On Sat, 29 Jan 2005 09:49:53 -0500, "Ed Huntress"
wrote:

"Cliff" wrote in message
.. .
On Fri, 28 Jan 2005 17:08:01 -0500, "Ed Huntress"
wrote:

"Cliff" wrote in message
.. .
On Fri, 28 Jan 2005 09:58:52 -0500, "Ed Huntress"
wrote:

"Cliff" wrote in message
.. .

Huh? Are you saying that Bush and the neocons are behind the
destruction
of
the WTC? Or what are you saying?

It was a *criminal* act.
Then bush & the neocons promoted it to further their *existing*
agenda to start wars in the Middle East and gain vast powers in
the US.

So you think that flying airplanes into the WTC was a criminal act,
rather
than an act of policital terror?

How easily some wish to toss out the rule of law, the US
constitution, international treaties, the UN's charter, people's
rights. etc.

What does that have to do with flying airplanes into the WTC? Keep your
eye
on the ball, Cliff.

It's quite clear where it is.

May I remind you that far more people in the US are killed by
gunfire each year than in the *criminal* events of 9-11?

You may, but in doing so you would only demonstrate that you have no clue
about what the consequences are of terrorism and attempted mass murder
versus the consequences of one-on-one criminality. They're both problems,
but they are unrelated problems.

But comparable numbers of people are dead in EITHER case. Well, not
really, as the gunfire goes on year after year ...

People die in car crashes. In one year about ten times as many die in car
crashes as in the WTC on 9/11. The consequences for each in social terms are
unrelated to each other, and have vastly different social consequences.

Because you are going to panic over the one case?

If
you don't see that -- if you even remotely confuse the issue by bringing up
deaths from criminal use of guns or irresponsible use of cars in a
discussion about what to do when you're under concerted attack --

I gather that the long swim just makes them a bit more grumpy.

you show
us only that you a lost in the maze of your own sophistry.

The neocons are a huge threat. So are many groups of fundies.

So are the effects of growth of various things now being *caused*
by the neocons, like huge recruitment *against* the US & it's
special interests.

Virtually the entire world knows that the neocons
are lying fundie winger loons too. And fewer than
7% of it's population outside the UK & he US NOW
have any respect for the US. Down from about 78%
IIRC (before the lying neocon loons).

Had existing world laws been used ......

Which ones would have stopped the planes flying into the WTC?

You tell me.

You were the one who said "had existing world laws been used." My feeling is
that no then-existing international laws would have prevented 9/11. You seem
to think otherwise. So, which ones?

Like Gunner sez at times: things happen.
Don't panic. That's one of the real dangers (but being
promoted as part of the neocon agendas).

Bring your towel
http://www.bbc.co.uk/cult/hitchhikers/guide/towel.shtml
--
Cliff