Thursday, November 22, 2001
7:26 am
The rational debate continues:
Came across your website and I have one word for you: "[Expletive Deleted]." People like you should be hung for treason.
This is even better. I thought that the isolationists were smeared as anti-semites:
GO fight for Israel, hypocrite.
This is from a previous correspondant, obviously taking optimism pills:
Don't worry about it , we as the policemen of the world (sic) will find Bin Laden and he will kill himself. And we, in the USA, are better for it after 9/11 because now we have a purpose,in our madness, to face up to a common enemy, terror. I can't say how you Brits feel but until you have had someone you know die, say a sister or father, then tell us what you would do. What you think this can't happen on British soil, think again. Talk to some of the ones from WW l l about bombs from across the Channel . Terror will strike again , Paris, London, or Rome take your pick. We all must find them and root them out, evil hates all of us, everywhere.
And here's from the French, unusually polite for that nation:
You can consider yourself lucky that your parents were not stupid pacifists as yourself otherwise you would be speaking German
or Japanese right now.
he goes on
I read the article again. . But it reads as an pacifist pamphlet. Are you a bunch of isolationists who don't want to get involved with anything outside your living room ? I hope the WTC made clear to you that this is not possible. What is the point you are trying to make ? Why are you against fighting terrorism ? You like terrorists ? You want to convert them to christianity ?
and in his last e-mail:
It seems your group is concerned with only "vital national interests". Wake up fellows. Killing as many terrorists as possible is a vital national interest. I hope 9-11 at least taught you that. Even an ex-isolationist as George W got the message.
You guys claim to be right wing conservatives. If I read a few more of your articles I am going to start believing that socialists are not that bad after all.
Came across your website and I have one word for you: "[Expletive Deleted]." People like you should be hung for treason.
This is even better. I thought that the isolationists were smeared as anti-semites:
GO fight for Israel, hypocrite.
This is from a previous correspondant, obviously taking optimism pills:
Don't worry about it , we as the policemen of the world (sic) will find Bin Laden and he will kill himself. And we, in the USA, are better for it after 9/11 because now we have a purpose,in our madness, to face up to a common enemy, terror. I can't say how you Brits feel but until you have had someone you know die, say a sister or father, then tell us what you would do. What you think this can't happen on British soil, think again. Talk to some of the ones from WW l l about bombs from across the Channel . Terror will strike again , Paris, London, or Rome take your pick. We all must find them and root them out, evil hates all of us, everywhere.
And here's from the French, unusually polite for that nation:
You can consider yourself lucky that your parents were not stupid pacifists as yourself otherwise you would be speaking German
or Japanese right now.
he goes on
I read the article again. . But it reads as an pacifist pamphlet. Are you a bunch of isolationists who don't want to get involved with anything outside your living room ? I hope the WTC made clear to you that this is not possible. What is the point you are trying to make ? Why are you against fighting terrorism ? You like terrorists ? You want to convert them to christianity ?
and in his last e-mail:
It seems your group is concerned with only "vital national interests". Wake up fellows. Killing as many terrorists as possible is a vital national interest. I hope 9-11 at least taught you that. Even an ex-isolationist as George W got the message.
You guys claim to be right wing conservatives. If I read a few more of your articles I am going to start believing that socialists are not that bad after all.
Links
- Ishtar Talking
- Korea Life Blog
- Toothing
- Academic Secret
- Genius Duck
- Hairstyles and Nails
- Home Tips
- Health Talk and You
- Beadle Beads
- Glass Beads Supplies
- Paquet Full of Glass
- Native American Jewelry
- Blogopoly
- Second String Swap
- Work at Home News
- Bashhh
- Click Here
- Click Here
- Just Another Opinion Blog
- Dip Dot
- Awryt
- Zacquisha
Blog Archive
-
▼
2001
(202)
-
▼
November
(43)
- An interesting question from an old copy of the Ne...
- And yet another one rolls in. I think that it sta...
- Some questions on this "prison riot" in Mazar-e-Sh...
- This is from a proud son of Dixie: Aw quit compla...
- This particularly worrying piece came in today: W...
- Afghan FAQs 1. What are the Afghan FAQ’s and why ...
- Anyone heard anything on the story in Pravda: AME...
- Oh no, not more bloody feedback on last week's art...
- Before you say it, no my last column is not wrong ...
- Some late feedback, first on the other feedback: ...
- A late addition from "Republican Catholic and Par...
- Responses. This is a fairly centralised point for...
- The rational debate continues: Came across your w...
- The responses keep coming. First a question, who ...
- A late addition. Is this what NORAID say behind c...
- Response I'm not sure why, but I've got a flurry ...
- Some feedback on my last article: Your artical ha...
- Information gratefully received My mailing list h...
- For more on the dangers of Pakistan going nuclear,...
- On some previous questions on Iain Duncan Smith th...
- So they've taken Kabul and all's right with the wo...
- If bemoaning moral and cultural decay is your thin...
- I'm not an Anglosphericist, and I don't think I've...
- Jonah Goldberg says our loyalty to America is "pee...
- And another thing. According to The Telegraph, Bi...
- So Osama did it all along, according to the Telegr...
- Has Romano Prodi finally gone mad? You be the judge.
- Has anyone noticed an, ahem, hostility from the BB...
- Another piece that's a bit late on here is this fr...
- An old but interesting piece in The Spectator by J...
- Does it still seem convincing? 10 Downing Street ...
- Anthony Howard's piece in Times is headed The Gove...
- Question Does anyone know how Iain Duncan-Smith k...
- How to work my links I have changed the way the l...
- What price for Poor David's survival? Poor David ...
- Discussion Groups Here's some of my favourite gro...
- Odds and ends Some Links I kept on meaning to pos...
- These are the MPs who spoke out against the bombin...
- Poor David Trimble has been saved! Hurrah for the...
- Historical Document's speech Blair's speech to th...
- Doublethink Some classic doublethink from the Com...
- Looks like poor David Trimble is about to be chuck...
- Two new web logs, one by Natalie Solent, which sho...
-
▼
November
(43)
0 comments:
Post a Comment