In message <[log in to unmask]>, Brice Yokem
<[log in to unmask]> writes
>>The oil comment was Mr. Browns idea, I was just responding to it.
>
>I can't claim any credit for originating the idea, though, just quoting
>it.
>
>----------------
>
>You did not quote it from me, which Michael seemed not to know.

I was using 'quote' in its pre-Usenet sense of repeating something I had
heard, or read, and not in the sense of reproducing something from
earlier in a thread.

Anyway, I couldn't quote you, as your quoting is horribly broken... :-(

>>The Taliban (including Osama) is active in the sence they are trying
>>to keep out of our gunsights.  I have not seen any airplanes flown
>>into any buildings in the last couple years, so they are not active
>>in that sense.

>Are you aware that several flights to the USA, from the UK and France,
>have been delayed (for up to three days) or cancelled lately?
>And in one instance, that several gentlemen of Middle Eastern appearance
>who arrived for one of these flights were escorted away by the
>authorities, we know not where?
>It looks like it is vigilance, not lack of attempts, that is keeping
>airplanes from being flown into buildings at present.
>------------------------

>How many people died from this, and how many buildings were destroyed?

Sorry, I don't understand; you want to know how many people died in a
thwarted attempt? None, precisely because it was thwarted....

Or are you saying that attempts don't count, because they don't succeed?

>We all know there are other terrorists than Al-Quada who may be using
>this opportunity to strike their blow also.

Ah. So are you saying (in the face of the evidence to the contrary) that
these were not Al-Quaida attempts?

And so, since you wish to argue that Al-Quaida have gone all quiescent,
that it would be unlikely for them to be active in Iraq at present?

(Not that I think they are, myself, but that view has been expressed
here).
>------------------------

>>200 killed, well you cannot pacify a country without resistance.
>>3000 were killed in the trade center.

>Is that what we are doing now, then, 'pacifying' Iraq? Hasn't the army
>surrendered? Do you think these suicide bombers are all covert
>ex-military? I'm not at all sure that's the case....

I suggest that perhaps not all of the suicide bombers are ex-military.
>------------------------
>Are you trying to imply that all of Saddam's former pals have surrendered,
>including 'Izzy'?  None of them are hiding out and trying to cause trouble?

Brice gives the appearance of disagreeing with me. Unfortunately, he is
disagreeing with something I did not say; what I said left open the
possibility that *some* of the suicide bombers are ex-military.

So no, Brice, I'm not saying that at all; what made you think I was?

>Or are you trying to say that unless someone was actually a member of the
>army, they cannot shoot a gun, set off a bomb, or launch an RPG?

Brice again gives the appearance of disagreeing with me. Unfortunately,
he is again disagreeing with something I did not say; what I said
explicitly suggested the possibility that some of the suicide bombers
are non-military.

So no, Brice, again I'm not saying that at all; what made you think I
was?

I think you are so keen to disagree with me that you have had to ignore
what I actually said in order to do so  :-(
>------------------------

--
Roy Brown        'Have nothing in your houses that you do not know to be
Kelmscott Ltd     useful, or believe to be beautiful'  William Morris

* To join/leave the list, search archives, change list settings, *
* etc., please visit http://raven.utc.edu/archives/hp3000-l.html *