From: joedees@bellsouth.net
Date: Fri Aug 02 2002 - 00:45:54 MDT
On 1 Aug 2002 at 23:40, Hermit wrote:
>
> Unworthy.
>
> I had hoped that you were still sufficiently analytic, despite US TV
> exposure to tell the difference between facts and opinion. I am no
> longer so certain. The facts are available. What you have provided is
> your opinion of the facts.
>
> As an example, the most accurate Afghan death toll I am aware of (to
> December 2001) is visible at http://www.democracynow.org/thndtrmb.doc
> originally posted to "US Definitely Avenged: but on whom", Hermit,
> 2002-04-08
> (http://virus.lucifer.com/bbs/index.php?board=7;action=display;threadi
> d=11541;start=30). That stated that deaths were in excess of 3,700.
> You have given us your unreferenced opinion that these figures are
> inaccurate.
>
> In the original article I quoted three extracts. Perhaps worth
> repeating.
>
> These quotes from the title page may be taken as representative:
> [*]When U.S warplanes strafed [with AC-130 gunships] the farming
> village of Chowkar-Karez, 25 miles north of Kandahar on October
> 22-23rd,killing at least 93 civilians, a Pentagon official said, "the
> people there are dead because we wanted them dead." The reason? They
> sympathized with the Taliban. When asked about the Chowkar incident,
> Rumsfeld replied, "I cannot deal with that particular village."
>
> [*]A U.S officer aboard the US aircraft carrier, Carl Vinson,
> described the use of 2'000 lb cluster bombs dropped by B-52
> bombers: "A 2'000 lb. bomb, no matter where you drop it, is a
> significant emotional event for anyone within a square mile."
>
> [*]Mantra of the U.S mainstream corporate media : "the report cannot
> be independently verified"
>
> [*]"..shameful dependence on and uncritical acceptance of Pentagon
> handouts instead of substantial, critical coverage of the ground
> situation in Afghanistan. The US corporate media seems to be muting
> any talk of civilian casualties first by framing any such news with
> "Taliban claims that…." And then happily putting the matter to rest
> with Pentagon spokesman…" " [Joel Lee, Hyderabad, Znet Inter Active]
>
> That is fact.
>
It is fact that those are peoples' opinions. Such a count can be easily
explained by the fact that those reporting the deaths are generally against any
war at all, whatever the reason, and thus uncritically accept and relay bloated
figures given to them by Taliban sympathizers wrangling for, and receiving,
sympathy from you and people like you. The following is just one example.
http://www.cnn.com/2001/WORLD/asiapcf/south/10/19/ret.pakistan.witness/
The aid workers arrived in Islamabad from Kabul on Wednesday to
relay information about what is happening in Kabul.
They claimed that 10 civilians had been killed since the bombing began
the night of October 7.
The figure is much lower than the 70 civilian fatalities in Kabul as
claimed by the Taliban. Across Afghanistan, the Taliban said "around
500" civilians have been killed or injured.
>
> As another, what is a fact is that you asserted various things about
> Iraq's intentions to dominate the World. When asked you pointed to
> your "six points" which proved nothing of the sort. It is your opinion
> that the six points supported the inference that this was the case.
>
It is not my opinion that they have committed these actions. They have.
>
> Finally, it is aso a fact that we are rushing toward the singularity.
> And if my surmises are correct, if we do not develop a less
> aggressive, competitive and more appropriate ethical system, it is
> likely that humanity will not survive that event. Speaking for myself,
> I think that would be a pity. It seems to me that your arguments and
> the actions of the US are in direct conflict with this end-goal.
> Winston Churchill once said, "The Americans will always do the right
> thing... after they've exhausted all the alternatives." My estimate is
> that there is little time for experiment or trying the many
> alternatives available. Choosing to gamble with your future is all
> very well, but I would suggest that your arguments are gambling with
> the future of all mankind. And the dice are already in the cup. And
> loaded against us. Is this sensible?
>
That he future is uncertain is a universal truism, but if we roll over and commit
collective suicide by allowing these fanatics to garner Allah's favor by
murdering us without response, the future, whatever it is, will most certainly
not include us.
>
> Regards
>
> Hermit
>
> ----
> This message was posted by Hermit to the Virus 2002 board on Church of
> Virus BBS.
> <http://virus.lucifer.com/bbs/index.php?board=51;action=display;thread
> id=25860>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Sep 25 2002 - 13:28:50 MDT