In a message dated 11/18/2002 2:05:57 PM Eastern Standard Time,
bronco@eskimo.com writes:
Excuse me, but William Saffire is a well known right-wing columnist
who used to write speeches for Richard Nixon. Since you support
such an outrageous obliteration of personal liberty in the US, perhaps
some other 20th-Century political figure is more to liking. Mid-40s
Europe comes to mind, after reading Mr. Saffire's article.> Despite the incredible inappropriateness of your post to this forum, let
meI hardly think that you, who has in the past often engaged in
gratuitous political commentary in this forum, have cause to complain.
Not to mention unprovoked personal commentary based on your delusions
about my opinions. However, I am happy to count both you and a certain RS
among those who object to me in such a manner. One's enemies say a great
deal about one, don't you think?> point out that if Janet Reno was less concerned about the "privacy"
rights of
> the French citizen who would have been the 20th hijacker (Mr. Moussia
sp?)
> and had given the FBI the permission they sought to get a warrant to
access
> his hard drive (before 9/11/00), there would likely now be several more
tall
> buildings standing in New York. And a few thousand more people alive.
>These statments are collectively known as "fibs," having been
explicitly declared false by numerous law enforcement authorities
(though I'll grant, still alleged in various wacked out conspiracy
sites) and it is to be hoped that responsible adults would try to avoid
fibbin when trying to defend the indefensible.As a person who brags about his participation in one of the biggest
political gang rapes in modern memory, I can see how this might be a
problem for you.> You can't defeat the scum of the earth without getting dirty hands. And
BTW,
> were you as concerned when Billy and Hilly got copies of the confidential
FBI
> files of nearly 1000 of their political enemies to use for their
political
> advantage?
>
>While this is another typical mis-characterization of the
relevant facts(and of a president whom I voted against for that matter),
it is interesting that the ranting right as evidenced by Sitting Bull
equates destroying the Bill of Rights with "getting dirty hands," and
doesn't mind using favored, convicted felons do do it.
Since you seem to be oblivious to the truth (everything I wrote is well
documented and accepted outside of gjbartland), and since your arguments
haven't reached the level of third grade rhetoric, I'll respect the rules of
this forum and leave you to wallow in your own silliness.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]