The Logic Off Topic list

Dennis Gunn <mightyjohn@...> wrote:

>All right lets get it straight.  "not one of the *primary*
>motivations"   ?  To a native speaker of English this seems to be
>implying that you think it may be a secondary motivation.  Is that
>what you are meaning to say or am I misunderstanding?

I said what I meant. Given that one of the *primary* gripes of the
terrorist(s) appears to be the perceived occupation and abuse of
territories held as significant to them, then however tenuous
a link, it is indeed an 'environmental' issue at some level. To
be clear though, this bears no relation to how the US deals with
its own environment, and I am in no way trying to infer that it does.

>Also get it straight that comments such as those of  Vincent Kenis
>when he said:
>
>At 11:29 AM +0200 10/9/01, Vincent Kenis wrote:
>>Maybe these fairytales
>>are necessary in a country born on genocide and slavery, where a good
>>part of the slaves' grandchildren still live in subhuman conditions,
>>and which sucks the planet dry in a criminal way. I don't know. But I
>>wish you looked around and realized that the world isn't based on
>>fair trade or equal chances.
>
><snip>
>
>>When it comes to international terrorism Ben Laden
>>is just a schoolboy, America and Europe have been exporting war and
>>desolation for decades.
>
>Are not only very unfair but would very certainly be taken by the
>terrorists, and for that matter, the fundamentalist mobs rioting  in
>Pakistan and Indonesia, as sympathy for their actions.  That is why
>they are not well received by Americans.

Whatever comments Vincent Kenis makes are his responsibility and
by merging his and my statements you are implying that they are
somehow 'our' doing and that I should somehow be held to account for
them regardless of whether I agree or not.

S.