| Topic: |
Science > Prophecies-Of-Nostradamus |
| User: |
"Jean Guernon" |
| Date: |
24 Jun 2003 06:28:33 AM |
| Object: |
Re: Does The USA Intend To Dominate The Whole World By Force? |
Peter van Velzen a écrit :
Jean Guernon <jguernon@globetrotter.net> wrote in message news:<3EF6D497.5B69EBB5@globetrotter.net>...
Peter van Velzen a écrit :
Jean Guernon <jguernon@globetrotter.net> wrote in message news:<3EF23999.729F01DB@globetrotter.net>...
Peter van Velzen a écrit :
Jean Guernon <jguernon@globetrotter.net> wrote in message news:<3EEEE8A9.FBEDB07E@globetrotter.net>...
Is she Muslim?
J.
Peter van Velzen a écrit :
Why don't you help save the planet and go drown yourself!...
J.
O on the otherhand wish you well, and hope you will find someone who
loves you, the way my lady loves me (By the way: perfect reason for
not drowning)
I wish the Best to you, and I wish you much fun with your attempts not
to communicate.
Think for yourself
Peter van Velzen June 2003
Atheist#1107
Amstelveen
The Netherlands
Not following the bad example of top-posting:
No, she happens not to be a muslim.
Then I don't get what you taking for the the terrorists sympathizer has
to do with your girlfriend. It shows that love is blind, what? Keep your
private life out of your lies if you want to retain some dignity.
J.
Accepting the point, that the republican think-tank does want the USA
to dominatie the world, has little to do with sympathizing with
terrorist.
It has everything to do with it.
It is one of the lies they use to justify their crimes.
You on the other hand, do not seem to understand that experiencing
some love, might help you to be kind and polite, and not make false
accusations.
As it happens: I have not told a lie for thirty years.
Hahaha two posts ago you admitted lying! Quote : "Sorry, I knew - of
course - that you were not referring to Rumsfeld."
So that means you made at least two lie in two posts (i.e. saying you
have never lied...
Notwithstanding the support of Chomsky lies that pretends the US wants
to dominate the world by force, or one of your other lies in this
thread, that the USA commits crimes against humanity. Furthermore, the
one that there is a UNSC resolution giving the US the permission to
commit crimes against humanity.
I mean lies after lies after lies... And I don't even try to look for
them.
You ARE a liar. Is that what you mean, about having your chick, does? It
makes you lie to look witty to your, err dumb blonde female? Is that why
you tell me that, she won't get the nuances?
Is that your point? Sorry mon, but take my advice; everyone has love in
their lives, you should never mix your love with your political
conditioning, I would call it brainwashing in your case. You risk
looking much dumber than you actually are.
J.
[snip]
If you think I am a liar,
you are deluded in a big way.
Only in your dreams.
Pointing out, that your replies, when taken litteraly,
lead to a conclusion you didn't mean is not a lie.
That is not the case though.
I do not think to USA are committing any severe crimes against
humanity,
Again you backpedal. This is Good though, this time. You retract one of
your lies.
I do however wonder why the USA insist, on other countries, giving
them carte blanche in this respect.
Because they want to have all latitude to pursue those who do.
If they do not plan to commit any crimes, why do they insist on
immunity?
You are not the police.
Maybe they are crazy, but they do insist on being immune.
Or are you denying the facts also.
No.
Someone who accuses me of being a liar,
might have many more crazy ideas.
I, on the other hand, do not think you are a liar.
even though your asssement of me is totally wrong,
I still consider the possibility that you mean well.
Thank you. But sorry if I am being harsh, we are dealing with war
matters.
Again, I whish you much happyness,
and much wisdom
Thank you, same to you.
J.
Think for yourself
Peter van Velzen June 2003
Atheist#1107
Amstelveen
The Netherlands
P.S. I just noticed as I was sending this that you are in your element
with one of the NGs in the headers, I didn't see that before. And so I
will try to be more conciliatory. There are so many who are here only
because they have their secret agenda. You are there by conviction as I
am here by conviction. So I apologize for being so dismissive of you
here, and I will be less oblivious to you in the future.
.
|
|
| User: "Peter van Velzen" |
|
| Title: Re: Does The USA Intend To Dominate The Whole World By Force? |
24 Jun 2003 03:20:12 PM |
|
|
If you think I am a liar,
you are deluded in a big way.
Only in your dreams.
I am wide awake
Pointing out, that your replies, when taken litteraly,
lead to a conclusion you didn't mean is not a lie.
That is not the case though.
But it is, If the only person mentioned in the last 10 sentences, and
indeed the only name visable in my computer window is Rumsfeld, and
you suddely say "he", I cannot but think, you are talking about him.
I did realize it didn't make sense, but I thought the best way, to
understand what your were trying to say, is to make the obvious
conclusion, and let you sort it out:)
I do not think to USA are committing any severe crimes against
humanity,
Again you backpedal. This is Good though, this time. You retract one of
your lies.
Sorry, I do not think trying to dominate the world is a severe crime
against humanity, and I did not accuse them of anything else.
If you see it different, please explain to me, what else - in your
view -
I accused them of, or explain why trying to dominate is a crime.
I do however wonder why the USA insist, on other countries, giving
them carte blanche in this respect.
Because they want to have all latitude to pursue those who do.
I do not think that is wise. If you want to fight criminals,
you should try and keep the law. As far as I know the USA is not
planning, to commit any such attrocity, so why ask persmission to
comit one?
If they do not plan to commit any crimes, why do they insist on
immunity?
You are not the police.
No, but neiter is the USA,
They are now acting like Vigilanties,
and asking the world to give them a free hand.
If that is not dominating, what is?
Maybe they are crazy, but they do insist on being immune.
Or are you denying the facts also.
No.
Thank you
Someone who accuses me of being a liar,
might have many more crazy ideas.
I, on the other hand, do not think you are a liar.
even though your asssement of me is totally wrong,
I still consider the possibility that you mean well.
Thank you. But sorry if I am being harsh, we are dealing with war
matters.
Again, I whish you much happyness,
and much wisdom
Thank you, same to you.
J.
Think for yourself
Peter van Velzen June 2003
Atheist#1107
Amstelveen
The Netherlands
P.S. I just noticed as I was sending this that you are in your element
with one of the NGs in the headers, I didn't see that before. And so I
will try to be more conciliatory. There are so many who are here only
because they have their secret agenda. You are there by conviction as I
am here by conviction. So I apologize for being so dismissive of you
here, and I will be less oblivious to you in the future.
So you can be polite, did you think you were just bashing a troll???
I still think the USA is in fact dominating the world. Both
economically and (potentially) military. They have prooved they can
beat one of the ten most potent armies of the world, with only a small
part of there force.
It is logicall for them to pursue their political objectives with even
more vigor, knowing potential opponents, will think twice before
facing their unslaught. Although this could be beinfial in the way of
democracy. (the USA has for the first time since WOII indeed pursuid
bringing democracy abroad) It is also dangerous, because the underdogs
always tend to built up hate against the "top-dogs". In fact,
september 11, was (for a great deal) caused by such hate.
The only lies I have - so far - encountered in this thread are words
like "that is a lie". When people expres an opinion, and you (or me)
have a different opinion, that does not mean the other one is telling
lies. So, to make more sense of the conversation, say: "I think you
are mistaken" rather than "you I a liar". It is not only more polite,
it is also more likely to be true.
Think for yourself
Peter van Velzen June 2003
Atheist#1107
Amstelveen
The Netherlands
.
|
|
|
| User: "Jean Guernon" |
|
| Title: Re: Does The USA Intend To Dominate The Whole World By Force? |
27 Jun 2003 03:46:04 AM |
|
|
Peter van Velzen a écrit :
If you think I am a liar,
you are deluded in a big way.
Only in your dreams.
I am wide awake
Pointing out, that your replies, when taken litteraly,
lead to a conclusion you didn't mean is not a lie.
That is not the case though.
But it is, If the only person mentioned in the last 10 sentences, and
indeed the only name visable in my computer window is Rumsfeld, and
you suddely say "he", I cannot but think, you are talking about him.
I did realize it didn't make sense, but I thought the best way, to
understand what your were trying to say, is to make the obvious
conclusion, and let you sort it out:)
You are obviously wrong. Anyone can see that.
Since you have bad faith, you will pretend to see only what you want. So
what is the use? Just keep out of apn with your lies.
Thank you very much.
J.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Peter van Velzen" |
|
| Title: Re: Does The USA Intend To Dominate The Whole World By Force? |
27 Jun 2003 06:05:24 PM |
|
|
Jean Guernon <jguernon@globetrotter.net> wrote in message news:<3EFC045B.EF853CAF@globetrotter.net>...
Peter van Velzen a écrit :
If you think I am a liar,
you are deluded in a big way.
Only in your dreams.
I am wide awake
Pointing out, that your replies, when taken litteraly,
lead to a conclusion you didn't mean is not a lie.
That is not the case though.
But it is, If the only person mentioned in the last 10 sentences, and
indeed the only name visable in my computer window is Rumsfeld, and
you suddely say "he", I cannot but think, you are talking about him.
I did realize it didn't make sense, but I thought the best way, to
understand what your were trying to say, is to make the obvious
conclusion, and let you sort it out:)
You are obviously wrong. Anyone can see that.
Since you have bad faith, you will pretend to see only what you want. So
what is the use? Just keep out of apn with your lies.
Thank you very much.
J.
No thanks, I will insert the text we are discussing here.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Jean Guernon <jguernon@globetrotter.net> wrote in message news:<3EE65C4A.67A71F5D@globetrotter.net>...
Peter van Velzen a écrit :
Jean Guernon <jguernon@globetrotter.net> wrote in message news:<3EE627A5.E31B45D8@globetrotter.net>... [snip]
As far as I know these people have proposed that the USA should indeed
use it's power to change the world in accordance with the interest of
the USA. They think that this would be a good Idea.
Bah Chomsky says "the US is seeking to dominate the world by force".
Personally I do not fully agree with Donald Rumsfeld, but at least he
is an honest man in respect to the name of this thread, as he has
clearly stated:
"It should".
Bah Rumsfeld never said that.
There are French people that have never ever said "yes"
For they only said "Oui". . . . .
Even if you do not speak French, you should by now know what that
means. . . . .
Bah French is my mother tongue.
And even if you mean that he said that much but in not so many words,
it
is not true. You, and he, lie.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
By the way at this point Chomsky dissappears from my Google window
As you can see: You used the word "he" twice, in the same alinea,
which would normally mean you are only talking about one person.
The first "he" clearly means "Rumsfeld".
Saying "Rumsfeld" was the only name appearing in the last 10
sentences, was a estimation. I didn't take the trouble to count
before. In fact in the 7th sentence (but the 10th line), Chomsky was
mentioned. But Rumsfeld was mentioned twice thereafter.
Does the fact that Fremch is your mother tongue, mean the "he", twice
in the same alinea will normally mean a different person? They didn't
teach me that at school.
Neither do I believe it is custom, to say "he" with person A in mind,
while the last two time a person was mentioned it was NOT A.
So please stop calling me a liar, and try to read your own words,
before you have to swallow them.
You may also try and be a nice person.
People will give more credence to the words of nice persons than to
the words of those who like to insult, and tell them to go drown
themselves.
Think for yourself
Peter van Velzen June 2003
Atheist#1107
Amstelveen
The Netherlands
PS
If Chomsky is a liar that would mean Chomsky does not believe the USA
is trying to dominate the world by force. You have presented no
evidence that Chomsky does not believe that. There is plenty of
evidence that he does.
You have every right to have a different opinion, but you do NOY have
the right to call someone a liar, without good reason.
The first being your freedom to expres your opinion, the second being
slander.
I hope Chomsky won't press charges. I certainly will not.
I am totally happy, if you have learned something from out exchanges.
For instance: If you would stop calling anybody a liar, just because
they do not agree with you.
If you do not stop, you will - in the end - call everybody a liar.
(everybody probably has one or to items on which s(he) differs in
opinion, with you (and me).
.
|
|
|
| User: "Jean Guernon" |
|
| Title: Re: Does The USA Intend To Dominate The Whole World By Force? |
29 Jun 2003 10:49:18 AM |
|
|
Pure bad faith. Doesn't matter. I am used to it here.
J.
Peter van Velzen a écrit :
Jean Guernon <jguernon@globetrotter.net> wrote in message news:<3EFC045B.EF853CAF@globetrotter.net>...
Peter van Velzen a écrit :
If you think I am a liar,
you are deluded in a big way.
Only in your dreams.
I am wide awake
Pointing out, that your replies, when taken litteraly,
lead to a conclusion you didn't mean is not a lie.
That is not the case though.
But it is, If the only person mentioned in the last 10 sentences, and
indeed the only name visable in my computer window is Rumsfeld, and
you suddely say "he", I cannot but think, you are talking about him.
I did realize it didn't make sense, but I thought the best way, to
understand what your were trying to say, is to make the obvious
conclusion, and let you sort it out:)
You are obviously wrong. Anyone can see that.
Since you have bad faith, you will pretend to see only what you want. So
what is the use? Just keep out of apn with your lies.
Thank you very much.
J.
No thanks, I will insert the text we are discussing here.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Jean Guernon <jguernon@globetrotter.net> wrote in message news:<3EE65C4A.67A71F5D@globetrotter.net>...
Peter van Velzen a écrit :
Jean Guernon <jguernon@globetrotter.net> wrote in message news:<3EE627A5.E31B45D8@globetrotter.net>... [snip]
As far as I know these people have proposed that the USA should indeed
use it's power to change the world in accordance with the interest of
the USA. They think that this would be a good Idea.
Bah Chomsky says "the US is seeking to dominate the world by force".
Personally I do not fully agree with Donald Rumsfeld, but at least he
is an honest man in respect to the name of this thread, as he has
clearly stated:
"It should".
Bah Rumsfeld never said that.
There are French people that have never ever said "yes"
For they only said "Oui". . . . .
Even if you do not speak French, you should by now know what that
means. . . . .
Bah French is my mother tongue.
And even if you mean that he said that much but in not so many words,
it
is not true. You, and he, lie.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
By the way at this point Chomsky dissappears from my Google window
As you can see: You used the word "he" twice, in the same alinea,
which would normally mean you are only talking about one person.
The first "he" clearly means "Rumsfeld".
Saying "Rumsfeld" was the only name appearing in the last 10
sentences, was a estimation. I didn't take the trouble to count
before. In fact in the 7th sentence (but the 10th line), Chomsky was
mentioned. But Rumsfeld was mentioned twice thereafter.
Does the fact that Fremch is your mother tongue, mean the "he", twice
in the same alinea will normally mean a different person? They didn't
teach me that at school.
Neither do I believe it is custom, to say "he" with person A in mind,
while the last two time a person was mentioned it was NOT A.
So please stop calling me a liar, and try to read your own words,
before you have to swallow them.
You may also try and be a nice person.
People will give more credence to the words of nice persons than to
the words of those who like to insult, and tell them to go drown
themselves.
Think for yourself
Peter van Velzen June 2003
Atheist#1107
Amstelveen
The Netherlands
PS
If Chomsky is a liar that would mean Chomsky does not believe the USA
is trying to dominate the world by force. You have presented no
evidence that Chomsky does not believe that. There is plenty of
evidence that he does.
You have every right to have a different opinion, but you do NOY have
the right to call someone a liar, without good reason.
The first being your freedom to expres your opinion, the second being
slander.
I hope Chomsky won't press charges. I certainly will not.
I am totally happy, if you have learned something from out exchanges.
For instance: If you would stop calling anybody a liar, just because
they do not agree with you.
If you do not stop, you will - in the end - call everybody a liar.
(everybody probably has one or to items on which s(he) differs in
opinion, with you (and me).
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
Re: Does The USA Intend To Dominate The Whole World By Force?
World War III ***NEWS*** May 20th, 2004....Red Cross condemns US excessive use of force.....
World War III **NEWS** Wednesday, July 9, 2003
Re: World War III **NEWS** Friday, July 11, 2003
World War III **NEWS** Monday, July 14, 2003
World War III ***NEWS*** Thursday, July 31, 2003..........
World War III *NEWS* Mon, Sept 1st, 2003... Israeli Defense Minister Threatens Gaza Invasion
Re: Sharon's Top Aide 'Sure World War III Is Coming'
| End of the world-Pentagon style
What fool would invest money in The End of The World ?
Re: World War III
Gas provokes Japanese clash (the goodness of globalization and its strain on world resources)
IS THIS WORLD TRULY WONDROUS OR BASICALLY FRICKED ?!!? - A DISSERTATION BY UNCLE WALLY ;-)
Solution for America and the World to End War Now and Begin the Conversion to Alternative Fuels
Nostradamus & World War III Webliography........................
|
|
|
