TK,

I figure you and others see me here however you decide. I’ve never considered myself an intellectual, let alone a verbose pseudo one, but, whatever. I don’t know where you get the great Salmo stuff, unless you make it up for yourself. And my sensibilities are anything but delicate! Further, in my circle, I’m challenged daily. One of the beauties of this BB is that I don’t have to compose 50 page best available science proofs of my point, when I only want to express my opinion.

I’m not particularly interested in BB challenges. It’s not why I’m here. But I’m nearly always interested in an opportunity to learn, which you at times almost offer, which is why I bother to hassle you about the incredibly poor way you present yourself here.

I have no doubt you’re better read on Israel/Palestine than I, but that part of your argument that goes to 4,000 years ago and Abel and Cain lacks credence for me because the history is inseparable from the myth and the faith. When you go there, you substitute opinion or faith, or both, for fact. That’s not to say I couldn’t learn anything about the area and history from you. But I do have sources I consider more reliable. They have PhDs, have studied the history and politics of the region, and have been there several times, one of them has met with some of Arafat’s people a couple times, one of them is Jewish, one is an Episcopalian Priest, and neither of them has the anti-Arab racism that you occasionally display (at least I interpret that from things you’ve written.).

You may conclude that I don’t have enough of the history under my belt to have that discussion. I have some background on the history, but it consists of scattered reading over many years, with my most recent information coming from the friends I mentioned above. Nevertheless, I’ve held the opinion for at least 30 years that our pro-Israel, anti-Palestinian policy was not in our best long term interests, and I think contemporary events are bearing that out.

Regarding OBL, again I’m not interested in your challenges. And I don’t even know or care what the party line is. My line is that we ought to capture him. That Pakistan and Musharef have a problem with our crossing their sovereign border seems absolutely silly, given Bush’s statements about being with us or against us, and no middle ground. Although, yes, I certainly do understand the concept and principles of sovereignty, but I see that the official U.S. policy is that we no longer give a rat’s a$$ about it when it comes to terrorism, or perceptions of linkage to potentially imminent terrorism. Given Bush’s position, I don’t see Pakistan’s objection to our crossing their border as an issue to Bush. Do you? If so, why, given Bush’s statements?

Regarding your last post, that’s positive and interesting news. I note that the General said it will take a “considerable amount of forces,” which aren’t available when they are in Iraq, and that “we need to do it at the right time.” I guess there hasn’t been a “right time” in the past three years, huh?

Bush hasn’t made Christian doctrine into law. However, he has indicated his support for doing so via Constitutional amendments prohibiting gay marriage and abortion. And there was the example Aunty M posted about Bush’s faith based initiative. So while the prez hasn’t done it, he has expressed his intent or support. Perhaps that doesn’t qualify for you, but it does for me.

RB,

Yes, I mostly ignore you because of the lack of worthwhile content in your posts. It ain’t personal, man; you just don’t say anything worth responding to most of the time.

Sincerely,

Salmo g.