What dumb arguments

Borba100 at aol.com Borba100 at aol.com
Thu Sep 13 22:52:33 MDT 2001


In a message dated 9/13/01 9:25:34 PM Eastern Daylight Time, cbcox at ilstu.edu
writes:

<<
 It begins to seem (and this in addition to the points made by Jim
 Craven) that these speculations about CIA/etc (i.e., _western_ and
 _white_) involvement carry some of the same racist overtones that gave
 force to the persecution of the Rosenbergs. In that case, it was assumed
 that the stupid Russian peasants could not possibly have built a nuclear
 weapon on their own. In this case the hidden assumption is that a bunch
 of stupid Arabs could not have pulled off such a
sophisticated operation
 on their own.
  >>

This is really dumb.  I am sure that the Arabs would gladly forgo the honor
of being credited with pulling off this feat of genius. Moroever, the analogy
is ass backwards. In both cases - Rosenbergs and now - the point is to expose
the holes in the enemy's arguments.  I think you guys are chicken shits.
You're scared to say what has to be said.

Moreover, the RUSSIANS said it was impossible - not because Arabs are dumb
but because IT COULD';T HAVE HAPPENED.  That was the HEAD OF THE RUSSIAN
NAVY.  You dig, Cox?

Jared
=======
PLEASE clip all extraneous text before replying to a message



More information about the Marxism mailing list