rHi Christopher, as you were just saying about Re: Censorship....
CC> RT> CC> Just so I know we're on the same wavelength, would you 
CC> RT> CC> define being a member of a terrorist group to me?
CC> 
CC> RT> I differ greatly in my definition from Janet Napolitano.  I believe
CC> RT> that *known* terrorists are identified members of a group that 
believes
CC> RT> that violence or the threat of that violence is the correct mode for
CC> RT> settling differences or accomplishing goals.   
CC> 
CC> Then the discussion has just changed.  
No it hasn't.
CC> That includes many that I
CC> know  including many military personel and LACs, me in some cases 
CC> being one of them.  For example, I could be considered in  the group
CC> thet believes that if you molest their family  member that you
CC> should be killed.  
Not what we were talking about.
CC> Many military generals  right now believes we
CC> should bomb Iraq because of their  chemical weapons and their threat
CC> to shoot down our spy  planes.  I still have connections in the
CC> criminal world  that won't mess with you unless you mess with them,
CC> but you  do something to them like steal their money or threaten 
CC> them they'll kill you.  
As will I under the right conditions.  That was not the point I said
above.
CC> Many police are in the group that  if you
CC> kill one of their comrades you should die.  Many  examples, many
CC> people, all violent.  You may want to make  your definition a little
CC> narrower, cause I have a feeling  it's not very well thought out.  
When you learn to read I will.  :^)  
No where did I say that using violence under your conditions defines a
terrrorist.  I stated that they "...believe[s] that violence or the
threat of that violence is the correct mode for settling differences or
accomplishing goals."  See the word "correct"?  That  means that it is
the *only* or the *first* method that they consider.  I believe that
you are trying to read something into what I wrote that just isn't
there.  Now I hope that your next response is better read and more
thought out.  :^)
CC> I
CC> know you probably  wouldn't consider many of these people
CC> terrorists, or so I  hope. 
I don't, but you should have figured that out by now.  :^)
RD 
sandman@azstarnet.com - A newspaper ISP - Arizona Daily Star
sandman@brassroots.org - A no compromise gun rights organization.
http://www.azstarnet.com/~sandman
___
 X KWQ/2 1.2i X Love is grand.  Divorce? ....About twenty grand.
--- Maximus/2 3.01
---------------