At 4:41 PM -0500 4/4/03, Henry Gould wrote:
>I furthermore defend my right to question the motivation of any
>statement made in debate : I believe it is legitimate to analyze,
>criticize, & characterize the understood purpose of any such statements.
Quite correct, Henry. But in a debate you surely have some duty to
process what Gabe says in defence. I have just waded through the
ninety or so posts around this argument, and it seems to me that Gabe
has answered every accusation with a reasonable and polite relation
of facts, which you then brush aside - for example, when you claimed
he was only posting Iraqi government or al-jazeera sources, he listed
the sources he in fact posted, which were all Western media. And so
on. (Also, I don't know how you claim to be on-side with Iraqi
people when you dismiss the Arabic media as endemically biased - as
if CNN isn't - and it is true that al-jazeera just won an award for
its fight against censorship, in London).
What I have just read seems to be as good an example of self-willed
delusion as I've seen; which is what I meant earlier by saying that
the argument for war seems to me to be deeply irrational. No fact
will stand in the way.
Best
Alison
--
Alison Croggon
Editor
Masthead Online
http://au.geocities.com/masthead_2/
Home page
http://www.users.bigpond.com/acroggon/
|