What the editorial actually urged was a local enforcement effort against gangs something like the federal government’s “unrelenting, multipronged attack” against terrorism following the events of September 11, 2001, just weeks earlier. The newspaper mentioned “the questioning of thousands of people and the thorough scouring of bank records” but did not call for any new legislation.
Furthermore, Obama’s vote took place on May 15, months before the Nov. 23 editorial appeared. In fact, the bill was dead by the time the editorial was published.
@ Obama Supporters: Relax.,
With the utmost gratefulness we thank you for your reply, which in spite of its automatically generated origin, harbours a personal kindness rarely seen on this blog.
Now my two questions for you:
Do you really believe such balanced, factual retorts can provide ample defence to survive such malicious attacks?
And how naive would a positive reply to my former question be, really?
#3
Obama Supporters: Relax.
Lees het artikel zo goed als je de film keek en als antwoord op je vragen; There is no ample defence defence against random(malicious)attacks. Only time will tell who has been naive about our shared future
#4
Bas
Ik vermoed dat de alt-tekst van de link 1988 moet zijn.
@Bas,
Klopt helemaal. De vacature voor alt-tekst eindredacteur staat al tijden open en dan krijg je dat. Vind ik overigens helemaal niet erg, als de Sargasso vacature’s voor futuroloog, sportpotser (EK) en wetenschapscolumnist maar wel ingevuld gaan worden.
Groep conservatieve activisten opent aanval op Obama
Reacties (5)
http://blueollie.wordpress.com/2008/04/25
What the editorial actually urged was a local enforcement effort against gangs something like the federal government’s “unrelenting, multipronged attack” against terrorism following the events of September 11, 2001, just weeks earlier. The newspaper mentioned “the questioning of thousands of people and the thorough scouring of bank records” but did not call for any new legislation.
Furthermore, Obama’s vote took place on May 15, months before the Nov. 23 editorial appeared. In fact, the bill was dead by the time the editorial was published.
@ Obama Supporters: Relax.,
With the utmost gratefulness we thank you for your reply, which in spite of its automatically generated origin, harbours a personal kindness rarely seen on this blog.
Now my two questions for you:
Do you really believe such balanced, factual retorts can provide ample defence to survive such malicious attacks?
And how naive would a positive reply to my former question be, really?
Lees het artikel zo goed als je de film keek en als antwoord op je vragen; There is no ample defence defence against random(malicious)attacks. Only time will tell who has been naive about our shared future
Ik vermoed dat de alt-tekst van de link 1988 moet zijn.
@Bas,
Klopt helemaal. De vacature voor alt-tekst eindredacteur staat al tijden open en dan krijg je dat. Vind ik overigens helemaal niet erg, als de Sargasso vacature’s voor futuroloog, sportpotser (EK) en wetenschapscolumnist maar wel ingevuld gaan worden.