Planets in exaltation and fall -

[Guest guest]

******All right, one more time for this fellow....

 

>>>> evidence that Bush & Co. stifled the CIA and FBI in

the months before the attacks, thus allowing the events to occur...

 

*******Two investigations have found no such 'evidence' of any kind.

So, your theory is that the US caused the NYC and Pentagon bombings to

start a war? Well, I'm sorry, but I'd say that's without a shred of proof. I

put it in the same class with people talking about secret gov't 'chem-trails'

and crashed UFOs.

 

 

******* ...nor has he started any wars, since the Muslims started it.

>>> " The Muslims " started it?? How overly simplistic ...

 

******It IS very simple. Who attacked whom? Or I suppose now you're going to

justify the slaughter of 3,000 innocent office workers, and tell us how they

deserved it because of such-and-such that the US once did or supposedly did.

In rape cases, that's called 'blaming the victim.' I don't think it can be

justified.

 

 

******* If the Europeans think that they know what's best and all we

> > need to do is follow their lead, perhaps they'd like to explain

why we had to rescue them from two continent-wide wars in just the past

century while we've had none.

> > >>>Germany and Japan did not declare WAR on the USA first?????

Where have you learned your history?? The Raelians?

> ******* The Europeans who now claim such superior knowledge of

preventing wars started two world wars on their own European continent, one

in

1914 and one in 1939. Both were going on for years before there was any US

> involvement.

> If you wish to know what happened " first " in the case of the Second

World

> War, it was Germany's invasion of Poland in Sept. 1939, over two

years before the Japanese attacking us at Pearl Harbor in Dec. 1941 that got

us

involved in saving the Europeans from themselves for the second time in the

twentieth century.

 

*****(The gentleman made no further clever response to that, because there is

none. This correction in elementary historical knowledge had to be made to

one who apparently thinks WWII began in 1941 and in the US---this for a man

lecturing us on how he alone knows the truths of all history.)

 

 

 

> > The ill-will started well before 9-11. Bush's unilateral

withdrawal from the ABM treaty was a bigee, among other items.

> ********Do you or anyone else seriously believe the ABM Treaty or

any other treaties, have the slightest thing to do with Osama bin Laden and

why fundamentalist Islam hates the modern West?

>>>No, but it has a lot to do with why this Administration has garnered

such ill will with most of the West; I never said it was why " Islam

hates the West, " which is another statement of dubious character.

 

******The only " ill-will " connected with the NYC and Pentagon bombings could

possibly be in the Islamic world. Connecting the ABM Treaty and such to Bin

Laden is an ethnocentric absurdity, I'd say.

As for fundamentalist Islam hating the West being 'dubious', I could

post, say, 100 letters from Bin Laden, sermons from Muslim clerics, etc. Read

what they say. You could start with Khomenini over 20 years ago calling us

'little Satans'.

 

 

> > >>>The Kuwaitis were ...stealing Iraqi oil in violation of international

agreements...

> ******Even if that was true----- which is debatable---- is it your

position that that justifies Hussein invading the country and trying to

annex it to his own? By what " international agreement " was THAT ok?

>>>Well, you have been drowned so deeply in propaganda that you have lost

sight of much factual history. The Bush (41) dimplomatic solution to the

Iraq/Kuwait oil tensions was to let the Iraqi's take

unilateral action -- I'm surprised you don't recall April Glaspie....

 

*****The gentleman then goes on to justify Hussein's seizure of Kuwait----on

grounds far more flimsy than Israel's seizure of the West Bank (now called

'Palestine')--- but I'd be willing to bet he's totally against that.

Peculiarly selective 'ethics'. And no international laws allowing Hussein's

actions, of course, were produced---- since there are none.

 

>>>> 25 July: Saddam Hussein was personally told by the US ambassador to

Iraq, April Glaspie, in a now-famous remark, that " We have no opinion on the

Arab-Arab conflicts, like your border disagreement with Kuwait. " But she

then went on to tell the Iraqi leader that she was concerned about his

massive troop

deployment on the Kuwaiti border in the context of his government's having

branded Kuwait's actions as " parallel to military aggression " ... <<<<

 

*****THAT''S supposed to NOT be a warning, but instead a 'green light'? Her

statements have been trotted out as an attempt to blame the US for Hussein's

actions since 1990, and with no more success. He clearly was warned against

his troop build-up.

 

 

> > >>> there was an active campaign in Florida to remove blacks from the

voter rolls (to the tune of about 50,000 votes, mostly Democrat) that was

linked directly to Bush, Harris, and some others.

> > ******Um, there's zero proof for this bizarre assertion. Nothing of the

kind has ever been reported.

 

*******No further respone to this either---because there is none. Katherine

Harris just won an election there in which all the possible dirt was thrown

at her by her opponents, and this imaginary charge had no basis and was not

believed: if there'd been any evidence, her opponents would have found it and

put it up.

 

 

> > Please re-read my original post, and you will see where you went

> > wrong in your assessment of it.

> ******I see now I went wrong in responding to it at all, I guess!

>>>>>Thank you for finally admitting to it.

 

*****I do indeed. I'm sure you're happy even if NO ONE responds to you,

because I'd say it appears you wish to talk but not listen.

No one can be an astrologer who doesn't know themselves---and you clearly

have little self-knowledge. You just accept your prejudices and run with

them. It's like Rush Limbaugh pretending to back up all he believes with

astrology.

I hope you analyze yourself with something like astrology and get over

your anger once you find its roots. " Meta-physician, first heal thyself! "

 

>>>you need a refresher course in high school history,

 

***** The humorous thing is I'm a professor of history & social sciences as

well as an astrologer, and many people here may know. I know quite a lot of

history---I also know a bit about being a human being, and an astrologer. And

I would never try to understand all world events based on mere prejudices,

like fellows mouthing off at a bar. The truth is always far more complex than

that.

 

But I came on this list to hear about sidereal astrology, so enough of

this. I just wanted to respond to obvious falsehoods which would be

stumbling-blocks to the understanding of real world events, and they've now

been disproved sufficiently.

 

Dr. Starman

 

http://www.DrStarman.net