Matthew -

I understood. I was thanking you for making the analogy. It was my intent
to have other readers answer the question I asked, hoping the obvious reply
would emphasize your statement  If my remarks were a little fuzzy it must
have been the result of exhaustion...I've been burning it at both ends
lately. Sorry for the confusion.

----------
> From: Matthew Levy <[log in to unmask]>
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: Their Terrorists, Our Freedom Fighters
> Date: Thursday, May 01, 1997 1:30 PM
>
> On Tue, 29 Apr 1997, DDeBar wrote:
>
> > >
> > >      A "terrorist" -- the Nazi's term for WW II resistance
> > > fighters --
> >
> >
> > SAY THIS AGAIN...WHO USED THIS TERM FOR WHAT???
> >
> > Thank you. Most people have, apparently, lost the use of their own
language
> > and given it up to jingoistic morons.
> >
> > I appreciate the historical perspective you offer.
> >
>
> Huh?  Sorry, but I found the original posting a lot clearer than your
> response ... the intent of the original comment was to make an analogy
> between the Nazi propaganda which called the resistance fighters
> terrorists and the American media which calls the Tupac Amaru terrorists.
> This is a clear analogy, and arguably a quite justifiable analogy.  What
> does this have to do with jingoistic morons?  The substance of your
> objection is simply unclear, though it seems you feel it ought to be.
>
> peace,
> m@2