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