To: Michael.SF.
"I am suggesting a middle ground actually. Had the original headline read: "Did Kerry advocate 'Domestic terrorism'?" I would have had no problem. But the headline states, as fact that Kerry is a domestic terrorist. I contend that the statement does not square with the facts.
If someone advocates segregation, are they not a segregationist?
If someone advocates conservativism, are they not a conservative?
If someone advocates liberalism, are they not a liberal?
If someone advocates domestic terrorism, are they not a domestic terrorist?
Sometimes you just gotta call a spade a spade, man. Especially when it's something this serious. I'm wondering if we're just not at odds on definitions, here.
Qwinn
80 posted on
03/21/2004 10:34:07 PM PST by
Qwinn
To: Qwinn
Sometimes you just gotta call a spade a spade, man. As I understand the situation, Kerry was present at a meeting where the subject of using assassination was brought up. The plan was never implemented and Kerry left the organization a short time after that.
In what context was the plan brought up (i.e., one for serious discussion and consideration, or just a wild idea that was thrown out?). Did Kerry voice an opinion on the subject? Did others?
Just because Kerry was there when someone made the suggestion, does not make Kerry a terrorist.
81 posted on
03/21/2004 11:06:14 PM PST by
Michael.SF.
(One Clinton in politics is 'probably more then enough'- b. clinton" (for once, I agree with him))
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson