[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: No Rules
[mailed and posted]
On Sep 13, 2001 Paul Harper <firstname.lastname@example.orgNOSPAM> wrote
> On Thu, 13 Sep 2001 06:57:49 -0700, Jeffrey Goldberg wrote:
> >On Sep 13, 2001 Paul Harper <email@example.comNOSPAM> wrote:
> > in <firstname.lastname@example.org>:
> >> On Wed, 12 Sep 2001 12:09:32 -0700, Jeffrey Goldberg wrote:
> >> >But we cannot rule out any action merely because killing innocents might
> >> >be a consequence.
> >> That's a very chilling sentence.
> >You are right. It is. I know that.
> >Consider the alternative [...]
> Actually, there was just one single word that made it chilling :
> Take that out and it's a whole different meaning.
Hereby amended. Any suggestion that the killing of untargetted innocents
is some how a "mere" consequence or side-effect would be an atrocious
I am sorry that what I wrote could be taken that way. Please excuse the
original expresses as very bad writing, and not in anyway a reflection of
my feelings. It was a terrible word to use.
Thank you for calling me on it and bringing it to my attention.
I have recently moved, see http://www.goldmark.org/jeff/contact.html
Relativism is the triumph of authority over truth, convention over justice
From line IS valid, but use reply-to.