response to the response to Mike Eisenstadt's critique
Wayne Johnson
cadaobh2@brgnet.com
Tue, 22 Jan 2002 07:49:48 -0500
Well, Jonster...yuk, yuk...it takes one to know one.
Meanwhile, my bicycle has developed a parrot.
B
-----Original Message-----
From: Jon Ford [mailto:jonmfordster@hotmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, January 22, 2002 12:06 AM
To: cadaobh2@brgnet.com; paramod@club-internet.fr; michaele@ando.pair.com
Cc: austin-ghetto-list@pairlist.net
Subject: Re: response to the response to Mike Eisenstadt's critique
Wayne-- this is an uncanny post-- it is as if you have penetrated the deep
unconscious raving sub-mind of moronic Texans and other right-wing idiots
everywhere! And of course, Mike fits in there somewhere-- even though,
ironically, he is in some ways quite the francophile!
Jon
>From: "Wayne Johnson" <cadaobh2@brgnet.com>
>To: "Joseph H. Rowe" <paramod@club-internet.fr>, "Michael Eisenstadt"
><michaele@ando.pair.com>
>CC: <austin-ghetto-list@pairlist.net>
>Subject: response to the response to Mike Eisenstadt's critique
>Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2002 15:59:32 -0500
>
>Those Frenchified deGaullistas, fluer-de-lis yellow journalistic
>anti-American Papists are NOT to be trusted. Who can take any man
>seriously
>whose name is Honore or Pierre for that matter. Real men have at least two
>MANLY names like Joe and Bob and Billy and Butch, not Jean-Paul or Lucien
>or
>Auguste. What a bunch of poofs! Our British cousins no better and, after
>many, many, many generations of warfare and intra-club breeding (when not
>co-mingling with Germans) have come to think of the French as "Foreigners"
>if not simply...frogs. Like who wants to read a "newspaper" named for an
>Italian opera? You can't be serious.
>
>As we here in the Old Dominion well know, only the Rev. Moon's Washington
>Times kind of newspaper can be trusted to tell the Truth and the Whole
>Truth
>just like God and Jesus and Martin Luther and Father Coughlin and Pat
>Robertson intended it to be told. I mean, come on, can you have any
>respect
>for a culture that eats snails? Yukk. Real culture eat cattle testicles
>and brains. How do think the Bush Family (in all there Minionesqueness)
>got
>to be so darn smart? How do you think it was that Ken Lay was able to fool
>all those people and run off with their money? Not from eating slugs and
>snails, I'll tell you. Nosirree, these men ate VERTEBRATES and drank beer
>(back before GWB found Jesus, he had found Bud & Coors & Lone Star & Shiner
>& Falstaff and other REAL AMERICAN beers. No St. Pauli ale for him.
>Nosir!) Only Frogs and
>California-limp-wristed-quiche-sucking-commie-tree-huggers drink wine.
>(Unless, of course, it is real German-American-Texican wine from New
>Braunsfels. Or Killeen. As in the treasured 1997 vintage Chateau du
>Goethe Gewurstramminer! )
>
>No sir. You are better off digging out your old Fulton Lewis Jr. tapes and
>listening to them.
>
>Bubba
>
>(Life time subscriptions to the Star are available at really good rates.
>There are still a couple of hundred issues with the Hubble photographs of
>Heaven available at lowered cost to you, dear readers.)
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: austin-ghetto-list-admin@pairlist.net
>[mailto:austin-ghetto-list-admin@pairlist.net]On Behalf Of Joseph H. Rowe
>Sent: Friday, January 18, 2002 11:51 AM
>To: Michael Eisenstadt
>Cc: austin-ghetto-list@pairlist.net
>Subject: response to Mike Eisenstadt's critique
>
>
> >
> >I wouldnt take what Joe Rowe forwarded very seriously. The
> >Figaro is not itself a very serious newspaper and the notion
> >that Osama would check in to the American Hospital in Dubai
> >for a procedure last summer beggars belief. At least my belief.
>
> >Mike Eisenstadt
>
> Mike, I'm not sure what your criteria for a "serious:" newspaper
>are. Le Figaro is one of the top establishment dailies in France, and
>whether or not you agree with its politics (which I generally don't), it is
>at least as "serious" a paper as any big American daily owned by a giant
>media corporation. It has a highly professional staff of international
>correspondents and reporters. Major writers have occasionally written
>articles for it, including Jean Paulhan, André Malraux, and others.
> Le Figaro can be criticized for many things, but it is absolutely
>not a scandal-sheet or sensationalist tabloid, as you seem to insinuate.
>And if you suppose for one moment that the TOTAL BLACKOUT of this story in
>the mainstream American press is due to the wise discrimination of
>American editors, who agree with you that Le Figaro is "not serious" (and
>their rags supposedly are!), then either you are incredibly naive --- which
>I know not to be the case --- or else you are rationalizing your own
>reluctance to admit that you, too, mon cher ami, are capable of being
>misled and fooled by the American media. I say this because you curiously
>had nothing at all to say about the essay's _other_ important evidence
>that the CIA had ample, serious warnings about an impending suicide
>airliner attack, and did nothing about it. This evidence is thoroughly
>documented, and there is even more of it at the websites mentioned. This
>would support the thesis that the CIA was uninterested in going after bin
>Laden until the time was "right" ---- whether or not Le Figaro's source
>turns out to be reliable.
> I personally don't believe in an active conspiracy, but the
>evidence seems to indicate a passive one: "OK, if those damn democrats
>won't give us a proper military budget, we'll let them find out what
>terrorism is really all about!" Nevertheless, such a passive conspiracy
>would be almost as heinous and criminal as an active one, at least in my
>system of ethics. If such a conspiracy of deliberate negligence does exist,
>as the evidence suggests, then it has certainly achieved its objective, in
>spades: a blank check from terrified taxpayers to the military-industrial
>complex, a devaluing of dissent and civil rights, and a very promising
>replacement for the Cold War.
> I recommend that you (or any other reader of this) visit the
>website http://www.copvcia.com and inform yourself, before engaing in more
>polemics about a whole area of current events of which you are bound to be
>ignorant, if you depend only on the likes of the New York Times, the
>Washington Post, CBS, NBC, NPR, PBS, etc, etc..... to find out about
>current events.
>
>
>Joseph
>
>Joseph Rowe
>chez Arcosud
>1, rue Constance, code porte 0118
>75018 Paris, France
>
>tel. (331) 42 55 18 92
>
>
>
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp.