Re: Who is the enemy?

From: Marchal <marchal.domain.name.hidden>
Date: Mon Sep 24 03:17:09 2001

Hi Saibal,

I want to add something.

The Americans, after a traumatic disaster due to fanatics, decide
to send soldiers, rather courageously, in a far country full of
dangerous trap.

Something has to been done, and destiny has chosen George Bush
for having the responsability of sending tanks on the eggs.

European, the whole free-world, and even the less free world, cannot
not support him, and must be ready to help him.

Wherever the enemyness of the enemy comes from.

Isn't it? I realise this aspect of the thing has perhaps not been
exagerately clear in my last post.


   This should not, because we are behind the scene, prevent us of
discussing... everything. As George Levy put it, that's our way
fighting the fanatics, of today and tomorrow.

And we can always ask questions. For exemple, in the
long run, is not some sort of economical peretstroika necessary?
Is that realist? Or would it leads to a major breakdown of mondial
economy?

Consider M the money of all the world converted in dollar. What
is the amount of black money? That would correspond to the minimal
amount of the crack following a straigth and blind economical
transparancy. To minimise that crack we should certainly revise the
definition of crime. To be more honest and more legal at once.
And I would bet more ethical too.

Do you know Taliban makes money with dope?

I would not be astonished if the XXI century end up mondially
with the Holland or Switzerland solution, in matter of dope.

Bruno
Received on Mon Sep 24 2001 - 03:17:09 PDT