When I hear someone saying something so fervently, I’m often moved to believe that the person they’re really trying to convince is themselves. Here’s a great thread.

-Ian.

Begin forwarded message:

> From: Dan Lowe > Date: Wed Apr 2, 2003 9:05:48 AM US/Pacific
> To: “‘Ian Andrew Bell'”
> Subject: RE: @F: Fwd: FW: MORE DIXIE CHICKS
>
> Seems strange how you like to shift the argument when it does not suit
> your
> needs? This will be my last email because it sounds as if you are
> incapable
> of reasoning with. You are right Ian, Iraq has not attacked us
> directly,
> but they are in violation of a truce treaty they signed 12 years ago.
> Besides, how many more ties to Al Queda do you need to see? Do you
> honestly
> believe that Sadaam is above having a relationship with Al Queda? One
> final
> question, have you had a father, grandfather, or even great grandfather
> serve in the military to protect the freedoms you enjoy today? What
> you and
> all of those countries and their people fail to recognize is that there
> would be no Belgium, no Switzerland, no france, no Venezuela, etc. if
> we did
> not exist. These countries are only sovereign because of us and the
> threat
> that we pose to world conquering dictators. So brush up on your
> chinese,
> russian and arabic speaking abilities if your ideology becomes the
> opinion
> of the majority in this counrty.
>
> Oh wait, next you are going to tell me it is about oil. Lets end this
> one
> right here and now. Oil companies have already stated that they would
> much
> rather negotiate deals with a sanctioned oil for food Iraq then a
> democrtatic Iraq which command a higher price at the bargaining table.
> Also, why did we leave Kuwait if it is all about oil. Did we stay in
> France
> and Germany to pilage them of their resources or did we prop up their
> governments economic system to help them get back on their feet after
> WW II?
> We are not conquerors we are the defenders of liberty – our liberty
> and that
> of others.
>
> —–Original Message—–
> From: Ian Andrew Bell [mailto:hello [at] ianbell [dot] com]
> Sent: Wednesday, April 02, 2003 10:32 AM
> To: Dan Lowe
> Subject: Re: @F: Fwd: FW: MORE DIXIE CHICKS
>
>
> Sorry… I wasn’t aware that IRAQ had attacked the US.
>
> -Ian.
>
>
> On Wednesday, April 2, 2003, at 06:47 AM, Dan Lowe wrote:
>
>> You want to talk about a REAL abuse of authority. Let’s see, how
>> about a
>> comparison between homeowners associations in the Houston area telling
>> homeowners that they can not put a ‘Support the Troops’ sign in their
>> window
>> or put a flagpole in their front yard compared to radio station
>> managers who
>> conducted online polls from their audience on whether or not to
>> continue
>> playing the Dixie Chicks in which the respondents in cities all across
>> the
>> country voted overwelmingly to take them off the air. I call it
>> democracy
>> in action. If you libs aren’t careful, we will begin to pass
>> legislation
>> approving public displays of patriotism. Why can’t libs join
>> conservatives
>> in the fight with OUR common enemy – rogue states intent on
>> threatening the
>> civilized world with terrorism and weapons of mass destruction?
>> Dan
>>
>> —–Original Message—–
>> From: Ian Andrew Bell [mailto:hello [at] ianbell [dot] com]
>> Sent: Tuesday, April 01, 2003 5:52 PM
>> To: Dan Lowe
>> Subject: Re: @F: Fwd: FW: MORE DIXIE CHICKS
>>
>>
>> You clearly refuse to listen to that which you do not currently
>> believe.
>>
>> Tell me, how did you come upon my email message in the first place?
>>
>> -Ian.
>>
>>
>> On Tuesday, April 1, 2003, at 03:01 PM, Dan Lowe wrote:
>>
>>> oh excuse me for thinking everyone in your entertainment industry was
>>> driven
>>> by ratings and what the people want. So now the argument has changed
>>> from
>>> ‘a violation of the dixie chicks freedom of speech’ to ‘contractual
>>> obligations’. ‘Abusing of authority’ as it relates to bad cops, over
>>> zealous security guards, the Presidents of France, Russia or Germany
>>> is one
>>> thing, but that is a mighty long reach to say that radio station
>>> managers
>>> who listen to their audience and act appropriately are ‘abusing
>>> authority’
>>> is normally. In fact, I see no abuse of authority. Instead I see
>>> Patriotic
>>> Americans! Freedom of speech is a 2 way street, one who makes
>>> millions from
>>> being in the limelight must also be aware of the repurcussions of
>>> their
>>> actions.
>>>
>>>
>>> —–Original Message—–
>>> From: Ian Andrew Bell [mailto:hello [at] ianbell [dot] com]
>>> Sent: Tuesday, April 01, 2003 4:46 PM
>>> To: Dan Lowe
>>> Subject: Re: @F: Fwd: FW: MORE DIXIE CHICKS
>>>
>>>
>>> Go for it… be mad, be pissed off. Call the radio stations and
>>> state
>>> your platform … fill your boots! But when programmers at radio
>>> stations take them out of the rotation they are abusing their
>>> authority
>>> and eschewing their responsibility as broadcasters on spectrum that
>>> all
>>> of us, Canadian or American, pay to administer.
>>>
>>> -ian.
>>>
>>>
>>> On Tuesday, April 1, 2003, at 08:59 AM, Dan Lowe wrote:
>>>
>>>> ian,
>>>> you can let all of your dixie chick buddies know that the only
>>>> organized
>>>> group I belong to is called the United States of America. You guys
>>>> can’t
>>>> stand the fact that this many people are disgusted by the comments
>>>> of
>>>> the
>>>> singing idiots, and think there has to some kind of conspiracy going
>>>> on. In
>>>> all actuality, 8 out of 10 support Pres. Bush and the troops and
>>>> think
>>>> her
>>>> comments were out of line with the majority of Americans whom she
>>>> thought
>>>> incorrectly that her statements more closely resembled. And another
>>>> thing,
>>>> I believe most concert ticket sales took place before the comments.
>>>> Somebody better put a muzzle on natalie or they will end up an
>>>> overseas act
>>>> exclusively like Madonna. Why the double standard? If Natalie is
>>>> free to
>>>> open her mouth and say what she thinks then why aren’t we free to
>>>> voice our
>>>> displeasure with what she said. Nobody is trying to lock them up
>>>> and
>>>> throw
>>>> away the key. They are still being shuffled around in limos, living
>>>> in posh
>>>> hotels and being treated like little queens by their pamperers, so
>>>> why
>>>> can’t
>>>> the public be outraged and active in their outrage because it
>>>> disgusts
>>>> them
>>>> so.Why can’t we?
>>>>
>>>> Dan Lowe

Pay no attention to the captains of industry robbing the larder, kids, Al Queda’s gonna get ya!

Love,

George, Donald, and Dick.

PS – Sorry about the no job no money thing.

-Ian.

Pay no attention to the captains of industry robbing the larder, kids, Al Queda’s gonna get ya!

Love,

George, Donald, and Dick.

PS – Sorry about the no job no money thing.

-Ian.

Bush’s conduct seems to have displayed where Canada lies on his agenda. He made no specific comment at all right after the event until this afternoon, and even then without showing sincere remorse. The fact of the matter is that in his government Canada is an also-ran that can be taken for granted..

The bitter pill for Canadians to swallow is that this is probably the truth.

When the anger dies down, maybe our gaze will turn North of the border. Can someone please explain to me the logic of conducting a live-fire exercise, in the dark of night, in the middle of a war zone? If Canadian soldiers still need training to brush up on their tactics when they’re actually stationed in the battle theatre, will they ever be ready?

Who’s the buffoon who ordered the exercise and didn’t ask the US to create a No-Fly zone around the area of the exercise, or to alert the AWACS controllers that all those tracer rounds are likely to be from Canadians shooting at practice dummies?

If Art Eggleton (Canada’s Defense Minister, formerly humiliated as Canada’s Justice Minister and other cabinet positions) has any balls at all he we cop to the Canadian military’s general lack of readiness for anything short of target practice (as the targets) and to the inexperience and arrogance of its commanders.

Sad as it is to say, Friendly Fire incidents are just as often the fault of the victims, most specifically their commanders, as they are the fault of the attackers.

All in all it’s probably safe to say that the operation in Afghanistan is likely to have been more effective at injuring Canadians than it has Al Queda.

-Ian.