[Rhodes22-list] Thugs (political)

[Robert Skinner]

Tootle wrote:
> Bob said:
> "but rather secular democratic nations against non-national dictatorial
> quasi-religeous vandals."
> I used a single word for this type:  Thugs
----------------------------------------------------------------

Ed, so did Bush, et al.:

   http://www.sepiamutiny.com/sepia/archives/000322.html

But I used the rather longer description, while perhaps tedious
to some, to more closely identify the differences that I was
pointing out.

I don't think we can afford to simplify the nature of what we
face here.  It is not just bad, or dangerous; it is a particular
kind of hate, and it goes far beyond Thugees strangling travelers --
it is now developing the capability of bringing the world to
nuclear warfare.  

To make the situation more clear: Our detante during the cold 
war was based on mutual assured destruction -- like two people 
with live hand grenades in a broom closet.  But now we are 
looking at the near certainty that our opposition is a suicidal 
maniac holding the grenade.

How do you like that picture?

I don't think that "thug" begins to convey the reality!

Let's think outside the sandbox.  Simple thinking got us into 
this mess.  It won't get us out.  We need to out-think and
ultimately isolate and ostracize (with the sane world's 
heartfelt agreement and help) those who would take advantage
of our freedoms to destroy our society.

/Robert Skinner