🚀 go-pugleaf

On 28/7/06 13:17, in article eacv5e$j4q$1...@news.freedom2surf.net, "William
Black" <willia...@hotmail.co.uk> wrote:

> 
> "The Reverend" <reni...@anglikckan.com.pe> wrote in message
> news:44c9fdbe.27897454@news.onetel.net.uk...
>> On Fri, 28 Jul 2006 12:53:06 +0100, "William Black"
>> <willia...@hotmail.co.uk> wrote:
>> 
>>> 
>>> "Michael W Cook" <mwc...@santlache.co.uk> wrote in message
>>> news:C0EFB715.222AE%mwcook@santlache.co.uk...
>>>> On 28/7/06 03:45, in article
>>>> pan.2006.07.28....@NOTROLLSgmail.com, "John Teague"
>>> 
>>>>> Would you agree that if Hamas and Hizbollah are part of the elected
>>>>> government of the PA and the government of Lebanon respectively that
> it
>>>>> stands to reason that actions taken by the militant wings of those
>>> groups
>>>>> are actions taken on behalf of those governments?
>>>> 
>>>> No, because Hizbollah and Hamas have a completely different agenda to
> that
>>>> of the Lebanese Government.
>>>> 
>>>> That's like saying that because the Political wing of the IRA, Sinn
> Fein,
>>>> have a couple of elected members in the British Parliament, they
> represent
>>>> the view of that government.
>>>> 
>>>> It's nonsense.
>>>> 
>>> Not quite.
>>> 
>>> Hizbollah have two ministerial offices in the Lebanese government.
>>> 
>>> As soon as Sinn Fein got some sort of min isterial responsibility the
>>> shooting stopped.
>>> 
>>> Indeed,  getting the posts was the direct reward for stopping the
> shooting.
>>> 
>>> With ministerial posts goes 'collective responsibility'.
>>> 
>>> Hizbollah IS part of the Lebanese government and so must be assumed to be
>>> operating with their blessing...
>> 
>> Assumption incorrect.  Hezbollah are a force unto themselves.
>> 
> My my.
> 
> The Texas Croat wants to play...
> 
> I thought you'd learned your lesson last time...
> 
> Have you considered a refutation of my argument rather than just a bald
> contradiction without any evidence?


Bloody hell, Bill is in a stroppy and argumentative mood lately ;-)