>     And you could be right. WW3 might be just 1/2  a war.

as I understand it, Charles, the strategic models our chickenhawk planners
are focused on are the great victories of My Lai and Sabra & Shatilla.
Meanwhile they're intent on seeing to it our moron prez don't get raptured
by another terrorist pretzel plot.

bob





----- Original Message -----
From: charles moyer <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Tuesday, January 07, 2003 7:35 AM
Subject: Re: Emerson- Pound


> Bobby,
>     Did not Pound him self decide it was "avarice" after all, mistaking
the
> symptom as the cause? Nicht wahr?
>     Jews too can imply self-criticism although that is usually projected
as
> "self-hating" by the maximilist readers of BAR. But imagine that applied
to
> Geeezus, See John 1:47 (No "dolos"). Again Guernon's gullible and
guileful?
> Not to say that all goyim are fryers.
>     And hasn't it been pointed out that Islam is nothing more than a
> Christian heresy? A few megatons ought to fix that. Is our brave young
> hungry caterpillar Pres. not driven by his messianic role for the rapture
of
> dominionism as his guru "Dr." Tony Evans has convinced him that he will
one
> day in gloriousmetamorphosis wear a beautiful set of angelic butterfly
wings
> in the New Jerusalem sitting with a conwerted and "saved" Ariel by his
side
> both anointed in Texas Tea?
>
> Chas
>
> p.s. Frobenius for Spengler, but your Emerson/Pound contrast is
supportable
> amid the neo-Emerson clatter.
>
> ----------
> >From: bob scheetz <[log in to unmask]>
> >To: [log in to unmask]
> >Subject: Re: Emerson- Pound
> >Date: Mon, Jan 6, 2003, 10:35 PM
> >
>
> > Michael,
> >      if i may, ...
> >      I'd tend to see emerson-pound a study in contrast.  Pound, for all
the
> > "make it new" virtuosity, was thoroughly a slave to Tradition, no?  An
> > esthete, no idealist, who read history to re-mythopoetise,
...roman-ticize,
> > not transcendentalise, ...after the fashion of his pre-rafaelite
nostalgia,
> > not kant, hegel, spengler.  Emerson, otoh, was passionate to chuck It
all,
> > ...was on the way to foucault, no?
> >
> > ...as for the criminality/ignorance of Pound's reading the causes of
WW1/2,
> > ...seeing the role of the zionist race-state in provoking the immanent
> > obscenity against islam, don't there sometime arise a twinge of doubt
that
> > the simple, "anti-semite,"  covers the matter?
> >
> > yours,
> > bob