Who decides what "sounds like lecturing from on high" and by what criteria (which can only be subjective)?
For instance, you rejected my posting of two New York Times articles with the following comment, which is merely a statement of my opinion.
I'd like you to explain where you found "lecturing from on high" in it.
The American strategy (if you can call it that) toward Saudi Arabia is really contradictory, and contradiction has especially become acute due to the Iraq War. What to do about it is a subject about which relatively little has been said on the (broadly defined) left side of the political spectrum, perhaps because there is no obvious solution to the problem whether you look at it from a leftist or rightist or centrist point of view. So is the British strategy. The suspension of George Galloway from the Commons even as the investigation into the Al-Yamamah deal (which may implicate the UK government in Saudi money laundering for terrorist cells: Simon Jenkins, "Who Exposed This Colossal Bribery? Why, the Feral Beast," 13 June 2007, <http://www.guardian.co.uk/baefiles/story/0,,2101559,00.html>) gets scrapped is a rich farce. -- Yoshie
<http://www.nytimes.com/2007/07/28/washington/28weapons.html> July 28, 2007 U.S. Set to Offer Huge Arms Deal to Saudi Arabia By DAVID S. CLOUD
<http://www.nytimes.com/2007/07/27/world/middleeast/27saudi.html> July 27, 2007 Saudis' Role in Iraq Frustrates U.S. Officials By HELENE COOPER
On 7/29/07, Doug Henwood <dhenwood at panix.com> wrote:
>
> On Jul 28, 2007, at 12:58 PM, Eubulides wrote:
>
> > What's private about the list?
> >
> > Serious question.
>
> What's private is that I moderate it and Jordan hosts it. I try to
> run it so that it's comradely and collegial, and the archives are
> open to the public.
"Comradely and collegial," like the tone you employ in your response to me (about Iran and Islam now, about Nader before that)? Who moderates the moderator? -- Yoshie