SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group

 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: FaultLine who started this subject11/7/2002 8:41:58 PM
From: Bilow  Read Replies (2) of 281500
 
Hi all; This interesting review might provide a means for US citizens from the Southern US a better understanding of the complex motivations of terrorists:

Review: Jesse James: The original bin Laden
L.D. Meagher, CNN, November 7, 2002
Jesse James: Last Rebel of the Civil War"
By T.J. Stiles
Knopf
History
512 pages

His name is legendary, his exploits mythic, his life the stuff of romance. Jesse James is undoubtedly the most celebrated criminal in American history. He evokes images of Arthurian knights errant. He has been called a latter-day Robin Hood.

Historian T.J. Stiles, however, offers a different kind of portrait. To him, Jesse James was the original Osama bin Laden.

Stiles builds his case in "Jesse James: Last Rebel of the Civil War," an exhaustive biography that roots the bandit firmly in time and place, a vortex of issues and emotions called Missouri.

Jesse and his brother Frank were raised as slaveholders in Clay County, nestled along the Missouri River at the border with Kansas. Clay County was deeply enmeshed in the economic, political and social milieu of the Southern states. Jesse's formative years coincided with the "Bloody Kansas" era playing out literally next door. When war came, first Frank, then Jesse rode off with the bushwhackers, guerrillas who terrorized Unionists.
...
cnn.com

-- Carl

P.S. Some of my ancestors gave assistance to the bandits that ran around after 1865.

As far as the recent thread commentary about Bush being responsible for the stock market, I'd suggest that (a) single day movements in stocks are almost always of absolutely no significance, particularly when the gains or losses are fractions of a percent, and (b) the actual truth is that the stock market makes the Presidents go up or down, not the other way around. As humans, we have a strong genetic tendency to idolize our leaders. That means that anything that is okay is attributed to them. And the politicians feed us back with claims that suggest that they have the ability to control the economy. The truth is largely that we, as individuals, have control over the economy, and that controls the politicans. When we quit buying stuff and push the country into deflation, we blame the President, LOL.
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext