Politics for Pros- moderated Message Board

STOCKTALK

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 : Politics for Pros- moderated

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: Rambi who wrote (170704)	6/22/2006 11:00:26 AM
From: Rambi	Read Replies (1) of 793890

I read the report and it mentions "degraded" but refers to no dates. They just seem to believe it was pre-1991. I don't get the excitement. Well, I get some of it, but this seems a sort of toothless thing to me. 20 year old cannisters of degraded chemicals. It really isn't spin when you see people shrug about this, which many will do. It's that they truly don't find the information strong enough to change their initial beliefs, or particularly surprising. Since a lot of the objections to the war weren't based on the assumptions of hidden old chemicals, it just won't persuade, any more than most here will find the terms degraded or pre1991 pertinent enough to affect their beliefs.

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next