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: c.hinton who wrote (256639)2/15/2008 10:03:15 PM
From: Nadine Carroll  Read Replies (2) of 281500
 
Ostensibly, that was not "interfering," but refraining from doing so. In practice, it was a clear endorsement of the rival candidate - the one to whom no "political" restraints applied. After all, Sharon could not forgo meeting the president, George W. Bush.


Heck, if this is the standard every Israeli minister will be accused of "interfering." I mean, WTF? PM Sharon did NOTHING, he sat in his office and didn't meet with any candidates, just with the President as necessary, and this was his "interference"? What would this guy be saying if PM Sharon had met with a candidate?

It is important in this day and age to learn to recognize arguments that have set themselves up as unfalsifiable, that is, there exists no set of evidence which would serve to disprove them.
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  

HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2025 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News