Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

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 : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: TimF who wrote (12129)	11/30/2001 3:44:39 PM
From: MSI	Respond to of 281500

you said, "Some of it was directly distributed by relief agencies. " My comment meant to say that's the best way to attempt distribution of non-military aid, rather than directly pumping cash into warlords in Latin America or Taliban in Afghanistan. If you think your responsibility for supporting terrorism doesn't extend to writing a tax check (or buying a Ford, assuming the CEO supports it), perhaps that's true, unless you happen to know about it. Then it becomes an interesting question, particularly if you are coerced. My general point is the US gov't is more corrupt than the general public ... An odd thought, but there it is. Any kind of voluntary action, such as a relief agency, is better, because if you find out that it supports terrorism, you can change your mind and not contribute. If you find out Saudi Arabia supports terrorism, are you responsible for supporting terrorism each time you buy gas? I'd say it's the oil co. executives who refuse to unbundle their offerings who limit those options. But as a young man we were told "you can delegate authority, but not responsibility", so perhaps until we achieve a less violent world it's all of our responsibilities.