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 : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: SilentZ who wrote (146206)	4/24/2002 5:51:38 PM
From: tejek	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1572099

I really wouldn't consider the BBC an objective observer here... the British press is very anti-Israel- for instance, they've been accusing Israel of massacres which really don't seem to have happened. Z, the article I posted was written well before the recent anti Israeli sentiment in the British press. Besides, the BBC is one of the more objective news media outlets in the world. In addition to the BBC, I also saw a similar explanation in an Israeli publication of Sharon's involvement in the massacre but I do not know which one. However, I don't think an Israeli tribunal would have found him guilty and stripped him of his post had he simply pulled his troops back. Why should he be held accountable for something that happened when he no longer was there? It would have been bad judgment had there been Israeli civilians present but its not Israel's responsibility to protect Palestinian refugees located in Lebanon. ted