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 : Stockman Scott's Political Debate Porch -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: stockman_scott who wrote (6938)	9/20/2002 10:04:21 PM
From: Sully-	Read Replies (4) \| Respond to of 89467

Scott, IMVHO, only a blind man on a galloping horse could claim to objectively have considered everything you posted today & then honestly state you posted objective, balanced & unbiased news & personal POV's. I do not doubt that some folks responded positively to what you posted...... those slanted OP/ED, Columnists & extremist liberal media outlets said what these people wanted to hear...... regardless of the lack of factual basis, reality & the lack of any semblance of balance in most of the articles. Scott, you claim to have read every one of those articles. You claim you are open minded. You claim you that you don't always agree with everything in an article you post. IMVHO, the facts overwhelmingly speak otherwise I read all your comments today. I read or scanned all of the articles your posted today. IMO, you posted them because, for the most part, they support your POV...... regardless of the facts..... they said what you wanted to hear...... and your comments are in line with the articles with ZERO dissenting opinion to anything in those articles. Bottom line, those articles were mostly slanted, biased, factually flawed & generally from a left wing POV......... let's look at just one.......... America's case for war is built on blindness, hypocrisy and lies George Bush and Donald Rumsfeld are wilfully ignoring the realities of the Middle East. The result can only be catastrophic - Columnist - The Independent.......... argument.independent.co.uk Did you read that article Scott? Did you consider the obvious slant throughout it? Was Bush Jr President when those atrocities happened in 1980-88? Was Bush Sr aware of all of the atrocities in Iraq then? Was Saddam openly threatening the USA at that time 1980-88? Wasn't Saddam trying to get US assistance against Iran (clearly our enemy at the time) & thus lying, misleading & withholding the truth from the US for his personal gain? Did the US have a policy of interfering with internal affairs of other countries then or now? Is Bush using internal affairs of Iraq as the reason to remove Saddam now? Had Kuwait been invaded yet? Was Iraq in violation of 16 UN resolutions then? What exactly would have been Bush Sr's reason to attack Iraq in 1980-88? I'd go on with many more reality checks, but I think any objective person will get the point. Why wasn't any of those points even given the slightest consideration in that article? Why didn't you give any of those points the slightest consideration yourself Scott? How about some clearly irrefutable facts Scott? No, I doubt that will be forthcoming. That's just one of the articles with nothing but bogus trash & biased left wing slant. How many of the articles would you like to objectively debate before the truth becomes painfully apparent Scott? It isn't about your oft repeated claim to stimulate discussion because your own words consistently prove that you support the crap in the articles you post. And your own words rarely, if ever, denounce any of the obvious BS in most of these articles..... your POV consistently is in support of this trash. And where are an equal number of articles & your own POV's that articulate any semblance of a balanced POV in order to stimulate discussion???????? I've read your POV & scanned the articles you posted Scott. It's the same slanted, unreliable crap from extremist rags or left wing OP/ED pieces over & over. Your POV is in line with the articles. You basically claim the Bush Admin are liars & you oppose practically everything they do or say in making a case for removing Saddam. The articles you post have the same slant...... regardless of the facts. And when reliable facts are presented to you from unedited transcripts, you tell others not to believe that news organization. Hell, you vigorously support Scott Ritter, who has ZERO credibility if you can objectively look at the facts.......... Message 17989598 Message 17989550 Message 17989534 Message 17989506 I'm not buying what you claim Scott. Your own words & the irrefutable evidence are clearly contrary to those claims.