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: LindyBill who wrote (63542)	12/30/2002 9:50:23 AM
From: JohnM	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

Too bad we are going to start having to do the same with the NYT. I assume the "we" in that sentence is the small band of hardy warriors who must type a negative about the New York Times each day in order to "make their day." Well, they and you have already done that, seen the Times as too political. It's interesting to see the Times going about the usual newspaper business of taking two long looks at any administration's actions, doing the same with the Bush admin that they did with the Clinton, and find the Bush folk accusing it of extreme political bias. The Clintons thought it was personal animosity.

To: LindyBill who wrote (63542)	12/30/2002 1:29:33 PM
From: Rascal	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 281500

"Now I wonder why Raines left that theory out? Hmmmm. Could it be because it does not make the Administration look bad? (And don't think for a minute that his fingerprints were not all over this copy.)" I think it makes America look very very bad. Instead of Bombing and Invading we are just going to starve people until they flip out and the military goes bonkers and murders whoever is perceived to have had decision making ability. Rascal@ eyesopen.com