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 : PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: username who wrote (348931)	1/28/2003 1:38:48 PM
From: JakeStraw	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769670

The guy's Canadian, what do you expect! :^)

To: username who wrote (348931)	1/28/2003 2:04:26 PM
From: George Coyne	Respond to of 769670

You have correctly identified an example of media bias and Jennings bias in particular. It is unfortunate that there aren't more people who are perceptive enough to recognize this. And others who are, become immune and are reluctant to point out examples like yours in enough detail to make the case. Those who refuse to acknowledge this bias will not concede any way. It exists even more subtly in the major print media, especially the NYT, not only in editorials, but in what are supposed to be straight news stories.

To: username who wrote (348931)	1/28/2003 2:07:59 PM
From: JDN	Respond to of 769670

Well said. As Benjamin Franklin said to the colonies, "Gentlemen, we must all hang together or we shall surely hang seperately" jdn

To: username who wrote (348931)	1/28/2003 4:39:11 PM
From: Raymond Duray	Respond to of 769670

username, I'm unfamiliar with any incident where Iraq invaded Saudi Arabia. Can you provide any detail on this? I am aware, OTOH, that reports of the Iraqi army positioning itself on the Saudi border in the fall of 1990 were a complete fabrication by the Bush I Regime and that they used this lie to sell the war to the American public, Congress and the Saudi Royal Family who weren't exactly thrilled about America's, er, the Bush Regime's decision to garrison American forces at Dharan and elsewhere. The unimpeachable source on this is John R. MacArthur's "The Second Front" amazon.com I have to tell you, when I read people say things like I thought it was supposed to be like an official thing; the policies of the United States are referred to as the policies of the United States. Back up the President and all that. I am completely taken aback by the comment. The U.S. Constitution clearly sets out a system of governance with debate and discussion to be the essence of our process. Your insinuation that those who don't kowtow to the Supreme Leader strikes me as being the methodology of the National Socialists in Germany in the 1930's, or of the Bolsheviks and Soviets for most of the history of that sordid totalitarian monstrosity. Feckless loyalty and obedience are the hallmarks of evil states, not the United States. So, you trouble me. Your insinuations of treason by dissent really raises my antennae that you may be a troublesome sort of brownshirt. And if you were to take a poll of the electorate, as CNN has done recently, you'd find that the country is pretty evenly divided as to agreement vs. opposition to the policies that Peter Jennings correctly identifies as those of the Bushista Junta and not those of the country. I know whereof I speak. I'm a regional coordinator for Not In Our Name. I mean it. Bush does not speak for us. In fact, many of us think the best thing that could possibly happen to this country and the world is for Bush to be impeached. He's a scoundrel, a criminal and a megalomaniac. How you can endorse his evil is beyond my comprehension. Salaams, Ray