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 : DON'T START THE WAR -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Ed Huang who wrote (22601)	3/18/2003 10:50:46 AM
From: jttmab	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 25898

Of course, the major shift of the attitudes of the Russia Parliament because of the Bushies' Iraq war is nothing either, eh? At this point, you have to consider that political statement. What happens after that is another issue. Re: Your comment. I'm not sure whether that was intended to imply that you think the treaty was substantive. jttmab

To: Ed Huang who wrote (22601)	3/18/2003 11:48:29 AM
From: Thomas M.	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 25898

Our Media, Our Sheltering Parents By Gabriel Ash Suppose you were a journalist and there were elections. Suppose that the new government administration decided to wage a war of choice on another country for reasons that the whole world finds perplexing. Suppose that another journalist finds out the decision to start a war was not even reviewed according to standard procedures in the State Department, but was based on Pentagon recommendations alone. What would you do? Would you perhaps make a list of the top Pentagon people? Would you perhaps look at their biographies, their public statements and affiliations, in order to figure out their world views and motivations? Suppose you found out that the third-highest ranking officer in the Pentagon was one of a tightly knit group of people with strong connections to a political party in another country? This officer, for example, was a board member of an organization called JINSA, the Jewish Institute for National Security Affairs. Wouldn't you be intrigued? Wouldn't you want to know what obscure connection could possibly exist between Judaism and national security -- perhaps a lost biblical theory of nuclear deterrence? And wouldn't you want to know who else is in JINSA, what JINSA does, where JINSA's budget comes from? Wouldn't your curiosity be piqued if you knew that JINSA was brimming with senior employees of top military contractors, or that the CEO of JINSA also managed a "charity" that funded Jewish settlements on Syrian territory? Wouldn't you want to know if the Pentagon people also supported blatant violations of Security Council resolutions? Suppose you discovered that JINSA lobbies on behalf of Israel (not a secret -- it takes a few mouse clicks on JINSA's website to find out). Wouldn't you find it noteworthy that Israel is the only country in the world whose leaders actually want a war against Iraq? Wouldn't you want to know why? What if you discovered that this officer -- his name, by the way, is Douglas Feith -- while in office, gave Israel advice designed to undermine U.S. influence abroad? Would you publish an article about all these troubling discoveries? I bet you would. But the New York Times wouldn't. [continued ...] yt.org