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: PROLIFE who wrote (393965)	4/17/2003 12:14:44 PM
From: Thomas M.	Read Replies (4) \| Respond to of 769667

Note that convicted traitor Oliver North is the one who broke this story, raising the question of whether this whole event is a caper of some sort. Putting that aside, we can turn to the actualy case of Abu Abbas: <<< Abbas has long renounced violence and Israel has allowed him to travel to Gaza, declaring him immune from prosecution over the hijacking. US itself dropped a warrant for his arrest several years ago >>> gulf-daily-news.com And yet, this is being portrayed as capturing a fugitive who nobody could find. Assuming this absurd characterization to be true, should we commence bombing of Israel for sheltering a known terrorist? Tom

To: PROLIFE who wrote (393965)	4/17/2003 12:15:50 PM
From: DuckTapeSunroof	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 769667

Re: "...The New York Post headline the next day was: "GOT 'EM." Reagan said: "I salute the Navy." And then Abul Abbas was released by the Europeans...." >>> So, why exactly did Reagan let Abul Abbas get away after capturing him with our military? >>> Why didn't Reagan bring him to America to be charged with murder and terrorism?

To: PROLIFE who wrote (393965)	4/17/2003 1:44:20 PM
From: Kevin Rose	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 769667

Now, this is typical of today's dominant right wing media. It is a very interesting and successful style. Basically, it is the 'Patton' approach to journalism. Attack! Attack! Attack! In this style, there is very little defense of any position. Instead of calling attention to failures by attempting to defend them, these right wingers completely ignore these failures, and instead attack on any shred of a position. Peppered in this attack style is a convenient forgetfulness for facts. Did not someone else post the fact that the US and Israel were in fact not even looking for this guy? No matter, he is a dangerous terrorist, and capturing him is a victory for the administration. And all this is a cover up attack for the real shortcoming. The original purpose given for the war was because Iraq posed a threat with its WMD. THAT was the primary reason given over and over by the administration. They made it seem that there were sites all over the country (1400 sites, I recall, is the number they gave as suspected sites). Those 1400 must have disappeared pretty quickly. I'm sure we'll find a few, but certainly not the massive buildup that we were assured of by the White House. Now that it is apparent that the threat of WMD was greatly overstated, how does the right wing respond? Oh, the real objective wasn't WMD, but terrorist training camps and to relieve the suffering of the Iraqi people! The constant barrage of right wing media on these subjects is classic misdirection; misdirection from either the failure of our intelligence to properly gauge the WMD presence, or misdirection from the outright fraud of the stated reason for the war. Coulter, in particular, is very good at this sort of deception. She opens up by calming restating the war's objective as terrorism and not WMD, as if that is a given fact (NOT). Then, attacks liberals for supposedly letting Abbas be free, which is a real truth gymnastics exercise (NOT). Then, evoking 'liberals as unpatriotic' for opposing a Kelso's 4 star retirement even though his reign included the shameful treatment of women in the military (and reduced overall military morale and efficiency as a result). In the euphoria and relief of a successful mission in Iraq, the right wing media is conveniently burying these failures and shortcomings by changing the original goals of the war. And attack dogs like Coulter are the administrations willing little PR firms. Democrats are gonna have to learn this aggressive, no-facts-left-unignored style of 'journalism' to have any chance of winning in the future.