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 : Bush-The Mastermind behind 9/11? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: JBTFD who wrote (766)	6/7/2003 4:12:11 PM
From: Raymond Duray	Respond to of 20039

Hi Mark, Alex Jones seems to be someone who understands what works for Limbaugh, Hannity and Savage. The entertainment necessity to stir the pot, whether the pot actually needs it or not. :) -Ray

To: JBTFD who wrote (766)	6/8/2003 1:41:22 PM
From: Don Earl	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 20039

FWIW, I have a hard time making up my mind on what to make of Alex Jones. He comes across a bit like a television evangelist looking for love gifts. Every other sentence is a plug for his over priced home movies. He has a lot of the right information, but my impression is his presentation of the facts leaves something to be desired. IMO, wild eyed extremism isn't the best way to reach mainstream America when the evidence is strong enough to speak for itself. <<<The funny thing is on the gun issue I am probably right of center.>>> The "right" vs. "left" thing looses me in places. As close as I can tell, historically, when the shooting starts, I've never noticed one side preferring to be less well armed than the other. If one assumes the Bush program is "conservative", being disarmed is an invitation to robbery, extortion and murder, which probably makes gun control a right wing philosophy at present. Gun control issues seem to be more between those who have an irrational fear of guns vs. those who don't. It's an emotional issue and the arguments are about as useful as trying to convince an arachnophobe not to be afraid of spiders. The Second Amendment deals with the reality that Americans might at some point need to defend their freedom through their own personal efforts. If it weren't for an armed militia, the United States would still be a British colony. The intent was never to protect Americans' right to go hunting. It was to protect Americans' right to defend themselves against human enemies if it became necessary. It's a safe bet that some freedom will be abused by certain elements of the population. Being free involves risk. There's always the possibility an individual will make wrong choices that may affect others. There's a balancing act involved in providing consequences for wrongful acts, while protecting the rights of the majority. In the final analysis, what it comes down to is a choice between accepting the risk involved in being a free people and the chance some individuals will abuse their freedom, or to chose slavery where the chance is one individual is in a position to harm everyone in the nation through the abuse of power.