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: bela_ghoulashi who wrote (103562)	6/30/2003 12:20:15 PM
From: Win Smith	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

I am as muchly bemused by the righteous indignation over that one as I am over all the other righteous indignation that passes for thought here. First google hit, from a righteous-right guy no less: When Did You Stop Beating Your Wife? Answering Righteous Questions In a Not-So-Righteous World spintechmag.com It's a joke, but I guess it's only funny when the righteous right poses the wife-beating question correctly, otherwise it's yet another opportunity for fatuous self-righteousness. Just to go modestly on-topic, though, there's this one a few links down the list: Scott Rosenberg: "So, Saddam, when did you stop beating your wife?" nutball.com So, Saddam, when did you stop beating your wife? Confirming evidence that our government is now taking its rhetorical plays directly from the pages of "1984" comes with this CNN report from defense secretary Donald Rumsfeld's press conference yesterday: The failure of U.N. arms inspectors to find weapons of mass destruction "could be evidence, in and of itself, of Iraq's noncooperation" with U.N. disarmament resolutions, U.S. Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld said Wednesday.... The chief U.N. weapons inspector, Hans Blix, told the U.N. Security Council last week that his teams had found no "smoking gun" in nearly two months of inspections but urged more "active cooperation" from Iraq. "The fact that the inspectors have not yet come up with new evidence of Iraq's WMD program could be evidence, in and of itself, of Iraq's noncooperation," Rumsfeld said. Commentary seems almost superfluous. Iraqis! If we find evidence of your WMD program, we will invade you! If we do not find evidence, that is evidence that you have not cooperated -- so we will invade you!What's really going on here, I suppose, is that Rumsfeld never wanted inspections to resume in the first place, always wanted to invade first and ask questions later, and is now trying to exploit the situation by closing a Catch-22 pincer upon the Iraqi dictator. Unfortunately for him, Rumsfeld's contortions wind up painting himself as a purveyor of paradoxical doublethink more worthy of "Dr. Strangelove" than the real world of geopolitics.