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: Don Earl who wrote (881)	7/2/2003 7:30:47 AM
From: LPS5	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 20039

Let's start with the facts. Can you say that with a straight face, given the conspiratorial theories which you yourself have promulgated in this forum; theories whereby emotional political editorials...blogs...and conspiracy theory websites are assumed to trump reason and examination at the onset? There is no evidence of any kind whatsoever linking Saddam Hussein or Iraq, to Osama bin Laden, al Quaida [sic] or 9/11. Well, that's not terribly true, is it? No evidence "of any kind"? Or is there no evidence that you, personally, find compelling? To date there is no evidence of any kind whatsoever of Iraq possessing WMDs at the time the country was invaded. That, too, is untrue. There's evidence, but the crux of the issue is how you perceive it and the weight you deign to afford it. [Hint: You're imposing; you've got to filter.] It would take you far less time to research your questions to your satisfaction than it would take me to research your questions to your satisfaction. Lest I permit you to weasel out of this, let's stay on topic: you're citing polls, and I've asked you whether or not you've gathered the information pertinent to determining whether or not they're statistically, and informationally, sound. Message 19078056 A question which you, as yet, have not answered. Faithfully, I should add. Especially when the majority of the information has already been posted. You've already posted answers as to the underpinnings of those polls? Where? (A link will suffice.) The Internet is a wonderful tool for anyone who wants more information on virtually any topic imaginable. If you can think up a question, chances are good you can also think up a search parameter to find an answer. And once you hit on "an answer", the whole Internet opens up to tons of information on your topic of interest. That's particularly appropriate where editorials and blogs are used to work backwards toward verification. Effectively - and in the case of secret government "propaganda campaign(s)" and citing the Administration as architect of the September 11th attacks - where we have conclusions espousing political rhetoric and emotion searching (frenetically, or as the case may be) for supporting evidence. You don't know me personally, and there is no reason why you should treat me as an authority on anything. Don, in particular after having seen the types of information you've cited on this thread: you're at no risk of my taking as an authority on anything. Don't let that keep you awake at night, pallie. :-) So rather than ask me to run searches to answer your questions, why not run some searches of your own and post the results? Do you think I'm challenging your innumeracy without knowing well the answers? Instead of asking me to find information related to laws prohibiting the US Government's use of propaganda against US citizens, why not look it up yourself? You made the statement, not only citing a "propaganda campaign," but calling that yet-unverified campaign "illegal." Message 19076875 I'd like to see credible, verifiable proof of this campaign. Moreover, show me the section of the Constitution, statute, or any other legislation citing (much less targeting) "propaganda." Are you saying that your evidenceless claims are - as you once called the sites from which you appear to have gleaned your conspiratorial theories - "beyond reproach"? Or, stranger still, that I should support your wild claims? That way you may check the credibility of various sources to your own satisfaction and see how it compares to what I've already posted. I have. Otherwise, why else would I still be here? More interestingly is your evolution from having at one time posted answers to my challenges to provide evidence for your posts to, more recently, asking me to support your theories for you. There's an interesting reversal, eh? I look forward to seeing what you come up with and I'm sure others may find the results of your efforts interesting as well. With your ability to do critical analysis, no doubt you will provide a perspective worth considering. So does that mean that, among others, this post... Message 19078067 ...will go unanswered, as have a number of others challenging you to support your undocumented allegations? LPS5