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 : Stockman Scott's Political Debate Porch -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Sully- who wrote (25278)	8/12/2003 4:49:55 PM
From: lurqer	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 89467

Private Belen I tried to get some more information on Private Belen, but he seems to have "disappeared". In the mean time, I came across this oddity What In The Hell is Going on? The third soldier in a weeks time has died in his sleep. This is getting strange. • 8/12/2003 SOLDIER DIES IN SLEEP AR RAMADI, Iraq – A soldier attached to the 3rd Armored Cavalry Regiment died while sleeping at a base camp in Ar Ramadi on Aug. 12. • 8/9/2003 1ST ARMORED DIVISION SOLDIER FOUND DEAD BAGHDAD, Iraq– A soldier with the 2nd Armored Cavalry Regiment was found dead in troop living quarters at approximately 5:00 pm. Aug. 9. • 8/8/2003 SOLDIER DIES IN SLEEP BAGHDAD, Iraq – A 4th Infantry Division soldier died while sleeping at a base camp in the town of Kirkush on Aug. 8. Posted by elvis56 at 02:13 PM \| Comments (8) from lunaville.com lurqer

To: Sully- who wrote (25278)	8/12/2003 5:52:44 PM
From: Selectric II	Respond to of 89467

We knew the NYT is a mouthpiece for everybody critical of Bush, but getting fed a line from a Saddam sympathizer dressed up and posing as an American soldier defines the term gullibility. The writer appears not to have even checked the source or veracity. No need, because it fit the NYT's political agenda. It proves that to be a "journalist" for most of the media, one must have a flair for creative writing, the correct left-leaning politics, and... well, that's all. Imagine this: What if Bush had referred to that fabricated account of the attack, based upon his reading the NY Times story, only to find out later it wasn't true. Would the NYT attack Bush for relying on an untrustworthy source? Ha!! No, of course not. It would either defend him for checking "reliable sources" before speaking, or chastise him for speaking without checking government sources, but leave out the fact that it was the source of his misinformation. Anybody who pays that outfit for a copy of its propaganda -- or who pays big advertising bucks to appear in it -- ought to think twice. Same goes for its wholly-owned subsidiary, the Boston Globe.