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 : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Road Walker who wrote (185753)	3/29/2004 9:31:18 AM
From: i-node	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1578539

That's because the admin response has been personal attacks on Clarke, not on the substance of his comments. What personal attacks? I've heard comments that his testimony was inconstent. But I've not heard the personal attacks. I've heard Clarke level the accusation, but no personal attacks. Do you have an example of a personal attack made by the administration against Clarke?

To: Road Walker who wrote (185753)	3/29/2004 1:14:50 PM
From: Tenchusatsu	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1578539

JF, It's not "Clarke's B.S." until you prove it's BS. Since they can't, you've got to figure it's the truth. Once again, the burden of proof is being forced upon the accusee. All you need to do is throw some accusations and get a sympathetic ear from the "mainstream" media. BTW, Clarke should have stopped with his 60 Minutes interview and his "tell-all" book. By going an extra step and saying Clinton did something about Al Qaeda while Bush didn't, he just stuck his foot in his mouth. Tenchusatsu