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: Neocon who wrote (153412)	12/6/2004 11:00:43 AM
From: jlallen	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 281500

You, of course, are free to read into all that you wish. And that, of course, is the problem. What purpose is served by demeaning the sacrifice of Mr. Tillman in this way? What purpose is served in denigrating the military and/or Admin. in this way...? In the end, after a not unreasonable delay under the circumstances, the accurate story was reported.....so.....what is the purpose of such bile....? J.

To: Neocon who wrote (153412)	12/6/2004 11:11:19 AM
From: cnyndwllr	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 281500

Neocon, re: I have seen too many "evolving" stories to blame the military for wanting to conduct an investigation before issuing a definitive version. You keep digging yourself a deeper hole. It may be time to quit digging. You see the facts are the facts and you can't spin them to make black into white. The military DID ISSUE A "DEFINITIVE VERSION" after it conducted an investigation and before it was forced to admit the truth. That version was a deliberate lie and the military knew it was a lie. That was the initial point that I asked you to address but you seem to lack the intellectual honesty or capacity to meet that point head on. Instead you consistently attempt to classify the military's creation of a fictional set of facts as "belie[ing] a coverup," or the results of bad initial information, when the true events clearly reveal that neither of those assertions could possibly be reasonably argued. I'm not willing to conclude that you are deliberately avoiding admitting that our military will lie for political purposes, but I am wondering what kind of mind cannot allow itself to see even a glimmer of a truth it finds unpleasant. Ed