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.

Pastimes : Let's Talk About Our Feelings!!! -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: cosmicforce who wrote (92893)	1/8/2005 12:32:05 AM
From: KLP	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 108807

Take it where you wish, but you and I both know that your version isn't what I said, nor thought. Commondreams takes the 'whiff' of the topic, and embellishes it with fairy dust, a good deal of corn husks, and pig mess....with some mud muffins thrown in as well. If you don't think I'm correct, go ahead and look to see who wrote the "piece", and then print their bio....Also insert their name and socialist in the same search. You will be surprised. Well, maybe not surprised. I think you know it already.

To: cosmicforce who wrote (92893)	1/8/2005 12:58:51 AM
From: epicure	Respond to of 108807

I'm not sure you're going to be able to steer the subject back :-)

To: cosmicforce who wrote (92893)	1/8/2005 1:17:57 AM
From: cosmicforce	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 108807

I'm not being venomous or abusive, but pointing out that you were all over the map, and not sticking to the original claim of bias. I'm pointing out a logical problem with the dismissal of a source because of the politics - it seemed you were dismissing the point because the site is slanted, which is valid only if they lied. They didn't. What is relevant is, in the past, the same cast of characters (recognize the names Rumsfeld and Cheney?) have supported this guy and other news sources have noted it. Commondreams is a fine place to pick up stories. I also use other places as well. 9/11 had nothing to do with Iraq. That is a red herring. Iraq was about Saddam amassing WMDs (which we aided). I merely was pointing out (which you have taken personally) was that your dismissive attitude was a variant of an ad hominem dismissal (except instead of a PERSON, it was an ORGANIZATION). What if, for example, the news media is biased in favor of current administration (whomever that may be) and is controlled by a few people who punish those who make stinks by removing their access to the leadership (which I believe it is)? The only people remaining to point out the truth may have to pull it from the fringe.