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 : John Kerry for President Free speach thread NON-CENSORED -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: StockDung who wrote (644)	1/10/2005 2:32:37 PM
From: geode00	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1449

Fox ever fire anyone for ethics violations? Lush Limbot ever not lie? Tom DeLay trying to squirrel out of felonious campaign fraud? Bush paying $250K for felonious propaganda? Where is the firing of treasonous Novak or blindingly pro-war Miller? Where? It's pure right wing buying and selling, nothing more. BTW, the White House has not denied the accuracy of the subject of those documents. Bush was and will always be a cowardly deserter and an incompetent Commander-in-Chief. So far, I see the NYTimes and the WashingtonPost and CBS trying to be reasonably fair. I see Fox, MSNBC, WashingtonMoonieTimes et al not having an ethical or moral bone in their entire organization. Obviously, only the moderate moral majority takes ethics somewhat seriously. The right wing doesn't even try to look ethical anymore. =========http://zmagsite.zmag.org/Jan2005/chomskypr0105.html "...A large majority of the public believe that the U.S. should accept the jurisdiction of the International Criminal Court and the World Court, sign the Kyoto protocols, allow the UN to take the lead in international crises, and rely on diplomatic and economic measures more than military ones in the “war on terror.” Similar majorities believe the U.S. should resort to force only if there is “strong evidence that the country is in imminent danger of being attacked,” thus rejecting the bipartisan consensus on “pre-emptive war” and adopting a rather conventional interpretation of the UN Charter. A majority even favor giving up the Security Council veto, hence following the UN lead even if it is not the preference of U.S. state managers. ... It is instructive to look more closely into popular attitudes on the war in Iraq, in the light of the general opposition to the “pre-emptive war” doctrines of the bipartisan consensus. On the eve of the 2004 elections, “three quarters of Americans say that the U.S. should not have gone to war if Iraq did not have WMD or was not providing support to al Qaeda, while nearly half still say the war was the right decision” (Stephen Kull, reporting the PIPA study he directs). But this is not a contradiction, Kull points out. Despite the quasi-official Kay and Duelfer reports undermining the claims, the decision to go to war “is sustained by persisting beliefs among half of Americans that Iraq provided substantial support to al Qaeda, and had WMD, or at least a major WMD program,” and thus see the invasion as defense against an imminent severe threat...." ========== Yep, that group would be the marginally educated, woefully lazy, easily manipulated servile group who dare to call themselves Americans. If all the facts were drilled into the heads of all Americans, Bush would be despised.