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: Sun Tzu who wrote (163661)	6/5/2005 12:56:01 PM
From: Nadine Carroll	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 281500

You said, "over 90% of the suicide bombers who could be identified were foreign". It was the italicized portion that made me think it possibly similarly deceptive to Kohr's. You may be right. And I was willing to consider that you may be right from the start. But I find it unlikely (then as well as now) that an objective assessment of such statistics can be made Could have fooled me. I do not just make stuff up. If I say something was reported, it was reported even if you didn't read it, difficult as you find this to believe. But I am willing to listen to a logical argument based on solid evidence, preferably from someone relatively neutral. But in the absence of neutrality, I will even consider the army's statements if supported by good evidence So in the "absence of neutrality" you find no difference between anyone's statements, the US Army and Al Qaeda to be regarded as equally deceptive? How very telling a remark. Let me just mail you a small clue: if you think you are remotely able to second guess what is going on in Iraq, you are going to spend waaay more time actually reading all the reports and learning about the players. Because about half your conclusions are absurd on their face to an educated layman.