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 (236103)	6/6/2005 8:32:59 PM
From: tejek	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1572946

The Bush administration appears to have opened a whole new front in its war on terror: a forceful, full-scale defense of the morality of its detention-camp policies. First came harsh criticism of Newsweek magazine for its since-retracted charge of Koran abuse at the US prison at Guantánamo Bay, Cuba. More recently top officials have pushed back - hard - against Amnesty International's use of "gulag" to describe Guantánamo's conditions. That's exactly right. This administration thinks a good defense is a strong offense. They also don't think torture and the abuse of prisoners is all that bad. That rather be able to do it inhouse and save the money of shipping the prisoners to other country who have a more 'liberal' view of torture. The intensity and coordination of administration remarks on this issue may reflect a belated recognition of the stakes involved. Rightly or not, to much of the world the abuse of prisoners in US custody may now be emblematic of American foreign policy as a whole. I am not sure that anything can be done about world opinion at this point.

To: Road Walker who wrote (236103)	6/6/2005 11:41:58 PM
From: tejek	Read Replies (6) \| Respond to of 1572946

While I was at the gym this evening, someone was interviewing Bill Clinton. [Let me stop here and say......what a brilliant man Clinton is. It wasn't by accident this country ran as well as it did during his tenure. I can see his value a lot more now that we are under a different president.] At one point, the interviewer asked Clinton why he thought there was so much animosity/tension between the two parties. He had a really interested spin on the whole problem. He said he thought it started back in the 1960s during the Vietnam war. He believes that the Republicans in this country did not want to withdraw from the war [sound familiar]and they felt the liberals forced this country to pull out. Secondly, he thinks the Nixon impeachment intensified the right's anger level, causing it to go up another notch; that they believed what Nixon did was not an impeachable offense and that the liberals pushed it just to get Nixon out of the WH. After that, the GOP was hell bent on seizing power and maintaining as much control as possible. It all sounds pretty plausible to me.