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 : Politics for Pros- moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: michael97123 who wrote (121075)	6/20/2005 5:55:03 PM
From: MrLucky	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 793731

He piled on the Amnesty International language which also was not well received. Like Dean he got carried away and he will pay a price. Mike The good news is that his behavior, along with Dean's and Kennedy's will make clinton look like a "moderate". Yeh, right.

To: michael97123 who wrote (121075)	6/20/2005 6:08:07 PM
From: Keith Feral	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 793731

There are a lot of things that one would like to say about this war that need to be kept to oneself. The frustration of the press at the rampant killing of innocent Shiites and Kurds in Iraq is mind numbing. Imagine the public reaction if 25 police officers were lined up and killed outside of their precinct in NYC by a group of terrorists. This country would go absolutely fucking beserk. I have no idea why we cannot focus on the reality of the Sunni terrorists that keep blowing up everyone in their way. To blame it all on GWB is simply ridiculous. Sunni Arabs don't execute Shiite police to protest GWB. They do it to protest their lack of power in post war Iraq. 1200 Shiites have been killed since April 28. I would estimate at least 10,000 Shiites have been injured. I am beginning to see some shift in the press releases that are focusing on the balance of power between the 2 groups rather than blaming GWB for the Sunni massacres.

To: michael97123 who wrote (121075)	6/20/2005 6:28:29 PM
From: Lane3	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 793731

I am reminded of a type of question they used to have on SATs and the like. They would offer a statement and ask whether a, b, c, or d was the best synopsis. Statement: "If I read this to you and didn't tell you that it was an FBI agent describing what Americans had done to prisoners in their control, you would most certainly believe this must have happened by Nazis, Soviets in their gulags, or some mad regime, Pol Pot or others, that had no concern for human beings." Synopsis A: Durbin said that the incidents described were something we would expect from Nazis, etc. but not from Americans. Synopsis B: Durbin said that US troops are just as bad as Nazis. Well, it's A, of course. B is an inference. What one infers is not the same thing as what the speaker says. I enjoyed the NBA game last night. I'm a Spurs fan. So here's the basketball version Durbingate. My neighbor has a basketball hoop in his driveway. I wake up this morning to the sound of thump, thump, swoosh, thump, thump swoosh. I look outside and see one shot after another going through the basket but I don't see who's doing it. Later I talk to the neighbor on the other side who tells me that it was this geeky kid who was not known to be athletic at all and the reason I couldn't see him is that he was shooting all the way from the sidewalk scoring one after another. So later in the day I run into the kid and tell him that I would have expected such a performance from Robert Horry, not from him. Am I telling him geeks are just as good at basketball as NBA champions? Not hardly. I suppose he might have an emotional or cognitive shock over my words and infer that he should run down to the Wizards camp for a try-out, but he'd be sorely disappointed because he's not in their class. All I was saying was that I was surprised to discover that he had some basketball skill.