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.

Strategies & Market Trends : China Warehouse- More Than Crockery -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: RealMuLan who wrote (5607)	12/10/2005 6:15:46 AM
From: thames_sider	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 6370

You don't provide a source for that so I can't assess, but there's one reference probably missed by US readers which does make me wonder if it is far-left even by British standards, never mind US: Even sections of the establishment press in both Britain and the United States, such as the Guardian and the New York Times, which have fully participated in the dissemination of lies and the coverup of crimes associated with US foreign policy, were obliged to register in some measure the powerful impact of Pinter's words. The Guardian is commonly identified with the soft-left in the UK. Not socialist by some way, but certainly social democrat: of all the serious papers it's by far the least 'establishment' and the most consistently to the left. It would probably sympathise the most with Pinter anyway and certainly report his words with delight. And I can barely think of a British paper less likely to conceal state crimes committed by any country, ally or enemy. So a comment which implies they are some conservative mouthpiece for the elite makes me wonder about the author's own stance: it's unlikely to be mainstream. I enjoyed the polemic, however, and do look forward myself to Blair's arraignment ;-) (p.s. I don't generally read the Guardian myself, it's a bit too LW for me, too soft on social and economic policy).