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 : Don't Blame Me, I Voted For Kerry -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Orcastraiter who wrote (75514)	4/16/2006 12:27:37 PM
From: Dan B.	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 81568

Re: "After I showed that it was way off" You didn't. Re: "you were the one that posted that data. Don't you have any personal integrity?" You've said SO much that goes against your own links, it's ridiculous. You've misinterpreted your own links, because you DON'T understand some basic concepts of logic. I posted what the S.E.Post stated, without comment, asking if you were aware the S.E.Post said it. That it was highly debatable was self-evident and immediately striking, IMHO. I then said I doubted the it. You then said it was a lie, and you still don't know that. You now claim to have proved that it is way off, and in fact as noted above and in prior posts, you have not done so. You took a stand on it. I left it to be proven or disproven. Re: "I already posted what the essential difference between a lie and an error is." Yes, and that explanation was incredibly silly and as wrong as it could be, as I noted earlier. Re: "there will be an increasing chance of suffering a first strike if we continue on a path of preemptive war..." In the first place, if our warring did demonstrably cause a strike against us as you might imagine, it would not be called a first strike, but rather a retaliatory one. Second of all, the enemy has vowed to attack even if we sit on our hands. If you think doing nothing would decrease the chance of us suffering a another strike (certainly not the first), you don't understand the motivation of the enemy. Re: "Any student of history can tell you that the reason we had to fight Hitler was because of his penchant for preemptive wars." LOL....this is just TOO much! Hitler fought no preemptive wars. He just attacked outright as the aggressor, like Al Qaeda. Perhaps you could back your statement above up by telling us which among Hitlers victim countries were about to attack Germany? LOL. You've got a LONG way to go, kid. Dan B.