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 : Polite Political Discussion- is it Possible? An Experiment. -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: MulhollandDrive who wrote (693)	8/7/2006 3:54:19 PM
From: Rambi	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1695

One of the reasons I don't spend too much time on political threads is that they so often get bogged down in definition of and perception of terms, or go off on tangents that are far from where they started. I can understand it, but it exhausts me, especially when it seems far afield of whatever small opinion I had ventured. In this case it was that the reading of the PNAC Statement of Principles made my blood run cold, perhaps an overdramatization but nonetheless having some truth for me. Suddenly I am getting rather confrontational questions like- "Are you really saying that the term isn't....etc" No, I wasn't saying anything at ALL about the term, and frankly, I don't much care about the term. It's a useful descriptor of a type of thinking, but apparently to some it has some far more profound judgmental accusation attached of which I was unaware. Is the term pejorative? I never thought it was but maybe this year when the outcome from their positions has caused such controversy and criticism, it has become so. Neo apparently was quite proud to use it as his nom de plume here. The meaning of militarized is to be equipped or trained for war, so Google's use of the word is perfectly correct in reference to NPAC. I've never thought of an oppressive regime in terms of the word at all, although one would expect such to be militarized to be effective. This doesn't mean that I don't think Google doesn't have an agenda. I don't know and yes, it is troubling. They make up 35% of the market share, Yahoo 30%. You could try Yahoo?

To: MulhollandDrive who wrote (693)	8/7/2006 3:59:58 PM
From: Rambi	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1695

This could be where Google got the description of PNAC for their lead: dmoz.org Project for the New American Century - A neoconservative organization supporting greater American militarization, challenging hostile governments, advancing democratic and economic freedom, and promoting American hegemony in the 21st century. In which case, it wouldn't be their wording, but whoever compiled the above.