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 : FREE AMERICA -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Mr. Palau who wrote (11887)	9/25/2006 5:44:02 PM
From: PROLIFE	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 14758

retired generals...batiste LOLOL clinton looked like a 12 year old school girl crying in full tilt spin mode LOL Chris Wallace is a goo newman and should have decked william the bastard.

To: Mr. Palau who wrote (11887)	9/25/2006 5:50:42 PM
From: PROLIFE	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 14758

September 25, 2006 - San Francisco, CA - PipeLineNews.org - First, starting with the obvious, the information being proffered by the NY Times and Washpost in their latest expose as being representative of the findings made within the NIE's 30 page April study on Iraq wasn't aired absent political purpose just six weeks out from a national election and at a time that finds Dem hopes for capturing either the House or Senate fading fast. As such it is compromised by the weight of obvious bias right out of the gate but that aside what is particularly striking about the allegations is that no significant content from the still classified study titled, "Trends in Global Terrorism: Implications for the United States" has been offered to back up the MSM's assertions regarding it. Generally one would expect such heavy breathing to be accompanied by substantial portions of the referenced document to be offered as proof that such a level of high excitement was justifiable, but this has not been the case. The leakers - apparently a dozen or so lefty tattlers who of course refuse to be identified because they are, after all engaged in the criminal act of disclosing classified information - maintain that the main conclusion of the NIE study holds that the war in Iraq has made terrorism worse, however they provide nothing in the way of certification for such claims aside from vague characterizations. Nothing has been offered by way of proof here...nada. And this is aside from arguing the merits of such a contention itself, had it been the centermost point in the NIE study. The operative process going on here leaves three degrees of separation between fact and the conjecture regarding it. There is the report itself, still highly classified and still beyond general access, then there is the representation of what that report says made by people unwilling to identify themselves [who are part of a class of operatives that have repeatedly attempted to malign the war on terror and the Bush administration] and who having obvious axes to grind and finally, there is the representation of what politically motivated leftist media operatives say those sources too timid to reveal themselves or the report itself have told them. Evaluated on its merits, such "evidence" would rightly be tossed out of Judge Judy's court let alone be considered sufficient basis upon which to assess national strategic considerations. Moreover the matter central to this mini-controversy is absurd on its face on the grounds that it is contradictory, self defeating and turned in upon itself... pipelinenews.org