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 : Impeach George W. Bush -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: one_less who wrote (81183)	5/31/2007 11:12:57 PM
From: JBTFD	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 93284

<<"In my opinion, it is a disingenuous to pretend that a double standard has to be declared in order to be in effect. It is you who declared a double standard. Your mistake. >> You totally miss my point. <<"It is also disingenuous to pretend that all countries have equal rights despite their disparities in size, wealth, or military might. Equal rights in this case have nothing to do with size, wealth, or military might. Your mistake, or pretence if you prefer. >> You accuse me of a mistake which I never made. <<"What value do rights have that one does not have the wealth or military might to enforce? " Rights are not associated with enforcement of will over others or goal achievement in general. Your mistake.>> Another mistake on your part. You must be getting bored with this conversation. I am saying precisely what I mean. You are projecting a lot of stuff I don't mean in to my statements and then calling it my mistake. What a joke. <<What value do rights have that one does not have the wealth or military might to enforce? " Rights are not associated with enforcement of will over others or goal achievement in general. Your mistake.>> You make the same mistake as above again. You project your concoction on to what I actually said and blame me. Maybe you need an active listening course. <<"Those rights become totally ostensible and of little or no value." You apparently do not understand the nature of rights and are claiming materialistic entitlements as rights. Your mistake. >> Your comment has no relevance whatsoever to what I said. You might as well be talking to yourself. You sure as hell aren't addressing any of the points that my post made.