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 : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: TimF who wrote (340368)	6/14/2007 5:50:10 PM
From: tejek	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1573718

It has everything to do with democracy No, just about nothing. Democracy means the people decide. It the people or their elected representatives decide to treat someone unfairly that isn't undemocratic. Congress legislated to have terrorists kept out of the country. The Bush administration decided to ding Cat Stevens because he converted to Islam. It may be unfair, unjust, wrong, or abusive of freedom, but those are separate issues from democracy. In this case there is some indication that their might be some reason to keep him out. However the publically released information doesn't seem solid enough to support doing so. If any secret information is no more solid then he should be let in. OTOH the abuse, if there is any at all, is much less because of the fact that he is a foreign national. An argument can be made that he should be let in, but forbidding a foreign national to enter the US, is hardly undemocratic, or some form of general repression. Cat Stevens is not a terrorist. There was talk they would take him off the list but to my knowledge they never did. Hell, Ted Kennedy was on the list. Anyone who doesn't agree with the Bush administration probably is on the list. I know, Tim, you don't believe.......you think everything is peachy keen. Corporate America is not a monolithic block. To the extent corporate owned media has some vested interest, its in making higher profits, by attratcing my viewers/readers, not in supporting any one political party or administration. The politics of the top people influence the politics of the corporation. Look no further that Rupert Murdoch. Rupert Murdoch is one man, whose politics appear to influence his news media outlets more than most owners. Other owners have different politics, so even if they do have a strong influence, it isn't always in a conservative direction. Many owners are known to contribute to liberal causes. GE owns NBC.....GE is a conservative corporation. Disney owns ABC. Disney is a conservative corporation. I believe Paramount owns CBS. I don't know the politics of that corporation. Then why did I have to go to the British press to get the truth? Correction, you had to go to the British press to see what you think is the truth. Everything the British press claimed back in 2003-2005 and denied by the Bush administration, in the end, was proven to be true. Its you who don't know the truth.