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 : Politics for Pros- moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Brumar89 who wrote (208885)	6/18/2007 5:40:14 PM
From: Lane3	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 793921

Why you are trying to depict Z magazine as something it isn't - namely as an objective and not hostile to America forum for ideas is beyond me. I had never heard of Z magazine. I'm not trying to depict it as anything. I read only the one article and that's what I addressed. The article seems objective and to the point to me. I earned a a living developing that kind of objective analysis so I am confident that I can recognize a decent job when I see it. It addresses the topic concisely, directly and without fanfare, spin, or flourish. The magazine may have commissioned and published it for their own purposes but the author wrote what looks to me to be a straight piece, one that is useful for genuine analysis on the off chance that anyone wants to do genuine analysis. If you think that and everything else on the list wasn't put there as a negative, you're the only one who thinks so. I can guarantee they intended it as negative. Methinks you are seeing what you believe, populating your preconceived framework. Its perspective is "they" have good cause to hate us and attack us because America has been doing horrible criminal things to "them" for decades. And that is wrong. I agree that it's wrong to conclude that those acts justify the hatred which, in turn, justifies the terrorism. Nothing could justify the terrorism. It is not helpful, however, to go to the other extreme and deny the role those acts play in the mindset of the enemy.