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 : Ask Michael Burke -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: nickfrombrooklyn who wrote (110151)	12/9/2007 6:35:31 PM
From: nickfrombrooklyn	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 132070

This video says everything that needs to be said about the hypocrisy of democrats and the quality of U.S. intelligence. youtube.com The Iraq war policy may have been an error, but it was either a bipartisan error or the democrats will say and do whatever maximizes their chances of winning. If you believe the war effort was an error, then the republicans are principled fools. That makes the democrats unprincipled, fools, or unprincipled fools. As to the current intelligence on Iran, in my opinion it can't trusted because of the recent U.S. track record in the area and the possible motivations of Washington. I also do not trust Israeli intelligence reports. Israel has a vested interest in the U.S. taking a very hard line on Iran. We are screwed until we find out what is really going on. If President Bush knew the exact contents of the latest NIE report during the summer, he has once again succeeded in looking like a fool with his statements about Iran. That is inconsequential. Most people already believed him a fool. More likely is that Bush recently decided to back off on Iran. As Wayne suggested, things are going well in Iraq again and Iran is too much to chew right now. He wanted that report to come out to give himself cover for backing off. What matters is getting the intelligence right and implementing a policy that minimizes the chances of a nuclear confrontation in the middle east in the future.

To: nickfrombrooklyn who wrote (110151)	12/10/2007 3:30:36 AM
From: Skeeter Bug	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 132070

>>I have to add, I thought he was quite restrained during the debate over Catholic priests and abuse. Not only was his view supported by the statistics and personal experience, many others wouldn't have been nearly as tolerant of your own verbal abuse and bigotry. The other 99% of good Catholic priests he told you about must have taught him well.<< Nick, so you don't think that Catholic management is responsible for aiding and abetting the admitted child molesters and promoting those who did the worst aiding and abetting? is this view that widespread? i never claimed those who didn't molest children ought to be held accountable for molesting children. rather, i said those who knew children were being molested and moved priests around to new "fertile grounds" ought to be held responsible for their aiding and abetting known child molesters. in addition, those in management who determined that official church policy was to move child molesters around instead of removing them from any interaction with kids (at the very, very least!) should be held accountable for a policy that did nothing but endanger more kids. to which of this don't you agree and why? i mean, if state government knew they had social workers that molested kids and moved them around every time they raped a child, i would think that there would be an issue with "state government" that set such a policy. why does "catholic government" get a pass? evil is evil, regardless if the evil is dressed in pretty robes and talk a good game and use the word "god" a lot. i do agree the name call ranting is better left off the threads.