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: Tenchusatsu who wrote (479322)	5/9/2009 9:04:52 AM
From: Alighieri	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1573377

He has a lot of very intelligent things to say and says it without sticking his foot in his mouth. In other words, he's the opposite of Joe Biden. In the history of the country it would be hard to find a man whose proclamations have been discredited to the extent of those made by this fellow cheney...sad that you would be so quick to overlook the sinister nature of this man and compare him to a benign Joe Biden. Al "[Since September 11] We learned more and more that there was a relationship between Iraq and al-Qaeda that stretched back through most of the decade of the '90s, that it involved training, for example, on BW and CW, that al-Qaeda sent personnel to Baghdad to get trained on the systems that are involved. The Iraqis providing bomb-making expertise and advice to the al-Qaeda organization." "He's had years to get good at it and we know he has been absolutely devoted to trying to acquire nuclear weapons. And we believe he has, in fact, reconstituted nuclear weapons." "In terms of the question what is there now, we know for example that prior to our going in that he had spent time and effort acquiring mobile biological weapons labs, and we're quite confident he did, in fact, have such a program. We've found a couple of semi trailers at this point which we believe were, in fact, part of that program." "With respect to 9/11, of course, we've had the story that's been public out there. The Czechs alleged that Mohammed Atta, the lead attacker, met in Prague with a senior Iraqi intelligence official five months before the attack, but we've never been able to develop anymore of that yet either in terms of confirming it or discrediting it. We just don't know." "On the nuclear question, many of us are convinced that Saddam will acquire such weapons fairly soon." "[T]hey continue to pursue an aggressive nuclear weapons program." "Simply stated, there is no doubt that Saddam Hussein now has weapons of mass destruction. There is no doubt he is amassing them to use against our friends, against our allies, and against us." "I don't want to talk about, obviously, specific intelligence sources, but it's now public that, in fact, he has been seeking to acquire, and we have been able to intercept and prevent him from acquiring through this particular channel, the kinds of tubes that are necessary to build a centrifuge. And the centrifuge is required to take low-grade uranium and enhance it into highly enriched uranium, which is what you have to have in order to build a bomb." "But we do know, with absolute certainty, that he is using his procurement system to acquire the equipment he needs in order to enrich uranium to build a nuclear weapon."

To: Tenchusatsu who wrote (479322)	5/10/2009 10:22:08 AM
From: bentway	Respond to of 1573377

Silence on torture troubling Sunday, May 10, 2009 CYNTHIA TUCKER At long last, a prominent Christian conservative has called waterboarding what it is: torture. Last week, Richard Land, an official with the Southern Baptist Convention, said the practice is unethical and “violates everything we stand for.” “There are some things you should never do to another human being, no matter how horrific the things they have done. If you do so, you demean yourself to their level,” said Land, president of the SBC’s Ethics & Religious Liberty Commission. His comments, though belated, are welcome. He breaks a telling silence about torture among the most politically active leaders of the religious right, who had a tendency to endorse all decisions and embrace all practices of former President Bush. Indeed, Land had nothing to say about waterboarding when Bush was still in office, though many reports confirmed the administration’s use of the practice years ago. Land’s comments follow a poll showing that evangelical Protestants are less ambivalent about torture than their fellow citizens. The Pew Center for Research found that, among all Americans, about half believe torture can often or sometimes be justified. Pew says 62 percent of “white evangelical Protestants” believe so. (Pew’s sample was too small to identify groups other than “white evangelical Protestants,” “white non-Hispanic Catholics,” and “white mainline Protestants.”) It makes you wonder, doesn’t it? Conservative Christians tend to be conspicuously pious, loudly proclaiming themselves moral, righteous, just. Yet, their support for torture — even against an avowed enemy, even in times of peril — seems oddly out of step with the radical gospel of a carpenter who preached peace, forgiveness and mercy: “Do unto others as you would have them do unto you.” Many evangelical Christians, black, white and brown, are Biblical literalists, insisting that homosexuality is a sin and evolution is heresy because the Bible says so. That same Bible introduces a simple teacher who instructed his followers to turn the other cheek, to repay cruelty with kindness, to disregard their personal safety. Yes, we may be forgiven for being afraid, but fear cannot justify inhumanity to others. How does that jibe with support for barbaric treatment of detainees? The religious right certainly isn’t responsible for the decisions of the Bush administration, which raised torture to official policy. Nor were conservative Christians alone in their failure to speak out — loud and long — against it. Even as reports leaked out about simulated drownings, chaining prisoners to the ceiling and slamming them against walls, there were few voices raised in protest. Much of America stood by quietly as our ideals were trampled, international law violated and our moral standing eroded. But conservative Christians were a favored constituency when Bush was in power. Their enthusiasm powered his campaigns; their votes helped usher him in; their leaders helped push through his agenda, including his unfortunate war of choice in Iraq. If Land had found his voice on torture then — and persuaded his conservative colleagues to join him — perhaps Bush would have seen the error of his ways. At the very least, Land and his fellow theologians might have been able to curb the enthusiasm for torture among their own parishioners. Perhaps they could have added to their condemnations of homosexuality and abortion a reminder or two about the words of the Galilean they purport to follow. “Love your enemies,” he said. It’s not a torture-friendly gospel. Find this article at: ajc.com