SI
SI
discoversearch

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.
Pastimes
The Boxing Ring Revived
An SI Board Since October 2001
Posts SubjectMarks Bans
7720 16 0
Emcee:  Neocon Type:  Unmoderated
Introduction Compact
Previous 25 | Next 25 | View Recent | Post Message
Go to reply# or date (mm/dd/yy):
ReplyMessage PreviewFromRecsPosted
5670Today's Post has a list of religious groups with anti-war web sites. Long lLane3-3/13/2003
5669If it is in the best interest of the United States to wait, then it is against iNeocon-3/13/2003
5668Depends what you think our interests are.The Philosopher-3/13/2003
5667One can think it is not necessary to go to war with Iraq now without believing tThe Philosopher-3/13/2003
5666What is up with the Salt Lake City cops? <I>…resembled the drifter that Eone_less-3/13/2003
5665I think it does, and I think it's a stupid policy. I don't think we shoepicure-3/13/2003
5664If Moran did not hold that war were against US interests, why try to agitate forNeocon-3/13/2003
5663I'm always amused, but not for the "right" reasons, at those listsThe Philosopher-3/13/2003
5662kNeocon-3/13/2003
5661<i>We tend to forget that he was answering a specific question from a JewiLane3-3/13/2003
5660That's not quibbling. Not at all. There is a vast difference between beinThe Philosopher-3/13/2003
5659<i>One can only go on one's perceptions</i> No. One can analyThe Philosopher-3/13/2003
5658Common sense. Thanks for posting. We tend to forget that he was answering a spThe Philosopher-3/13/2003
5657Don't quibble, counselor.....Neocon-3/13/2003
5656No one was discussing Israel, except in the tacit sense of assuming it was driviNeocon-3/13/2003
5655kNeocon-3/13/2003
5654<i>What if being for the support of Israel puts the US at risk?</iThe Philosopher-3/13/2003
5653One can only go on one's perceptions.....Neocon-3/13/2003
5652Did he say it was against American interests? One can oppose the war without feeThe Philosopher-3/13/2003
5651But even if you're talking about him, it seems to me that our politicians haepicure-3/13/2003
5650I will defer to Karen's excellent discussion of that point.The Philosopher-3/13/2003
5649Seems pretty reasonable. As I said, I am agnostic on Moran's intent.....Neocon-3/13/2003
5648<i.Fine. Then "remarks that an interlocutor perceives as slanderous"The Philosopher-3/13/2003
5647At this point, you may be right. But I am not sure that applies to those with thNeocon-3/13/2003
5646I was talking about Jim Moran. Anyway, a reasoned argument is not objectionablNeocon-3/13/2003
Previous 25 | Next 25 | View Recent | Post Message
Go to reply# or date (mm/dd/yy):
HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2026 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News