Display:
You have a lot of damn nerve coming in here with your brazen lying.  No reasonable person would come away from your article doubting that you and the Economist thinks an attack on Iran is worth considering.  You would not have even written the story if you didn't believe this to be true.

  1. The Economist has ZERO credibility here.  Not only did you guys support taking Hussein out, you have consistently supported economic policies over the past 30 years that have destroyed the lives of millions of people.  If you could support "structural adjustments" and you did, why would we believe you wouldn't support nuking Iran?

  2. Burying a little "balance" far into an article is just another CYA lie.  If you were really against an attack on Iran, your headline would have read, "Global Economic Calamity Certain from Attack on Iran."

  3. You have a lot of chutzpah to suggest Jerome isn't very bright because he didn't summarize your whole thesis (you even point out that he got the page count wrong.)  Listen you clown, I have read both of you and in my humble opinion, you are not intellectually qualified to wash Jerome's shorts.  More to the point, while Jerome is investing in real projects that solve real problems and provide some tiny hope for a possible future, your worthless rag thinks that there is nothing wrong with "investing" in derivatives.  I am pretty certain that the whole staff of the Economist--together--wouldn't recognize the difference between investing and computerized speculation.  You guys wouldn't know a real investment if it kicked you in the backside.


"Remember the I35W bridge--who needs terrorists when there are Republicans"
by techno (reply@elegant-technology.com) on Mon Jul 23rd, 2007 at 09:25:03 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Please, no need for flames on ET! Chasing away Mr. David is not a worthy goal.

*Lunatic*, n.
One whose delusions are out of fashion.
by DoDo on Tue Jul 24th, 2007 at 04:27:46 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Ah, but let us give Mr. David the benefit of the doubt, and suppose that he has skin think enough to not come undone for a few enraged reactions. He was after all brave enough to step into this nest of leftist cranks that quite clearly have no love for his publication or any of the viewpoints it so repeatedly peddles.

So, a warm welcome to Mr. David. Hope you don't mind a few sharp elbows to the ribs...

by someone (s0me1smail(a)gmail(d)com) on Tue Jul 24th, 2007 at 04:50:00 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Is the eco-no a new religion?

Having clear opinions and being angry with good reason is a most worthy goal and we are constantly "chased" and ignored by that waste of paper.  

Why should Peter scare so easy?  If an editor has not had worse discussions at work, he is not doing his job.

Our knowledge has surpassed our wisdom. -Charu Saxena.

by metavision on Tue Jul 24th, 2007 at 04:51:42 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Display:
Login
. Make a new account
. Reset password
Occasional Series