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.

Technology Stocks : Cisco Systems, Inc. (CSCO) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: TigerPaw who wrote (56014)	10/18/2001 4:42:18 PM
From: willcousa	Respond to of 77400

I don't think we will move on Saddam without hard evidence. We really don't need a full blown war with Iraq. I do believe that he is bent on mass destruction and that we will lose a lot of lives before Iraq is settled, however it goes on the anthrax issue.

To: TigerPaw who wrote (56014)	10/18/2001 9:06:47 PM
From: M. Charles Swope	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 77400

I agree that there's something fishy about the anthrax attacks. It appears that the targets have been media types and the most prominent liberal politician in the Senate. Why would Saddam or bin Laden have it out for them? Wouldn't surprise me to find out that the culprits turn out to be domestic far-right loonies. I believe there was an incident some years ago where they found some vials of bubonic plague germs in a car driven by some militia types.