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 : Impeach George W. Bush -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: jlallen who wrote (7293)	10/30/2001 9:28:40 AM
From: jttmab	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 93284

Silly analogy. An exaggerated comparison, but not a silly one. Circumstantial evidence can be misleading. It's not all that difficult to set up timelines of circumstantial evidence to make someone guilty who you want to be guilty. But when all the fingerprints point in a different direction..you follow the direction of the fingerprints not the circumstantial evidence. Why would Atta have met with that Iraqi intelligence agent? No idea. But the question doesn't dictate the answer either. None of the threat matrices have come up with a connection. There was intelligence that Osama was involved in Sept 11. There was nothing on Iraq and there is no intelligence that says that Osama or Iraq was involved in the anthrax. It appears to me that Rumsfeld wants to get Sadam and he's willing to point a finger at Sadam whether he deserves it or not in this particular situation. I've seen plenty of comment from around the world that Bush Sr. should have taken care of Sadam. I don't necessarily agree. There are no guarantees that Sadam wouldn't be replaced by someone worse. jttmab