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 : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: skinowski who wrote (25702)	4/17/2002 9:45:43 AM
From: carranza2	Respond to of 281500

Anyway, why is everyone always in doubt about Debka's veracity? Has anyone ever caught them lying? The reason I injected an element of doubt into my post is that there was no corroboration that I could find concerning the foiled attack. I take everything that's printed in the media with a grain of salt. Especially news from the Middle East. C2@skeptics'rus.com

To: skinowski who wrote (25702)	4/17/2002 10:52:10 AM
From: Win Smith	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 281500

This inspired me to look up my favorite Debka story, for old time's sake. #reply-16467750 Before even the launching of the major US military offensive in Afghanistan, long Chinese convoys were carrying armed Chinese Muslim servicemen through northwest China into Afghanistan, according to DEBKAfile’s intelligence experts. They were sent in to fight alongside the ruling Taliban and Osama Bin Laden’s Al Qaeda. Their number is estimated roughly between 5000 and 15,000. Our sources report another three convoys are behind the first 3000, who crossed the frontier Friday, October 5. I couldn't remember which side this army was supposed to be on, but given right wing orthodoxy on China, I guess it was a given they were agin' us. "Intelligence experts" like that make the legions of bloviating pundits toeing the Perle/Wolfowitz line look like the very picture of intellectual integrity and independent thought, relatively speaking.