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: Nadine Carroll who wrote (61217)	12/12/2002 1:02:24 AM
From: paul_philp	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

Nadine, Doesn't this seem a little too convenient - by half? I know that this is exactly my theory on why Saddam is intolerable post 9-11. The trouble is I have been right once already today and I just don't think Carl's heart could take it if I was right twice in the same day. ;-) I am having a George Bush hissy fit today (lousy economic team and Trent Lott still has a job) so I am a bit skeptical about this particular story. Waiting for more facts, Paul

To: Nadine Carroll who wrote (61217)	12/12/2002 9:28:26 AM
From: E. T.	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 281500

According to the WP's off-lead, the Bush administration has received "a credible report" that Islamic extremists in northern Iraq have gotten hold of some sort of poison gas, possibly VX nerve agent. The Post says government analysts "suspect" that it was smuggled overland via Turkey. If true, says the Post, the report would be "the most concrete evidence" to support the White House's contention "that al-Qaida terrorists receive material assistance in Iraq." That's sneaky language. The al-Qaida affiliated radicals are in Kurdish-controlled Iraq, so while they might be receiving assistance in the country that doesn't mean they're getting help from it. And by the way, why would Saddam route chemical weapons through a second country? From Slate this morning.