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 : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: hmaly who wrote (159169)	1/29/2003 12:59:34 AM
From: i-node	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1584274

People are trying to say, if we haven't found anything, therefore,we have no proof that Saddam has these weapons. This is the problem -- Alan Colmes argued tonight, as most liberals do (Susan Sarandon), "how do you prove a negative? How does Saddam prove he doesn't have WMD?" The fact is that that we DO know what Saddam had. The burden of proof is on Saddam to ACCOUNT for the WMD. If he can't prove he destroyed them, we must assume he has them. Period. I think Bush is wise, however, in refocusing the debate on the human rights issues. The Democrats are weak here, as the hypocrisy is glaring -- Saddam has killed at least a million, yet they don't care -- but they were hot to trot to get Milosivec. Clearly, the human rights issue with Democrats has more to do with who holds the presidency than the number of innocents tortured and murdered.