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 : DON'T START THE WAR -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Thomas M. who wrote (4987)	2/3/2003 5:30:02 AM
From: Thomas M.	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 25898

That conversation is a vivid illustration of Orwell's maxim: "The nationalist not only does not disapprove of atrocities committed by his own side, but he has a remarkable capacity for not even hearing about them." <<< Just before the 1991 Gulf War, this writer discovered a group of British scientific technicians in Baghdad who had been “seconded” to Iraq by the British Ministry of Defense and the Secret Intelligence Service, MI6, to help Baghdad develop biological weapons. The British technicians were based at the secret biowarfare complex at Salman Pak where they were developing anthrax , botulism and possibly Q-fever for Saddam’s military – with the full knowledge and support of the British and American governments. Other British scientists were developing poison gas for Iraq. They showed me documents confirming that the feeder stocks for Iraq’s germ weapons had been supplied by the United States. >>> amconmag.com

To: Thomas M. who wrote (4987)	2/3/2003 7:32:13 AM
From: Brumar89	Respond to of 25898

Your purpose is misdirection. Actually amall quantities of anthrax were sold till recently to almost anybody who paid for them. It's doubtful the folks who knew about Saddam's WMD back in the '80's also knew about the anthrax. Cobaltblue produced an informative post on the whole issue: Message 18081108

To: Thomas M. who wrote (4987)	2/3/2003 7:38:06 AM
From: Brumar89	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 25898

Thomas's MO: When your side is losing an argument badly, quickly change the subject by posting some lies about things that happened 20, 30, 40 or more years ago. That far back people won't know who is telling the truth and some will be fooled. More important, people will lose track of the argument about the current issue. I think what set Thomas off on his current diversion campaign is the post of the Iraqi doctor's opinion piece. I'll see if I can find it.