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: Rock_nj who wrote (13054)	2/25/2003 11:58:13 PM
From: PartyTime	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 25898

Rock--you are absolutely correct. Heck, bad chemicals could be gotten at virtually any university labortory in the world. The lie Bush used to get the pre-election congressional resolution was that he was just around the corner from going nuclear on us. Well, that's been debunked, along with nearly a dozen other contentions, if not ore, as plain wrong. Untrue! OK, so the nuclear threat ain't there. Chemicals? It's my theory that, yes, he's got some. But primarily for defensive purposes. HIstory shows he uses them defensively, not offensively. So why make him use these, if he's got 'em? Biological weapons? Perhaps we should concentrate on finding who got the anthrax out of our own military installation. Here's how I see it: Bush is more fradulent than Saddam is dangerous!