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.

Strategies & Market Trends : P&S and STO Death Blow's -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: sun-tzu who wrote (28762)	3/1/2003 2:37:15 PM
From: mishedlo	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 30712

Tell me what I have said that has NO basis in fact. Furthermore, what has Mike said that has basis in fact? He cites a source, I cite a source. Which source is correct? Perhaps we are both wrong. Perhaps we are each partially correct. There is no doubt that Powell's presentation to the UN was from a plagiarized 10 year old, student document. That is a fact. Now as to what Bush is really thinking can not be proven by either side. We do know what he is saying but we really have no idea what he is thinking or saying behind closed doors. I say it is oil and laid out a case. A good logical case. Until Bush admits it is about oil (unlikely) it can not be proven. Nor can you prove it is not about oil. We do know that world opinion is against this war. That is a fact as well. Turkey just now, turned down a bribe via a vote in parliament. Without that bribe it would not have had a snowballs chance in hell. That is a simple fact as well. Perhaps France Germany and Russia are lieing about the true reasons they object. But if you think they are lieing, why cant we be lieing? Personally I do not know how anyone can believe any political leader right now. Therefore I believe the truth is somewhere else. Bush just lied about economic experts backing his plan, the organization quoted sent a letter of protest to Bush. Clearly this guy does not have it all together. Those are FACTS. Undisputed facts. Yes it is conjecture by those that think Iqaq has nuclear capability and by those that think he does not. I have looked at the evidence and no one can show any proof. None. That is a fact as well. There is conjecture that he has that capability but no facts. In the absence of facts, I believe Hussein has no such weapons. There are several generals in the last war that advise against this war. That is a fact. Now, is their data current? No it is not. But we have not seen any FACTS from this administration. We have seen plagiarized documents presented as evidence. That should give any rational person grounds for concern. Blix has stated that the aluminum tubes were for rocket purposes not for centrifuges for enriching plutonium. If you read up on this, that is the story that by far makes the most sense. Now, even if you disagree, the FACT remains he did not receive that shipment. He does not have centrifuges (he does not even have the tubes to build them!), and there is no evidence that he has any nuclear material whatsoever. If there is evidence then where is it? Now, lets go one further, even if he does have nuclear material, does he have any capability for enriching it? Where are the centrofuges? Where is the plant? Can you hide such a plant? In short, where are the centrifuges, where is the plant, where is the nuclear material? Where where where? How long does it take to crank out a bomb once everything else is in place. It is far longer than 6 months from what I have read. At least a couple years, and that is IF you have the stuff as well as a program, and a factory etc etc. There is no way in hell Iraq could ever build a weapon with inspectors running all over the place. I believe that to be a fact as well. Perhaps one could build a dirty bomb in one's basement, but can you really build full blown nuclear warheads in your basement? In short, every step of the way it becomes massively harder and harder and harder to believe as credible any reports that show Hussein is 6 months from building nuclear weapons. Again, if we had any such evidence why did not Powell show it instead of a 10 year old plagiarized document? Please answer that last question. In light of all the total garbage in that report, why was evidence of nuclear capability not presented in Powell's presentation other than aluminum tubes (aluminum tubes there were not even received). Those are the facts. No evidence was presented because there is no evidence. This administration is relying on conjecture. All over the place. On weapons, on ties to Al Qaeda (that last one was really a stretch and cost Powell a lot of credibility), on the economy etc. Conjecture and proven lies and plagiarism. Those unfortunately are the facts. IMO that is overwhelming evidence is that he simply can not be trusted and has not told the truth. He has been openly called a liar in several instances in open forum in the senate. That is a fact as well. It is a sad state of affairs if you ask me. You can either believe Bush's conjecture or not. That is up to you. I do not. M