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: Ilaine who wrote (98991)	5/23/2003 11:45:12 PM
From: Dayuhan	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 281500

But . . . . were they lying? I don't think so. An issue of semantics, to some extent: at what point does manipulation of information become a lie? It's widely reported in the intelligence community that information that did not support the "imminent threat" hypothesis was routinely shunted aside. I realize that I'm flirting here with FL's request to postpone discussion of this issue, but I think the administration's position could be strengthened a lot if they would reveal some of the information on which the assessments were based. This could not have been done before the war, for fear of revealing the sources, but surely this is less of an issue now. Revealing the basis for the threat assessment would not settle the issue of whether or not the threat was real, but it would go a long way toward settling the question of whether or not the administration acted in good faith.

To: Ilaine who wrote (98991)	5/24/2003 9:10:12 AM
From: see clearly now	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

.."were they lying? I don't think so. I think they fucked up."..I agree big and time .. a strike to the heart of the American power base ..the twin bastions of commerce and the military operations center turns out to be a potential "turning point" ... 1. nipped a dictator in the bud that was not helping the Muslim civilisation's cause. 2. similarly most surely has triggered the downfall of the Saudi Regime and others will follow. 3. mired the US in a political morass it may wish it had never stepped into (even with the consequent guarantee of secure (?)and lower oil prices)...and the loss of progress and competitive advantage in sustainable renewable technologies..... 4.provided a "shadow government" with the front of a questionable democratic Presidential election power to act under the cloud of fear that has been magnified to empower their Non-Democratic agenda. 5. while taking away the potential influence of Moderate Muslim and other civilization's leaders to create a more peaceful and honorable world ...favoring the radical extremists who want to destroy...... and so on it goes in a vicious downward spiral.. I would say by this one act (911) by a "terrorist" will go down in history as a major turning point...and the way I see it for now not for the good of our world. I am sure in this unique forum there are points of views that can see alternative paths that I have not envisioned. what are they? Arni Fullerton