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 : PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Land Shark who wrote (411805)	6/5/2003 12:26:39 PM
From: Thomas A Watson	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 769670

glycol recycling???? Well not bad for a technology ignoramus. Follow some real links. Are they all over head??? wmd.homeip.net And just what could one of the mobile labs make. Yes it's from the New York Times and I have not been able to second source it. "I knew that it was the credibility of the United States that was going to be on the line on the 5th of February," said Powell. Did his faith in the CIA pay off? On May 28, the CIA released a paper entitled, "Iraqi Mobile Biological Warfare Agent Production Plants." It describes three vehicles recovered in Iraq by U.S. forces -- a truck fitted with a "toxicology laboratory" that "could be used to support BW or legitimate research" and two tractor-trailers similar to the mobile units described by Powell at the United Nations. "We have investigated what other industrial processes may require such equipment -- a fermentor, refrigeration, and a gas capture system -- and agree with the experts that BW agent production is the only consistent, logical purpose for these vehicles," concluded the CIA. The New York Times reported May 21 that the units "could be used to produce an estimated 500 liters of liquid anthrax and 50 liters of botulinum toxin per batch within two to three days -- millions of lethal doses." "The manufacturer's plates on the fermentors list production dates of 2002 and 2003 -- suggesting Iraq continued to produce these units as late as this year," said the CIA. U.S. intelligence, it turns out, found some very deadly needles in a haystack as big as Iraq. Why did the U.S. change the regime in Baghdad? President Bush stated it plainly in his State of the Union Address: "Trusting in the sanity and restraint of Saddam Hussein is not a strategy, and it is not an option." Those who argue that what has been discovered in Iraq thus far changes this calculation must answer one question: How many secret Iraqi bio-weapons factories would have been too many?

To: Land Shark who wrote (411805)	6/5/2003 7:07:13 PM
From: Raymond Duray	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 769670

"Bush and Blair Lied to Get a War".... yields, Re: Mobile Bio-chem labs -- I spotted that item at What Really Happened as well. whatreallyhappened.com Here's what the editor, Michael Rivero, has just posted: <COPY> The time has come to stop pussyfooting around and tell it like it is. Bush and Blair lied to get a war. There are no WMDs in Iraq. There weren't any. When Colin Powell stood before the United Nations acting as representative of the people of the United States, he lied. Bare-faced, bold, without remorse, lied. There was no evidence of WMDs. The "proof" Powell waved around was a plagiarized student essay backed up with out-dated photographs. Blair pressured British Intelligence to make their report "sexier". Cheney did the same with the CIA. The lie was overt, intentional, and pre-meditated. Those who told the lie knew it was a lie. Those who told the lie knew the invasion into Iraq was not about WMDs because those who told the lie knew there were no WMDs, otherwise there would have been no need to lie. Wolfowitz is trying to back away from the comment about Iraq "swimming in oil", trying to claim that this does not mean Iraq was invaded because of the oil, but given that there were no WMDs to begin with, what other reason was there to invade and conquer Iraq? The loot from the Baghdad Museum wasn't worth it. The Iraqi people have fewer freedoms now than under Saddam, and face a lifetime threat from unexploded cluster bombs and depleted uranium. What motive exists for the conquest other than the oil? But at bottom, the real issue is the lie. At the time Bush and Blair claimed to have proof that Iraq had WMDs, they did not. And it doesn't matter what they find or plant in Iraq from now on, the fact of the lie remains unchanged. Both governments (and the media that supported them) have proven themselves totally untrustworthy, and governments that cannot be trusted cannot be tolerated. Everyone who took part in this lie should be fired immediately. What was good for Sosa should be equally good for Bush, Blair, Intelligence Agencies, and assorted talking heads, and for exactly the same reason, to act as a deterrent. Because if We The People do NOT remove these liars from office right now, it sends a bad message to everyone in government; that We The People are okay with being lied to in order to start a war. This, I promise, will result in more lies to send off your children to more wars. If, on the other hand, we have the courage to kick liars out of our government, to throw them into the streets in the most humiliating manner possible, to make the cost of such a lie outweigh the benefit, then I promise that the rest of the government will discover that truth is a virtue. Government will be no more honest and truthful than we force it to be. <END COPY>