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: Bilow who wrote (100560)	6/10/2003 5:46:35 PM
From: Neocon	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

No one said it was a bad thesis. In fact, it was a respectable piece of work. So far, the matter has been closer to the predictions of the Administration than someone like you. No one is 100% correct on such highly contingent matters. Therefore, like most Americans, I find the Administration much more credible than those opposed to the war.......

To: Bilow who wrote (100560)	6/11/2003 4:50:41 PM
From: Neocon	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

The BBC got it wrong. The main documents used were 12 years old, but the thesis was recent: But it made familiar reading to Cambridge academic Glen Ranwala. It was copied from an article last September in a small journal: the Middle East Review of International Affairs. It's author, Ibrahim al-Marashi, a postgraduate student from Monterey in California. Large sections do indeed appear, verbatim. A section, for example, six paragraphs long, on Saddam's Special Security Organization, the exact same words are in the Californian student's paper.... ....al-Marashi document: (section: "MILITARY INTELLIGENCE", published sept 2002 ... commondreams.org