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: Brumar89 who wrote (105485)	7/15/2003 8:21:49 AM
From: Noel de Leon	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 281500

Rice is a member of the administration and as such is not a qualified source. As to the statement being technically correct, no one has denied that. The issue is deeper than that. Others have posted sites covering the problem.

To: Brumar89 who wrote (105485)	7/15/2003 6:36:05 PM
From: Jacob Snyder	Respond to of 281500

What Condi Rice said was: "What is the definition of 'is'" = "We were just repeating a British allegation, we never said Saddam was trying to buy Chad ore." "Oral sex is not sex" = "Our lies are not lies. We were given bad intelligence, by the __________(fill in scapegoat of the day: CIA, State Dept., British, French, whoever, as long as we aren't blamed)." To sum up, the current state of the coverup is: Bush and Rice blame the CIA The CIA blames itself, but nobody believes it the Brits are blamed by the State Dept., The Australians blame the Brits The Brits blame the French The French aren't saying anything. Cheney says nothing. Everyone else creatively fills in the blanks, and continues to Know what they already Knew. This is the best soap opera of the season.