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 : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: tejek who wrote (171915)	7/15/2003 5:56:10 PM
From: TimF	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1579033

After all, according to the author, we know that Saddam had a nuclear WMD program in the ninties and we have found a few components that could be used in a nuclear devise That itself is a violation of the cease fire and something that Saddam was trying to hide. He doesn't point out that the CIA disapproved a similar statement in his Oct. speech in Cincinnati. The original disapproved statement was apparently based on CIA information, the later statement on British information. He also doesn't point out that Powell a few days later did not bother to use the info in his UN presentation because he felt the evidence supporting it was too flimsy. Do you have specific evidence that Powell though the supporting evidence was flimsy? And then the NR author makes a rather vapid attempt at discrediting Mr. Wilson and in turn, his position re. the Niger transaction when its not just Mr. Wilson who is saying the documents are forgeries. The British information was not specifically about Niger but about attempts to gain uranium from Africa. Wilson spent a few days in Niger and so supposedly knows that Saddam didn't try to get uranium from anywhere in Africa?? Tim