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: PROLIFE who wrote (464799)	9/25/2003 11:18:34 AM
From: Thomas A Watson	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769670

Personally I think the President should not reveal WMD until about 3 months before the election. That is the best way to expose all the active maggots and all the silent maggots. It is also the best way to get hillary maggot into the worse disaster election the dems every had. But PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH will play it straight. ANd that is really the best way, damn it. Saddam minister granted immunity Ahmed surrendered after reported mediation Former Iraqi Defence Minister Sultan Hashim Ahmed has been granted immunity from prosecution following his surrender to US forces. Mr Ahmed - number 27 on the Americans' list of most wanted former Iraqi officials - gave himself up in the northern city of Mosul last Friday. White House officials say they have high hopes he will provide significant information on Iraq's alleged weapons programmes. The news came as US officials indicated that an interim report by the Iraqi Survey Group - charged with locating weapons of mass destruction in the country - would contain no evidence of illegal weapons. But neither would it close the door on the possibility that such weapons might still be found, they said. IRAQ SURVEY GROUP Took over WMD hunt from the US military in June Using intelligence to build picture of Iraqi weapons programmes Led by US general, but has some UK and Australian staff 1,300 staff include former UN weapons inspectors Pentagon officials said the survey group - headed by David Kay, a former UN weapons inspector and now a special adviser to the CIA - had found what they regarded as evidence of Iraqi preparations to produce chemical and biological weapons. They say there will be enough suspicious evidence uncovered to convince reasonable people that something was afoot. At present, President George W Bush has more pressing concerns, specifically the cost of the operation in Iraq - a source of ongoing controversy - and the difficulties in getting UN support. But the BBC's Justin Webb says the issue of weapons of mass destruction may well come back to haunt him. 'No proof' On Wednesday, a Bush administration source who spoke to the BBC said the interim report - which is likely to be published next month - concludes it is highly unlikely that weapons of mass destruction were shipped out of the country to places like Syria before the US-led war on Iraq. Mr Neil said the report is being finalised and could undergo changes The Bush administration source told the presenter of BBC television's Daily Politics show, Andrew Neil, that Saddam Hussein had mounted a huge programme to deceive and hinder the work of UN weapons inspectors. Mr Neil said that, according to the source, the report will say that the inspectors have not even unearthed "minute amounts of nuclear, chemical or biological weapons material". 'Speculation' Neither have they uncovered any laboratories involved in deploying weapons of mass destruction, not any delivery systems for the weapons. But, Mr Neil added, the report would publish computer programmes, files, pictures and paperwork which it says shows that Saddam Hussein's regime was attempting to develop a weapons of mass destruction programme. Mr Neil, a former editor of the British Sunday Times newspaper, stressed he had not seen the draft report, and was reporting what a single source had said its findings were likely to be. Both the UK Government and the US administration have dismissed the claims as speculation. news.bbc.co.uk

To: PROLIFE who wrote (464799)	9/25/2003 3:15:52 PM
From: DuckTapeSunroof	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769670

Are you INSANE, Pro... or just SERIOUSLY misinformed? Re: "Problem being, liberals cannot tolerate a Christian's belief in God and in Jesus," >>> Say WHAT? I almost don't know where to begin. First of all, I'm a Libertarian... so I don't claim to be an expert on either branch of the Republicrat Party: the so-called 'Liberals', or the so-called 'Conservatives'. Still, it seems that with most surveys reporting the USA to be among the most religious of all nations on Earth (measured by those who self-profess faith, and by Church going) it seems unlikely that such antimosity is a major factor from either side of the Republicrat house. And, from what I know of Classical Liberalism, I believe that respect for other's beliefs (especially religious beliefs) is one of it's tenets... not to mention the Constitutionally guaranteed right of religious belief and association that's been around since our founding. "yet you would willingly accept an atheist as President...which is another religion, BTW." >>> A) I would attempt to judge a person by the 'content of their character'... not by any particular religion they professed to believe in. >>> B) On the other-hand, I'm not aware of any 'Atheists' running for President - and I know I've never considered the question of whether I personally would vote for an Atheist Presidential candidate - so I know DAMN WELL that you don't know anything about my thoughts on the matter... so you are clearly LYING here. (PS - not to get too picky here - but don't all religions have Gods?) "You need to learn that there is a difference between a Theocratic state and an elected leader who believes in God and is not ashamed to say so." >>> Of course there is a clear difference, and I clearly understand the difference (so you've no need to worry on that score). >>> But, it might be more useful to ask whether YOU understand what a THEOCRACY is?