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 (175655)	9/30/2003 6:36:38 PM
From: TimF	Respond to of 1578817

At best, your distinctions are subtle and inconsequential. I think the Bush administration used whatever they thought would convince the Amer. public to go for war. That's why I believe your distinctions are not important. The Bush administration may very well have used whatever they thought would convince Americans. That doesn't change the fact that "Saddam was behind 9/11", "Saddam had contacts with Al Qaeda", and "Saddam supported terrorism" are entirely different things, and not just subtly different. Also while there is no evidence for the first, there is at least slim evidence for the 2nd, and the 3rd statement is basically beyond serious dispute. ___ "there COULD be links between al Qaeda and Saddam", or "there were meetings REPORTED between al Qaeda and Saddam", or "al Qaeda and Saddam and al Qaeda MAY have been working together" ___ "The statements in quotes in the paragraph above are the truth." Prove it......with veritable links. Which of the above statements do you want to challenge? They are statements that are pretty hard to argue against, because they don't say "there where links between al Qaeda and Saddam" ect., but rather that "there could be", there might have been", "someone reported that", "they may have been" ect. Absent really solid evidence against such things the normal rational viewpoint is to assume that yes there could have been such connections. If I say something happened you might reasonably ask me for proof, if I say something might have happened normally the burden of proof would be on you if you say it is impossible that it happened. Tim