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 : Politics for Pros- moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: LindyBill who wrote (10163)	10/1/2003 8:39:58 AM
From: DMaA	Respond to of 793677

I wonder what made Wilson admit he was lying about Rove? Esp. if he was the target of all this. Hmmmmmmmm. Had to have been a tormenting thing for a guy like that to do. But maybe not. He is a trained diplomat. To them it's like admitting they breath. Pardon my thinking out loud ( metaphorically speaking ).

To: LindyBill who wrote (10163)	10/1/2003 11:47:03 AM
From: JohnM	Respond to of 793677

REVIEW & OUTLOOK WSJ.com Political Intelligence The agenda behind the kerfuffle over Joe Wilson's wife. It's always a hoot to read these editorials from the wsj and know they would be perfectly reversed if Gore were in the White House. Because they were perfectly reversed when Clinton was there. Paul Gigot is, in your own famous words used to describe some other writer, nothing but a political hack. The first "outing" here was the one Mr. Wilson did to himself by writing an op-ed in July for the New York Times. Of course, now we know what caused the "outing." If you speak out against the use of intelligence for the run up to the Iraq invasion, you must deserve whatever happens to you. Now, just stop and think a moment about how that would read if Gore were president. Hmmm. Ah, but it gets worse. The real intelligence scandal is how an open opponent of the U.S. war on terror such as Mr. Wilson. . . . Wilson's earlier positions on Iraq, before the way the Bush folk blew the multilateral bit and before they misused intelligence, was similar, I think, to Ken Pollack's positions. But whatever one thinks of his views prior to the invasion, to now consider the invasion a mistake and the use of intellligence by the Bush folk an utter folly is certainly not to be against the war on terror. In fact, a good many folk who care about that war have argued, quite persuasively, that the invasion of Iraq damaged the war on terror. Once again, Gigot is a political hack. The rest of it is simply more of the same.