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: Sidney Reilly who wrote (117450)	10/22/2003 8:41:36 PM
From: Hawkmoon	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

So what if they don't. It was all a hoax. So facts don't matter now, right Sidney? They don't matter because they aren't convenient, right? Listen Pal.. all I said is that obviously Bush accepted MI-6's intelligence over that of Wilson. He even stated that this was a British intelligence report in that controversial speech. But yet folks continue to claim that he lied based upon Wilson's reports, which are challenged by the British. So it would seem that calling Bush a liar is a going a bit far. But I believe he can be justifiably criticized for relying upon foreign intelligence over our own. And if, as rumour has it, that MI-6 was provided this information by French intelligence sources (who would be in the ULTIMATE POSITION TO KNOW), and that is the nature of this source that supports their continued belief in the Niger/Iraq uranium connection, then having full faith in Wilson's report would be tantamount to ignoring potential contradictory information (which the Brit's naturally refuse to name the source of). So we're in a quandary here.. Either we reject Wilson's report, or we reject MI-6's analysis. That doesn't sound to me like a "hoax"... But it does sound like a lucrative book and movie deal for Wilson and his wife, given his musing as to which actress would play her role.. Hawk