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 (117541)	10/23/2003 8:36:46 PM
From: bela_ghoulashi	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 281500

>>There is no room for dissent in Bush's American and among his goose stepping followers.<< Baloney. Silly self-dramatic hogwash.

To: Sidney Reilly who wrote (117541)	10/24/2003 2:44:49 AM
From: Hawkmoon	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

Thank you for posting that Sidney. Yes, Bush did take responsibility for including that statement. And personally speaking, I don't believe he should have included foreign based intelligence unless properly vetted by US intelligence sources. But it doesn't mean that he lied. After all, look at what the British Foreign Office continued to assert: In its letter, responding to a series of detailed questions from the FAC, the Foreign Office confirmed that the CIA had warned just before the dossier was published last September that it did not believe the claim was credible. However, it said that the CIA had provided no explanation for its concerns. "UK officials were confident that the dossier's statement was based on reliable intelligence. A judgment was therefore made by the JIC (joint intelligence committee) chairman to retain the reference," it said. "British officials saw no need to put a health warning on the claim, because they were confident in the intelligence underlying it. The reference in the dossier was based on intelligence from more than one source." The Foreign Office again insisted that it had only learned of a visit to Niger early last year by former US ambassador Joseph Wilson - who also cast doubt on the uranium claim - when details appeared in the media. So what are we left with Sidney? Only that someone, either the CIA, or British Foreign Office, has faulty intelligence. Now the Brits claim they have multiple sources, whereas the CIA relies strictly upon the analysis of Mr. Wilson. It's hardly a lie, nor worthy of the incessant demagoguery being made of it by the liberals playing election politics. Btw, I notice that you said nothing about the mass graves we discovered in Iraq. I guess there's maybe all of those dissenters to overthrowing Saddam might be doing a bit of "goose-stepping" of their own... There certainly seems to be a convenient lack of humanitarian concern for the plight of the Iraqi people under Saddam's regime. Pity for the Bosnians and Kosovars, but none for those nasty, dirty, Arabs, right? Nor those nasty, dirty, Ruwandans who suffered under the previous administration's watch.. Two can play at demagoguery Sidney... Why don't you just tone down the propaganda a bit and deal with some reality about the world we're living in. Hawk