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: Win Smith who wrote (117994)	10/29/2003 1:40:13 PM
From: carranza2	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

Winnie, you have apparently forgotten to describe the set-up I purportedly authored. Would you, please? Who, again, did I say set up whom? For what purpose? I don't remember saying any such thing. Could you perhaps be.....spinning? I did say that Saudi cash might embarrass the Happy Couple, especially if she's using it to buy her nighties at Saks. Since you apparently don't understand why Saudi cash might become embarrassing to them, here's a paint-by-the-numbers lesson in Conflicts of Interest 101: If she benefits from Saudi cash through her husband's income, the perception might very well be that her judgment as a CIA analyst might become skewed to the extent that she is required to deal with Saudi issues. Why do you think the Saudis spread all that cash around DC if not to skew the judgments of policy-makers? You think they're just...nice? Billary's tenure in Arkansas was a perfect example on how to bribe the spouse of a policymaker, or have you forgotten Hillary's brilliance at playing the futures markets? Didn't you rant and rave about some unproven suggestion that Perle had talked to some shadowy Saudis about a business deal? You seemed to have understood the idea well enough. What has happened since then? Oh, I forgot. Perle is a Blood-Sucking Neocon Pig and different standards apply.