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 : PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: geode00 who wrote (499529)	11/28/2003 12:03:51 AM
From: Dan B.	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769667

Re: "It didn't have to resort to terrorism as it had the firepower, allegedly, to declare war on us." LOL, yeah, according to Baghdad, maybe. Re: "I'll say it again, if Saddam was so dangerous to the US because he had the motive, opportunities, weaponry and time...why didn't he strike?" You haven't convinced me he hasn't struck. I THINK he tried to assassinate President Bush in Kuwait(and I think Clinton dropped a bomb or two in retaliation). I THINK we've been hearing of Iraqi connections to Bin Laden for a decade now. I don't need to argue with the American Heritage Dictionary, 'cause, well, have you ever heard of State Sponsored Terrorism? This is what Clinton's '92 Campaign Advisor on Iraq had to say in 2001... "New York FBI believed in 1993 that Iraq was behind the Trade Center bombing. That was accepted by the White House, that New York FBI might well be right. In June, 1993, Clinton attacked Iraqi intelligence headquarters. He said that that was punishment for Saddam's attempt to kill George Bush when Bush visited Kuwait in April, but Clinton also believed that it would deter Saddam from all future attacks of terrorism, and that it would address the WTC bombing, too, so that Saddam would not think to carry out further attacks against the U.S. And then the Clinton administration put out a false and fraudulent explanation for terrorism, saying that terrorism was no longer state-sponsored, but carried out by individuals. That false and fraudulent explanation was accepted and allowed Saddam to continue to attack the U.S. The reason Clinton dealt with terrorism in that fashion was because he did not understand the kind of threat that Saddam could pose, and by taking care of the terrorism in New York in that fashion, he avoided riling American public opinion, which might have demanded then, back in 1993, that he do a great deal more." siliconinvestor.com Dan B.