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: Dan B. who wrote (499688)	11/28/2003 11:48:42 AM
From: Skywatcher	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769667

Utter Nonsense is right.....BUSH CC

To: Dan B. who wrote (499688)	11/28/2003 1:00:51 PM
From: Devil's Advocate	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769667

>> Re: "He said WMD's" >> Yup...and we know he wasn't wrong since the presence of >> WMD's was verified years earlier. Yes, we thought he meant NOW.

To: Dan B. who wrote (499688)	11/28/2003 2:30:52 PM
From: geode00	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769667

You need to stick to a single point of view as you're very muddled and are mixing up facts: 1. Was Iraq an imminent threat? If you believe that Shrubbery tells the truth, then buying nuclear material to make weapons doesn't constitute an imminent threat? "Bush has been on the defensive since the administration acknowledged it could not document his State of the Union claim in January that Iraq had been trying to buy uranium in Africa to develop nuclear weapons." jerusalemites.org Of course this statement has been totally discredited (did Shrubbery lie in his State of the Union Speech? I believe that he most certainly did lie deliberately and unapologetically.) 2. Did Iraq plot with OBL on 9/11? Argue with Wolfowitz as he says no. Shrubbery wasn't going after Iraq for a sponsoring a terrorist anything other than 9/11. 3. having verififed WMD's in Iraq years earlier Which, ironically, looks like he actually destroyed. Note that Rumsfeld LIED and said we knew exactly where they were. If he didn't lie then Rumsfeld is thoroughly incompetent as he can't find them now. Was Saddam so much smarter than Rumsfeld et al and scurried around hiding the WMD's under Rumsfeld's spying eyes? Then Rumsfeld is still grossly incompetent, a liar or, worse, a traitor by lying to the American people. 4. Nope. I'm saying it is hard for even Columbo to find what has plainly been actively hidden, though it is known to exist. You are saying that Rumsfeld et al is like rumple-coated Columbo with the glass eye? Rumsfeld, I'm sure, would appreciate the comparison. I, however, demand a better military leader than a TV detective. 5. Nobody said Saddam had Nuclear Weapons ready to go in 2003, let alone for 10 years running. Quite the opposite in fact. Huh? Shrubbery said that by talking about the African buying program which turned out to be a complete lie. Are you this gullible? Of course Shrubbery was lying to the American people in order to secure oil for his family and friends while finishing what OriginalBush failed to do. 300 million of us have been sucked into a tremendously dangerous family drama. The Bushes don't care about you. They care about themselves, ditto the Husseins, the bin Ladens and the Sauds. Why aren't you outraged?