SI
SI
discoversearch

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 : Stockman Scott's Political Debate Porch -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: lurqer who wrote (34855)1/12/2004 5:42:36 PM
From: NOW  Respond to of 89467
 
what a farce! i have to think some spooks are steaming mad and looking to get even here....



To: lurqer who wrote (34855)1/12/2004 6:49:20 PM
From: lurqer  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 89467
 
On the PBS News Hour tonight, two aspects of the O’Neill spin and obfuscation were mentioned. The Prez in Monterrey, Mexico says well we were for regime change coming in, just like the out going Admin. What an incredible piece of disingenuous obfuscation. Surely, every sane individual was for regime change in January ’01. But the Bushes were for far more than regime change. They were for violent war to implement regime change. Huge difference. The second matter concerned the appearance of an unspecified classified document on the 60 Minutes report. It wasn’t stated, but I suspect it was that map of Iraq that showed the designated areas of oil interest. Yeah, we need to keep that secret.

JMO

lurqer

Edit: The closing essay on Robert McNamara was telling.



To: lurqer who wrote (34855)1/13/2004 8:24:07 AM
From: jlallen  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 89467
 
The point is that Bush never mentioned Niger in his specch and the forgeries were not used in the SOTU. The reference in the SOTU was to an independent Brit intel assessment which Tony Blair backs up to this day.....

I don't see what is "thin"....seems perfectly reasonable to me ....