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 : The Castle -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: tejek who wrote (2469)	1/20/2004 11:30:14 AM
From: TimF	Respond to of 7936

Sorry, I don't buy your argument. First of all, if one the national parties in the US murdered only one person in a terrorist act, its very likely they would be banned. I'm not sure we can ban political parties in the US. We can sue them under RICO and cripple them finacially and we can arrest their leaders or even many of their rank and file if we can prove they did something illegal but I'm not sure we can actually ban parties. Also lest say Bush, Cheney and the Chairman of the Republican National committee get together and plan a successfully assassination of John Kerry. Imagine that a dozen other Republicans are involved in planning and committing this act and that it is done by way of a bomb that kills 4 Kerry supporters or staff members in addition to Kerry himself. If this happened and Bush and company's guilt became public knowledge then Bush and Cheney would be impeached and indicted and the Republican's would get their heads handed to them in the next election but I don't think the party would be banned. While not as active as Palestinian terrorists That's greatly understating the case. The Israeli terrorists operate on a level below what is likely to come from Palestinian terrorist if a peace settlement is reached, and one that is way above that of the current activity by the Palestinian terrorists. Tim

To: tejek who wrote (2469)	1/21/2004 7:02:02 PM
From: TimF	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 7936

N IMMEDIATE THREAT: The source for the BBC's claim that the case against Saddam's WMDs had been "sexed up" turns out to have believed the opposite. Scientist David Kelly, who killed himself during the controversy, sided with most other experts in believing that the threat from Saddam was "immediate": In the interview Dr Kelly was asked whether there was an "immediate threat" from Saddam Hussein's weapons of mass destruction. He replied: "Yes there is. Even if they're not actually filled and deployed today, the capability exists to get them filled and deployed within a matter of days and weeks. So yes, there is a threat." The BBC looks worse and worse - but it is to its credit that this revelation came from its own documentary department. andrewsullivan.com found at Message 19717954 BBC story at news.bbc.co.uk