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

To: Sully- who wrote (37354)	2/7/2004 11:52:03 AM
From: lurqer	Read Replies (4) \| Respond to of 89467

I see you still have a shouting problem (large bolded typeface). However, let's take these posts, one at a time. Given that the "source" in the first post has been demonstrated to be totally wrong by post war events, the first question is why? Was this source an Iraqi exile, or an Israeli plant? In either case the fabrications would become explicable, but a more interesting question arises. Why was Tenet duped? The second post doesn't even rise to your normal standard. It's pure Admin CYA. "We gotta keep looking. The ISG will find something. Just give them more time." Meanwhile, when hopefully no one notices, let's gut the ISG of resources, because we know it's a lost cause. Post #3 is pathetic. In the much smaller unbolded section is a flagrant falsehood. Sorry, everyone without Alzheimer's knows that Iraq is many things, including an intelligence failure. The international community (as witnessed by the inability of the US to get a second UN vote) simply weren't convinced that Saddam was a sufficient threat to justify a war. And now we have the proof they were right. Now for the fourth post. First, let me compliment you on the percentage of bolding. If everything is emphasized, emphasis has no meaning. Let's analyze the choice of words. none of the countries and allied services that we were working with in the time saw this any differently and And I would say that, if I went to my principal foreign partners -- and not just the British; Middle Eastern services, other European services -- none of us called us any differently. Hmmm... I guess this means that we weren't working with the French, the Germans, the Russians or the Chinese, because they all saw it differently. And this reference to "Middle Eastern services". Other than Israel, what ME service? So what this statement really says is, "Everybody on our side agreed with us". Now that's really impressive! Tenet blew it badly. He knows it, Kay knows it, the Senate Intelligence Committee knows it. Apparently almost everyone, but you knows this. But again you keep hang around trying to refight yesterday's war. The world has moved on. In case you haven't noticed, the rest of us are now concerned with how to fix the problem. JMO lurqer