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 : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Nadine Carroll who wrote (127708)	3/29/2004 9:46:12 PM
From: JohnM	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

Nadine, On the Saddam did the World Trade Center in 93 issue, neither of us are in any position to assess the data. We are picking whom we will believe. My first serious information on this debate came from Tek who thought the idea was something beyond silly; his friend, Ken Pollack, last time I heard him talk about it agreed because I gather that was the lore at the CIA and certainly on Clinton's NSC; Richard Clarke wrote the same thing in his book; I recall reading Fareed Zakaria say the same. The only public declarations of that tie that I could recall came from the identifiable sources I typed: Perle, Woolsey, Myerloe (sp), and their friends. I don't have to think very long to decide who is more credible. Thus, I say we simply have to agree to disagree.

To: Nadine Carroll who wrote (127708)	3/29/2004 9:50:03 PM
From: Sam	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 281500

Nadine, the article you posted that you say has so much "evidence" says, "Even if the new information holds up — and intelligence and law enforcement officials disagree on its conclusiveness — the links tying Yasin, Saddam and al-Qaeda are tentative." Why does this constitute something definitive in your mind? So much of what people like Cheney, Powell, Wolfowitz, Bush et al have claimed or predicted has been wrong, I don't get why you accept much of anything they say without some rock solid third party proof. They have proven time and again that they will say anything if it supports what they want to do, and will say it with great gusto and certainty. A la Powell at the UN: This is not speculation, gentlemen, these are facts on the ground. Sure Colin. I wanted to believe you. I really did. But none of it was so.