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 : Politics for Pros- moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: LindyBill who wrote (38514)	4/8/2004 1:15:57 PM
From: KLP	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 793907

We watched her entire testimony from 6 AM PDT...She did an excellent job, and certainly did note there was a systemic flaw between the FBI and CIA as far as info sharing. We here know it was the law, but many others who don't pay attention as much to the Federal laws, but rather are into the blame game, might not have known that. Now there is no excuse for them not to know. She certainly spelled it out. Ben Veniste came off as a jerk, IMO, and Bob Kerrey proceeded to use some of his 10 minutes to vent about the Iraq War, and then *itched because he didn't have enough time for his questions. The one thing I didn't understand is why the continued questions about why the bombers of the USS Cole weren't "taken care of" by the Bush Adm....when in fact, the event happened on the Clinton watch Oct 12, 2000. (I remember that Albright said they weren't sure FOR SURE who was responsible)..... fact-index.com Remember, after the election the "chad and voting problems", the missing military ballots, and the lawyers going back and forth to the various courts, including the Supreme Court....then the new Pres and VP are inaugurated about Jan 20th... it took several months for Bush's new appointees to be approved by Congress.....and in the meantime, he was supposed to send a cruise missile to someone because of the USS Cole? After all, that's what the country had gotten used to under Clinton. Why didn't Clinton do it? Thanks for posting the transcript, BTW.

To: LindyBill who wrote (38514)	4/8/2004 4:08:44 PM
From: Rascal	Respond to of 793907

That's what they said about Powell's testimony at the UN last year: "This should end the controversy." Powell: Iraq biological labs intelligence was shaky Saturday, April 3, 2004 Posted: 2:44 PM EST (1944 GMT) (CNN) -- U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell said Friday that part of his dramatic testimony to the U.N. Security Council before the Iraq war was based on intelligence that appears to have been unreliable. Powell's speech before the Security Council on February, 5, 2003 --detailing possible weapons of mass destruction in Iraq -- was a major event in the Bush administration's drive to justify a war and win international support. Powell told reporters at a press briefing that his testimony about Iraq possibly using mobile biological weapons labs "was presented to me ... as the best information and intelligence that we had" but "now it appears not to be the case that it was that solid." Powell said he hopes the 9/11 Commission looking into pre-war intelligence "will look into these matters to see whether or not the intelligence agency had a basis for the confidence that they placed in the intelligence at the time." "Now, if the sources fell apart, then we need to find out how we've gotten ourselves in that position." Powell told reporters. "I've had discussions with the CIA about it." (Full story) cnn.com Rascal @TheyNeedMoreOreos.com