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 : Moderate Forum -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: epicure who wrote (10452)	5/11/2004 8:39:36 PM
From: Brumar89	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 20773

You seemed to be talking about more than fake. OK, this is a 1 yr + conversation, so I had to go back and check things. I had first expressed disappointment that I hadn't seen anyone on the antiwar side deal seriously with any of the points in Powell's presentation to the UN. Message 18584095 In a followup post, I noted that Powell's presentation to the UN included: Tapes of Iraqi officers talking about nerve agents, cleaning up sites. Video of an plane testing spray dispersal mechanism. Testimony of defectors and detainees. The only objection that can be raised is the baseless claim that the evidence he presented was faked. Message 18584260 Then another poster, Bubbafred, raised the possibility the tapes and video could be "video graphics production", which I took to mean that the video and audio could be fake: Message 18584301 You sure none of those are video graphics production? Do you have links that show those graphics and why weren't they part of Colin Powell's UN presentation? They seem to be good solid proofs unless they are old movies. To that I replied in the post you quoted ( siliconinvestor.com ), that the production of a lot of fake evidence would necessarily require a large conspiracy and IMO Massive conspiracy theories don't make sense. And a massive conspiracy is what it would take to produce a lot of fake evidence. And given the differences of opinion on the proper course to take toward Iraq, a massive conspiracy would be leaked by someone, probably many someone's. No, we can be assured the evidence presented to the UN was exactly what it seemed to be. That's why the antis ignore the evidence offered and strive to divert attention to irrelevant plagiarism charges. The last sentence was a reference to the plagiarism charges made against a speech given by Blair of the UK, which was getting a lot of attention at the time. ..turns out those antis were right... Not IMO.