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: Win Smith who wrote (141270)	7/22/2004 5:18:01 PM
From: Murrey Walker	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

...maybe you could explain how Berger's mistake did any harm. Are you suggesting Winny, that Sandy made a harmless mistake? Give me a break! Your credibility just took a belly flop.

To: Win Smith who wrote (141270)	7/22/2004 5:55:06 PM
From: Ish	Respond to of 281500

<<If you feel like pontificating some more, maybe you could explain how Berger's mistake did any harm. As opposed to, say, Chalabi's little Iranian dalliance.>> Two different things stud.

To: Win Smith who wrote (141270)	7/22/2004 10:26:33 PM
From: Nadine Carroll	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

Win a) removing and destroying highly classified documents from the National Archives is a crime, and Sandy Berger knows it very well, as do you & I for that matter. If Condi Rice did it, you wouldn't be asking to be shown the harm first. b) If you would please tell me the contents of the drafts that Berger removed and then "lost", then I can tell you what relevant information was denied to the 9/11 committee, the Senate Intelligence Committee, and all future investigators. Must have been important for Berger to take such a risk, not just once but multiple times.