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 (56223)	7/26/2004 8:19:47 AM
From: LindyBill	Respond to of 794392

Cori Dauber has a long fisk of yesterday's Times story on the 911 report. Here are some clips that show how the Times slanted it. .....Second, the Iraq connection. I'm getting so tired of chasing them on this I could, well, I don't know what I could do, but I've about had it. As recently as last month, Vice President Dick Cheney said there was reason to believe a disputed Czech intelligence report. . . It took me thirty seconds on google to find the direct quote. Vice President Dick Cheney said last month that the meeting had "never been proven - it's never been refuted." That ain't exactly the same thing. The Times continues to discuss the report's findngs on the Iraq-al Queda link in language that is perfectly accurate, but which I believe is just, slightly, misleading. Since I'm typing and not cutting and pasting I'll just give one example: . . . the bipartison commission's final report found no evidence of close collaboration between Saddam Hussein and Al Queda, appearing to undermine a justification for the Iraq war. Sorry, no sale. There was no close operational collaboration, that extra word was stuck in there for a reason, and the argument in terms of war was that the potential for linkage was too dangerous to tolerate. That is true whether they're conducting joint operations or not. In fact, it was specifically not argued that the two entities would not engage in joint operations, but that if Saddam and a terrorist organization had the same goal, Saddam could enable that organization, allowing him deniability, to strike without leaving a "return address." If the point for Saddam was deniability, he would never have engaged in "joint" or "operational" collaboration. Period. rantingprofs.com