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 : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: RetiredNow who wrote (240382)	7/7/2005 12:32:14 PM
From: Alighieri	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1578142

OK. Assuming you are right about the sarin and the anthrax, then what about the botullinum? Let's see, no centrifuges, no sarin, no anthrax....what's left? oh yeah....botox... Al

To: RetiredNow who wrote (240382)	7/7/2005 12:40:59 PM
From: TigerPaw	Respond to of 1578142

I am really suprised that not a shred of WMDs was found in Iraq. I'm not surprised because I think Saddam still had any. WMDs may have made sense against mass infrantry attacks by Iran, but it made no sense to keep them once his butt was kicked in Bush war 1, it would only hurt his chance to get sanctions lifted. Instead I am surprised because it would have been so easy for a covert team to stuff a rack of vials into the refrigerator of some dead family and then claim they found them. I'm sure the adminstration would have planted evidence if they could. They were, after all, more than willing to lie about hydrogen-generation trailers for artillary balloons and try for many months to pass them off as mobile biological weapon laboratories. I can only imagine that they could not find a team corrupt enough to carry out such a mission. botullinum? While it is true that the U.S. sent such cultures to Iraq, the only botulism found after Bush war 2 was in the spoiled food in those failed refrigerators of the dead families. TP