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: Hawkmoon who wrote (173194)	10/24/2005 3:44:56 AM
From: KLP	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

Hawk, did you see the article for tomorrow by Stephen F. Hayes? Message 21819701 He certainly raises some very good questions about the CIA in particular... Hope all goes well with you, and I'm certainly glad to see you posting... Take care!

To: Hawkmoon who wrote (173194)	10/24/2005 7:17:41 AM
From: jttmab	Respond to of 281500

I see you're taking the Buck stops anywhere but Bush tactic. Everyone else should take responsibility but the precious Republicans. And the British have NOT backed off, or rescinded, that information. I have little doubt that the British shared their confirming intelligence with us and the US has backed off the claim. That probably does say something about Blair and Straw and it isn't good. So if you, or the democrats, had a problem with what Bush said, it should be addressed to the British.. Tenet had the claim scrubbed from a speech prior to the SOU. Tenet had Hadley scrub it. But when it came to the SOU, the "speech writers" put it in and no one in the Administration noticed. Hence, you conclude: take it up with the British. Or at least.. asking why Bush chose to believe British intelligence over our own "highly capable" HUMINT networks that were put into place by the previous presidential administration by the same CIA leadership that Bush foolishly chose to keep in place. (wink, wink, nudge, nudge) Like Chalabi? Wait a minute, both the CIA and State Department didn't think that Chalabi and his people were reliable, but Wolfowitz thought Chalabi was good. HUNINT is cr_p intelligence. On Iraq WMD, on the threat to the NYC subway, on the threat to the Baltimore tunnels. If you can't verify HUMINT by technical means it's worthless. I can live with taking out an alleged weapons facility based on HUMINT, but starting a major war where 10s of thousands of people die requires a higher standard of certainty then rumor and innuendo. Tenet should have been tar and feathered and ridden down Pennsylvania Avenue; not given the Medal of Freedom. Frankly, I don't care whether Clinton initially put in Tenet. I care whether we commit US Forces and start a war on false pretenses. All the intel we passed to the UN prior to the war was shown to be wrong; but we didn't care. Maybe that's the difference between the two of us. You don't care whether we start a war on false pretenses if it's done by a Republican Administration. jttmab

To: Hawkmoon who wrote (173194)	10/24/2005 8:42:07 AM
From: jttmab	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

My congratulations to you and the troops for Operation Iraqi Freedom. According to the report, fewer than one in 100 respondents felt the presence of American, British and other allied troops was improving security in the country [Iraq]. Forty-five per cent countrywide were said to believe that the attacks on the troops were justified - a figure that rose to 65 per cent in the Maysan, one of the provinces policed by the British. No fewer than 82 per cent, according to the report, declared themselves 'strongly opposed' to the presence of coalition troops. politics.guardian.co.uk 82% All you folks need to do is convince the other 18% and you'll have a total victory. A total victory for terrorism. jttmab