SI
SI
discoversearch

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 : View from the Center and Left -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: rich evans who wrote (5217)11/11/2005 8:21:10 PM
From: TigerPaw  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 542820
 
and Czechs reported meetings between Iraq MI 14 and Atta.

No, even though Cheney maintained over and over that the Czechs were making such a claim, they never did and the FBI proved that Atta was in Florida at the time the meeting was alleged to take place. This is exactly the kind of evidence that proves the administration wasn't led astray by the CIA, or somehow misinterpreted ambiguous evidence. At least on Cheney's part it was out-and-out lies. The only question for Bush is whethere he was that out of touch, or in on it.

Bublan, head of Czech foreign intelligence, says pre-Sept. 11 meeting with Iraqi agent al-Ani unproved and implausible
- November 11, 2002

praguepost.com

Czech President Vaclav Havel warned Bush early in 2002 that no such meeting took place.



To: rich evans who wrote (5217)11/11/2005 9:50:07 PM
From: Ilaine  Respond to of 542820
 
You didn't have to ask FDR jack. The Japanese bombed Pearl Harbor, and Congress declared war the next day.

But, at any rate, rehashing the same old arguments over and over again isn't going anywhere.

We need the White House to quit obstructing a thorough investigation. At this point, more than half the American people think Bush lied and they are trying to cover things up, which was a far left position only a few months ago.

This administration is handing the government to the Democrats on a silver platter with gold ribbons tied around it.

You may think you already have all the answers. That position is losing credibility fast. We keep finding out more and more -- similar to the Able Danger "investigation" that's been suppressed to cover the respective butts.



To: rich evans who wrote (5217)11/12/2005 8:58:55 AM
From: Mary Cluney  Read Replies (3) | Respond to of 542820
 
I guess it depends on what standard of evidence you wish to use and take action on.

You figure that out.

You are going to take the country to war.

You are asking people to die. You are going to have a lot of civilians killed.

You are going to commit at least several hundred $billions.

The buck stops with you.

What standards will you use?

If you go on a hunch and you are wrong - what will you do?

Own up to it or blame others?