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

To: Sdgla who wrote (11105)	2/7/2006 4:18:14 PM
From: epicure	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 541475

Pathetic. The fact that Clinton's admin also leaped to conclusions and made mistakes, doesn't justify Bush's mistakes. I've been just as critical of Clinton's stupid actions as Bush's- but Clinton made smaller, and fewer, geopolitical blunders (thank goodness.) From your link: "Instead, he describes al Qaeda and Iraq as unwitting collaborators. "The Iraqi connection with al Shifa, given what we know about it, does not yet meet the test as proof of a substantive relationship because it isn't clear that one side knew the other side's involvement. That is, it is not clear that the Iraqis knew about bin Laden's well-concealed investment in the Sudanese Military Industrial Corporation. The Sudanese very likely had their own interest in VX development, and they would also have had good reasons to keep al Qaeda's involvement from the Iraqis. After all, Saddam was exactly the kind of secularist autocrat that al Qaeda despised. In the most extreme case, if the Iraqis suspected al Qaeda involvement, they might have had assurances from the Sudanese that bin Laden's people would never get the weapons. That may sound less than satisfying, but the Sudanese did show a talent for fleecing bin Laden. It is all somewhat speculative, and it would be helpful to know more." The best evidence for there being no connection is that Bush would have trumpeted evidence if he'd found any, and it's clear he hasn't. All those documents seized, and no credible threat to the US, and no substantive ties to Al Qaeda. I realize it's always tempting to grasp at straws, but post your straw grabbing to someone else, ok? I'm really not interested. I really have seen all that your "side" has to offer on this- and it's about as compelling as the evidence from folks who claim to be rectally probed by aliens. As to your other questions, I've answered them many times to others, and I'm bored with the whole thing. I'm really not interested in discussing this again with someone who has the positions you do. It's just too much repetition.