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 : Don't Blame Me, I Voted For Kerry -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Cogito who wrote (74835)	3/26/2006 9:05:52 AM
From: ChinuSFO	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 81568

Your past two posts have been reasoned posts. Dan and about 36% of the Americans are unable to or have deliberately shut themselves off from reason and they continue to follow Bush propaganda blindly. The Bush/Rove gang reminds me of Hitler/Goebbels. When they get beaten down they flood the media with stories like "Russia giving Saddam intelligence etc. etc." Little do these folks realize that the American people are asking why they are finding about it so late in the game. We are wondering if the intelligence has been that slow coming in or whether Bush knew about it early on and is just telling us about it now. If so then we are left wondering what his objective is in letting us in that info now? Some of us even wonder whether that is just a Bush fabrication.

To: Cogito who wrote (74835)	3/26/2006 12:33:34 PM
From: ChinuSFO	Respond to of 81568

The Chris Matthews Show brought out the contrast between what what Bush said about Saddam's links to Osama just after 9/11 and what he is saying now. Today, he is no uncertain terms is saying that "I particularly did not link Saddam with Al Qaeda and the 9/11 attack" Then Chris Mathhews goes on to show a video clip and memo to Congress from Bush where Bush clearly and in no uncertain terms said that there was a direct link between Saddam and Al Qaeda and 9/11 attacks. Wonder why Dan is still holding on to his opinion that there was a direct link between Saddam and Al Qaeda. Even Bush is trying to shun that notion even though videos of Bush is making it hard for him to do so.

To: Cogito who wrote (74835)	3/26/2006 2:22:00 PM
From: Dan B.	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 81568

I don't grasp at straws there, I report what is known because some here deny it. What is known then, is that Saddam and Osama were quite willing to work with each other. Do you deny it? Does AS deny it? Does Orca deny it? Does Chinu deny it? It seems so, and so you all then speak falsely. After denying the evidence exists and having it thrown in your face instead, you folks want to speculate that nothing came of it. You want to speculate that some indication of bad blood later somehow proves that nothing could have come of Saddams dealings with Osama. I didn't insist that something did. The problem we have here is that you and yours are afraid that if what is known is accepted for what it is, it will lead to reasonable speculation that something did come of it. You fear it would lead to the sort of speculation we heard from Clinton and many analysts prior to 911 and prior to Bush. Evidence does exist, as well as reasonable speculation (grasping at straws, to you), all prior to Bush becoming President, and so claims that Bush intentionally "pretended" something, or "lied" over this, are in fact revisionist history and hogwash speculation of the worst kind. When it comes to reasonable speculation, if we hold all the reported connections between Iraq and terrorism and yes, even Al Qaeda terrorism in our minds at once, we find ourselves faced with obvious and quite believable speculations to deal with (such as, again, WERE reasonably made prior to 911). Denying the evidence exists does not deal with it. Dan B.