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: Metacomet who wrote (18104)	5/9/2006 4:32:12 PM
From: Dale Baker	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 542125

Neither. For some reason I let them both have limited play on the thread; it reminds the rest of us what passionate partisanship is about. If your passion is arguing one conspiracy vs. another, my deepfelt wish is that you would both just take it somewhere else. SI has plenty of boxing rings for this kind of stuff.

To: Metacomet who wrote (18104)	5/9/2006 6:55:55 PM
From: Hawkmoon	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 542125

This sort of conspiracy crap is at least as far fetched as the 9/11 conspiracy theory. Is it conspiracy when the information is coming DIRECTLY FROM IRAQI INTELLIGENCE FILES?? I spent a year with the ISG, pal.. I personally saw quite a few documents and reports alluding to the IIS-Al Qai'da connection. I've just shown you the ones that have been publicly released. You'll have to ask the Bush administration and the intelligence agencies why they aren't releasing the other information. And while you're at it, you can ask them why they haven't budgeted more money towards ALL of the millions of documents that remain, untranslated and unanalyzed. Now if you can tell me that you were over there looking at those documents yourself, that might give you some credibility. But since I doubt you were, WHY are you so quick to assert "conspiracy".. And WHY DON'T YOU WANT TO KNOW the truth?? If anything, there's a conspiracy NOT to find the truth.. To brush over all of this as if there's nothing there. Hawk

To: Metacomet who wrote (18104)	5/10/2006 12:57:15 PM
From: TimF	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 542125

This sort of conspiracy crap is at least as far fetched as the 9/11 conspiracy theory. That simply isn't true. There is evidence of limited ties between Al Qaeda and Iraq, but such limited ties might not be considered an important concern, and wouldn't be a solid justification for intervening in Iraq. Saddam wasn't the Taliban. The belief that there where strong ties including mutual planning and assistance does strike me as far fetched, but while I think it unlikely it isn't anywhere near as out there as the "Bush is behind 9/11" wackos.