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: Nadine Carroll who wrote (222991)	3/8/2007 3:00:26 AM
From: geode00	Respond to of 281500

Nadine, when are you moving to Israel? Your hatred for Wilson makes you an absolute putz or schmuck. Take your choice.

To: Nadine Carroll who wrote (222991)	3/8/2007 3:53:34 AM
From: cnyndwllr	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

Nadine, re: "Wilson's lying NYT op-ed was "cause"" Nadine, you type the above phrase and then you justify it with 5 asserted "lies." But I've read the op-ed piece and I still don't see any of the lies you attribute to Wilson. Did you dream them up? Do you have some special op-ed piece that we haven't seen? Cause you surely can't be relying on "he implies," (asserted lie number one).... or an "omission," (asserted lie number two) which by definition is not a false representation.... or "his report was routine," (asserted lie number three) which is hard to interpret as a lie since that's only your interpretation of what you think he meant.... or that "Cheney knew he had gone," (asserted lie number 4) when that was clearly presented as his opinion rather than a something he KNEW from direct knowledge... or "his trip proved beyond a shadow of a doubt that no yellowcake had been purchased or even was attempted to be purchased," (asserted lie number five) when the piece makes it clear that he's not saying that, only relating what he did and didn't find on his trip and then drawing his own conclusions. But maybe you mistake a statement of opinion for a statement of fact? No, I don't think that's it. I think you believe whatever you want to believe and that you love believing that those who don't agree with your extreme, poorly reasoned views are liars, traitors and fools. Too bad for you that they've so often been proven absolutely correct. Your buddies smeared Wilson, they outed his wife, they smeared Kerry, they smeared McCain, and now they're smearing Fitzpatrick. Your buddies made a hero out of George Bush, they made a hero out of Katherine Harris, they made a hero out of Kenneth Star and they're making a hero out of Scooter Libby. But your buddies are a fast growing minority and given your "evidence" no impartial jury in this country would agree with your allegations of "lies." Ed

To: Nadine Carroll who wrote (222991)	3/8/2007 10:49:19 PM
From: Win Smith	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

I'd forgotten what fun it is to deal with your particular, peculiar form of "intellectual honesty". You started out with the alleged "cause" in siliconinvestor.com Wilson's lying NYT op-ed was "cause" So, I posted Wilson's allegedly lying NYT op-ed in its entirety and asked what the lies were, and you came back with 5 alleged lies that, as near as I can tell , and as Ed pointed out, have no apparent relation to Wilson's nefarious op-ed piece. I assume your 5 "lies" have mostly to do with the continuous smear campaign that random W flacks have been running against Wilson for three and a half years or so now, but I have a hard time keeping up with all the smear campaigns the flacks are always juggling. One point in particular: Lie number 4: he had gone to Africa at VP Cheney's request and Cheney knew he had gone there because it's "standard operating procedure". Nothing about Wilson's trip was standard operating procedure. In fact, the way Cheney hit the ceiling when he read Wilson's op-ed is supporting evidence for the fact that the entire operation was a nasty surprise planned by the CIA for the VP. Ewwwwww, the dreaded CIA conspiracy against the noble shooter Dead-eye Dick Cheney again. The line that Wilson went to Niger at Cheney's request I know has been put out continually, and I would dearly love to see where, exactly, Wilson claimed anything like that. In the "lying op-ed", what Wilson said, precisely, was In February 2002, I was informed by officials at the Central Intelligence Agency that Vice President Dick Cheney's office had questions about a particular intelligence report. While I never saw the report, I was told that it referred to a memorandum of agreement that documented the sale of uranium yellowcake — a form of lightly processed ore — by Niger to Iraq in the late 1990's. The agency officials asked if I would travel to Niger to check out the story so they could provide a response to the vice president's office. The relation between that statement and your "lie number 4" is extremely tenuous, to be charitable. Offhand, I'd say somebody is indeed lying here, but it doesn't seem to be Wilson.