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 : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Road Walker who wrote (350599)	9/14/2007 5:31:21 PM
From: Brumar89	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1586399

"not just one" And I named several who were there with their groups. So when are you going to prove that Saddam Hussein "allows them to operate legally in their territory and protects them"? I don't have to "prove" that (it would take my possession of internal Saddam regime documents to prove that and you wouldn't accept even that). The fact that Saddam ran a Stalinist state is evidence enough. Since there were so many more terrorists in SA, Pak and Egypt then the logical assumption would be that they were much more "havens for terrorists". SA, PAkistani, and Egyptian security forces regularly fight and jail terror groups. Something Saddam didn't do. And if there are more terrorists in the US than in Iraq Unlikely. the implication is that the US is more of a haven for terrorists than Iraq was. Are you looking to justify an animus against the US>