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: Bridge Player who wrote (68830)	5/30/2008 5:14:08 AM
From: Cogito	Respond to of 542132

>>Third public hearing of the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States Statement of Judith S. Yaphe to the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States<< BP - The first report you posted repeats a lot of things the Bush Administration once claimed were so, but turned out not to be, such as the alleged meeting in Prague between Mohammed Atta and someone from the Iraqi government. It has been proven that Atta was in another country at that time. Why repeat things like that? Further, it spoke about terrorist training camps in "lawless areas in Northern Iraq". Those areas were not under Saddam's control, so clearly they can't be counted as evidence of his support of terrorists. One thing clear from both reports is that there was no working relationship between Hussein and Al Qaeda. The statement of Judith Yaphe supports that view. But the Bush Administration, when speaking of Iraq's support for terror, referred to Al Qaeda virtually every time they got specific about what groups Hussein supposedly supported. Bush insisted, even after reports showing that there was no relationship between Al Qaeda and Hussein, that the reason he kept saying there was such a relationship was "because there was". - Allen