rightorwrong

jsevigny, Only a person who hasn't been to Iraq since 2003 would say that the war on terror at the Iraqi front was stupid and had accomplished nothing. If you can't go there yourself, maybe you should talk to someone who has been there before making comments based upon faulty intelligence gleened from the op-ed media.

Saddam was terroristic, his regime was terroristic, his regime had terrorist contact and ambition, he had WMD (huge amounts of nuclear material found in Iraq have been sent to Canada recently) and the capacity to quickly make more, and he had no uneasiness about using them.

The war on terror on the Iraqi Front has accomplished great things for the people of Iraq and continues to do so. Not to mention helping keep terrorist types occupied in areas other than the United States.

Your spewing of op-ed media talking points without investigating reality is offensive to those that know better.

deelilly,

Let's be honest here. Ayers has been an issue with people paying attention for many, many months...well over a year. The reason it is just now becoming public is the mainstream media...basically all that are not "fair and balanced"...can no longer keep this crocodile swept under the mat. 5 months ago, mainstream media didn't know who the Democrat candidate would be. They wanted Obama, as you could tell by the opinion articles they tried (and still try) to pass off as news reporting. They couldn't bring it up then and risk the almighty Obama losing the primary. Then when he won the primary, they were forced to keep it swept under the mat. Now, too many people know about it. It can't be hidden anymore. The mainstream media knows that this issue will almost certainly come up in the debate. Mainstream media already appear biased to most people. How much worse would they look when this comes up? The mainstream media would have again been proven biased and untrustworthy. Those that only get their news from mainstream sources could (and should) realize they are being fed a line of crap daily by those "news" sources. Those news sources would then be naked in the eys of the public and finally be seen as what they are...Leftist propagandists. Mainstream media must begin to report on this before it comes out in other ways or face losing the last ounce of credibility they have left.

That's why this is an issue now, but wasn't 5 months ago.

If Obama wins, is this question voided???

A liberal is sure to win. Both candidates are lefty's. One is in the bleachers behind the left field fence in Arizona and the other one is on the roof of the building across the street from the left field bleachers at Wrigley field in Chicago...too cheap to pay the price of admission but thinks he desrerves to sit behind home plate. Who ever wins, I'm buying more guns and bullets!

This seems like a fun question...but no 11's (no aces) - still fun.

Does this question refer to "closing price" or crossing $130 "during the trading day"? It could make a difference

HOLY CRAP! Did you read the executive summary?!?!? There is a link in the article. I should have read this before I wagered. There is no way that CNN (or any other main stream liberal media source) would push this very hard! I am shocked that ABC website even allowed this article...and with the link to the summary on top of it. ABC made it so easy for anyone to read just how detailed that Saddam's regime kept records about their terrorist support practices. I wish everyone would read this summary. Support for the war on terror in Iraq would triple...even more. Now I know why it hasn't been "broadly released." It supports the war effort, and therfore will get little to no coverage.

You clearly state ON April 1st in your question. Since Oregon is not starting until AFTER April 1st, then Washington AND Oregon will not be starting ON April 1st.

I am wagering NO - H$9000

If this question is changed, I'd like my wager refunded.

OUCH!!! It dropped like a rock in the last minutes! That hurts. Wish I would have had some on 11900

I agree here. Anything other than a cut of 50 points should be settled as "no." I flagged this for clarification, but have not heard anything as of yet.

Of course they'll comment on it. Maybe not by 3/23/08. CNN's goal is to run out the right party and they do what they can to achieve that goal. What get's to me is that they never seem to mention that the rest of the world's leaders believe the same things as well. Also, they always state this as a "direct" link. What about "indirect"??? No one disputes that there were/are "indirect" links between al Qaida and certain regimes - this fact isn't reported because it goes against the goal of "no more conservative party", but they are quick to point out that certain U.S. government officials may have "indirect" links to certain business dealings, etc.

disclaimer - I wagered H$500 on yes

Just to add my note...In the "additional details" area just below the main body of the question here, it mentions the "Open Market Committee"...Isn't that what we were wagering on? Not the "PRIVATE BANK MARKET"? Who requested settlement of this question? Maybe "robmar" should be asked the intent of the question? Maybe the question should just be voided?

Disclaimer - I wagered H$10000 on NO

I enjoy reading your comments here. Especially historyteacher's about the focus of the war on terror. It puzzles me that there is no mention of the failures of the Clinton administration to bring Bin Laden to justice when they had the chance, or do anything else with the intelligence that was available to them at them time about Al Queada.

I have to mention something about WMD and Iraq...No one seems to ever mention the trucks leaving Iraq into Syria in the months prior to the invasion. This all happened while our UN buddies were doing all they could to delay the impending invasion. Why is that? Is it because there was a deal worked between Iraq and other nations? Also, why does no one ever mention the truckloads of chemical artillery shells found in Iraq, or the tons of highly enriched nuclear material, or MEGA tons of other radioactive material that could be used in dirty boms? No one mentions that Saddam had all the tools and ingredients he needed to restart a chemical weapons program with in days. All that is ever mentioned is that no evidence of "actual" WMD's has been found. Is mustard gas not actual? Sarin gas? If you were hungry and had everything you needed to create a meal and a desire to eat, do you fix a meal and eat? If Saddam and his people had everything needed to create WMD and a desire to use WMD, do they mix it up and use it? I say yes they do and every report says that they DID have all the ingredients needed to create WMD.

Is this on trading throughout the day - or open to close?