Look ... as far as the Haliburton stuff goes, I think it's as dumb to claim that Cheney advocated war for the benefit of Haliburton as it is to claim that the war in Iraq has much to do with the war on terror. I have always been opposed to the degree of profiteering disguised as privatization that has been going on in the military for the past 15 years; Haliburton et al. merely prove my point. The costs of allowing the military services to perform many of the tasks now being done by private companies may seem burdensome on paper ... but in fact, this costs us more.
It's really kind of funny, Mike, that you get your panties in a knot every time someone suggests that Bush's policies may not be 100% correct. If everyone who questions Bush's actions is a cynic, what were you between 1993-2001?
I do not think the announcement made Sunday was done completely for political purposed without any foundation in fact. I do think that Karl Rove got a hardon when the subject came up.
I agree with JR up to a point - "you would have to be somewhat delusional to actually believe that such specific warnings in Washington DC and to many of the worlds largest financial institutions is
completely a hoax or a political move." But JR, gimme a break - are you saying that this OR ANY OTHER Administration is not capable of a) inflating the threat, or

timing the announcement for political purposes? Are you really that niave?