SI
SI
discoversearch

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 : Politics for Pros- moderated
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: KLP who wrote (10383)10/2/2003 4:00:59 PM
From: Ilaine  Read Replies (2) of 793822
 
The significance of the difference in this situation is -

1) Wilson is on record as saying that Saddam did have chemical and biological weapons, prior to and during the recent war - he was using the same intelligence that the Clintons used, which is the same intelligence that Dubya used.

2) There is no doubt whatsoever that Saddam had a nuclear program in the past, and that he continued to attempt to obtain uranium during the 1990s.

3) The question Wilson was involved in, peripherally, was whether Saddam continued to have a nuclear program as of 2002-2003.

Interesting that Wilson's wife is a CIA specialist in WMD, and that the CIA has always (as far as I know) argued that Saddam did NOT continue to hunt for ways to continue his nuclear program in 2002-2003. Thus, Bush was clear when he attributed the intelligence he used in the SOTU address about African uranium to the Brits.
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  

HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2025 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News