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 : Stockman Scott's Political Debate Porch

 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: American Spirit who wrote (44242)4/29/2004 4:11:34 PM
From: one_less  Read Replies (5) of 89467
 
I am sorry but you do your self no favors by pushing that as your example. It is a very strong statement to say that someone is making untrue statements with the intent to deceive us. To make such a statement obligates you to back it up with clear proof that this information was false, that it was known to be false, that the specific purveyor of the information knew it to be false, and that he/they had only the intent to deceive us as a motive for delivering the false information.

The idea that WMD existed in Iraq was believable and pervasive at the time G. Bush took office. Most reasonable adults do not believe that he and his admin created this belief to deceive the rest of us. I certainly do not. There are many reasons to view the Regime of Saddam as evil and threatening and among them the pervasive belief that WMDs were on his agenda. If we at some point in time found that Saddam had no ideas to promote WMDs, that might lead to the conclusion that we had gotten the wrong impression. But it would be a long ways from making G. Bush a liar. Personally, I believe that Saddam was biding his time and had every intention to pursue his goals of world domination, and that WMDs were on his menu.

You are going to have to do better than that.
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext