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 : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: SilentZ who wrote (163769)	3/11/2003 7:59:54 PM
From: TimF	Respond to of 1572366

Saddam making such a big effort to hide weapons and evidence about them would seem to be evidence (although obviously not "proof beyond all reasonable doubt") that he has these weapons and/or is trying to make them. This isn't a court room and we don't need proof beyond all reasonable doubt, but if it was a court room, then Saddam would be guilty of obstruction of justice, perjury, and contempt of court. Tim

To: SilentZ who wrote (163769)	3/11/2003 9:05:56 PM
From: i-node	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1572366

Blix is saying that Saddam is not doing all he can to help the inspectors prove he doesn't have weapons he shouldn't have, and is also saying Saddam hasn't proven it himself. He's not saying Iraq definitely has them. There is confusion amongst a lot of people (particularly those not in the US) about what inspections are and are not. Inspections were never designed to detect the existence (or lack thereof) of WMD and as thus, cannot reasonably be expected to do so.