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 : Impeach George W. Bush -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: jlallen who wrote (22066)	7/14/2003 2:52:46 PM
From: jttmab	Respond to of 93284

Thanks for the links...a gold star on your forhead. globalsecurity.org....nice link. Sometimes they mention source, sometimes they don't. When they do it's defectors. I don't see anything in there that would not be available to BG Brooks. You should know by now that I don't typically cite links that are not major news sources. The other links are ok, but I validate with another news source. That goes for me, you, and Duray. The PBS interview with Khodada ....I've been very consistent in my opinion of defectors and their credibility. They will say anything that is in their best interests. Case[s] in point, all the defectors reports on locations of WMD, etc., ad nauseum. The only thing reliable about defectors is that defectors are reliably wrong. You don't believe anything a defector says unless you can corroborate it with real intelligence, i.e, not another defector. This is not news in the intelligence community, it used to be standard operating procedure until this Administration came along. intelmessages.org...there's that guy Khodada again...I don't think I've changed my opinion of him since the interview with PBS. There's other defectors also..it's difficult to differentiate guerrila warfare trainging from terrorist training, not a whole lot different. And you'll also notice that the article contains....While no hard evidence was provided of a link between Iraq and Al Qaida or the Palestinians, the overall impression... There's that word "impression" again....and no hard evidence again. British assessment of Iraqi WMD...I'm pretty familiar with that, and so is the Parliament....and given the public hearings in the UK [it would be nice if the US allowed public hearings]....nearly two-thirds in the UK believe that Blair mis-represented the case....[stronger than exagerate]...I don't know how much you want to use that as a source....I know what the conservative Ian Duncan Smith has to say about Blair and that report....You can't believe anything he says. [Recent story in the UK ...Whitehall sources believe that WMD will never be found in Iraq] I wouldn't suggest using that one really heavily. freerepublic.com President Bush shouldn't wait a second longer to introduce Iraqi defectors Sabah Khodada and Abu Zeinab to the American people, and fire whoever it was in his administration who advised him to ignore the defectors' eyewitness accounts tying the Baghdad terrorist training camp Salman Pak to the 9/11 attacks. That should confirm what I've been saying about the intelligence community not relying on defectors. They know why, Bush doesn't. I'd be inclined to use this story to justify my position....if you read the rest of the text. But I won't, I don't consider Orthodox Pres. to be a major news source.... All in all, tell me what BG Brooks doesn't know or doesn't have access to. There is no hard evidence anywhere. That's the problem. All we have is defector gossip and we can't find a damn thing to corroborate anything they say. We can't find WMD, we can't find any labs that we can verify were used as bio-chem labs; we can't find any documents that show they had an active program; we can't find any hard disks that have any data; we can't find anyone show us where anything is. At the time this war started, I said on this thread I hope we find something soon. We haven't. That sucks. Not only because we can't justify what we said, but because our credibility is taking a beating. On the global stage, who the hell is going to believe us if we were to claim that we have solid bulletproof [Rumsfeld] intel that country x has WMD? Who is going to believe us? There's no one. Even the British commission said that Blair relied too much on US intelligence. globalsecurity.org; freerepublic.com; intelmessages.org and pbs.org don't cut it on the global stage. It doesn't matter who on this thread believes what ...but it does matter what the Head of States and the Head of Governments think. Because we need their cooperation and we need their feeds from their intelligence agencies. jttmab