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 : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: jttmab who wrote (119153)	11/11/2003 11:47:56 AM
From: Hawkmoon	Respond to of 281500

You're a pretty binary person aren't you? They either are, or they are not. I certainly am when, during a surprise "inspection", UNSCOM inspectors discover that fully 1/3 of Iraq's claimed expended WMDs remain unaccounted for ACCORDING TO THEIR OWN AIR FORCE RECORDS. Iraq was clearly keeping two sets of books, those they provided to UNSCOM, and those they maintained internally (but were supposed to disclose to the UNSCOM teams). When corporate officials are caught maintaining two sets of books, they go to jail. But when UNSCOM teams find them, we're just supposed to accept Iraq's promises? It's NOT the obligation of the inspection teams to discern which set of books is correct. Personnally, I'd like to know who did the forgeries. Purportedly, we got them from Italy, but who did Italy get them from? No one seems to care. Wouldn't we all? And I would like to know exactly what procedures and sources Mr. Wilson utilized to discern that the entire Niger incident was a hoax, despite British assertions that they have other evidence that indicates the claim was valid. There is a rumour that British intelligence had a source within French intelligence regarding the validity of the data. And this would make since as the French own those Niger uranium mining companies.

To: jttmab who wrote (119153)	11/11/2003 11:56:42 AM
From: Hawkmoon	Respond to of 281500

We got lots of intel from defectors and informants about Iraq's WMD and WMD programs....they just didn't happen to pan out. Saddam's generals are no different. They lost and they will tell the "winners" whatever they want to hear. The hell they didn't!! Saddam's own son in law, Hussein Kamel, "ratted" out Saddam in 1995 and UNSCOM inspectors found over 1 million documents related to Iraq's nuclear, biological, and chemical programs in 1995. Documents which were supposed to be accounted for in 1991. Documents of such quantity that NO ONE WITHIN IRAQ'S GOVERNMENT COULD SERIOUSLY CLAIM THEY DIDN'T KNOW ABOUT THEM. pbs.org The fact that these documents were entrusted with the son-in-law of Saddam himself, is almost irrefutable evidence that Saddam was directly responsible for defying the demands of the UN and UNSCOM inspectors. That was a material breach THEN, but folks such as yourself "conveniently" overlooked the violation in the interest of avoiding a reinitiation of hostilities (and/or losing those lucrative French and Russian oil contracts). Hawk