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 : Don't Blame Me, I Voted For Kerry -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: cnyndwllr who wrote (11749)	4/2/2004 10:26:21 PM
From: lorne	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 81568

cnyndwllr. You said...." If you'll recall, Hans Blix has said that whenever we gave him "hard" intelligence he followed up on it immediately and it was invariably wrong. He says that should have told us that our sources were unreliable and that we needed a lot more information before we concluded that Saddam was not cooperating when he said he had no wmds. It makes sense to me. '.... As you well know it was assumed by all concerned that wmd were being moved about to avoid detection. Why did hans blix keep insisting that he be given more time to find wmd,,,he also must have believed they were there, either that or he was lying about wmd still being there. I do not believe there were intentional lies ....mistakes possible yes. but lies NO. whoever lied knew the lies would be found out. Correct? so why do it? Now that don't make any sense. A person may lie if they are convinced they will not be found out. But to start a war on the pretense that wmd are there and knowing it is a lie and will be found out is not at all logical. Tell the truth,,,did you think there was wmd in iraq?