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 : Moderate Forum -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: TigerPaw who wrote (13294)10/25/2004 4:50:53 AM
From: epicure  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 20773
 
The problem with most of the report dealing with WMD's is that it is based on interviews, with no paper trail, while the fact of the absence of WMD's is obvious, and tangible. Since people are willing to say almost anything to save their skins, and since the Iraqis KNOW what the US wants to hear, I've been amazed there wasn't more information supporting Bush's stance. Just shows there are limits to how much people will make up even to save their own positions (of course we didn't really torture people- if we had, they would have said anything.)



To: TigerPaw who wrote (13294)10/25/2004 8:49:01 PM
From: Brumar89  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 20773
 
Informed opinion based on intense investigation is not the same as speculation. BTW, the absence of WMD in the present does not in and of itself prove the absence of WMD in the recent past as a "fact". Removal to another country or covert destruction in the recent past would also account for the current absence.


HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2025 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News