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 : American Presidential Politics and foreign affairs -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Peter Dierks who wrote (9688)	6/27/2006 1:35:29 AM
From: RMF	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 71588

Yes...NO evidence will ever satisfy me. EVIDENCE could satisfy me, but I draw the line at NO evidence.

To: Peter Dierks who wrote (9688)	6/27/2006 1:04:20 PM
From: ThirdEye	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 71588

Keyword there is "had." Twelve years of UN inspections did not find any ongoing program. Our own intelligence agencies have denied finding any useable chemical weapons in Iraq. From WashPO June 23: That assertion was backed up by representatives of three intelligence agencies who told reporters that the study differed little from a 2004 report of a team of American weapons inspectors led by Charles A. Duelfer that concluded that Hussein was not in possession of significant stocks of chemical, biological or nuclear weapons at the time of the U.S.-led invasion. The intelligence officials also said that the munitions referred to in the report were produced before the Persian Gulf War in 1991 and that they had degraded and could not be used as designed. "There is no evidence today of any post-1991 WMD munitions," said the official, who agreed to speak with reporters only if his identity and his agency were not disclosed. The officials said that the study was conducted to analyze the hazards that arose from the aging chemical munitions being discovered in small caches throughout Iraq to alert troops of the potential dangers of moving or destroying the weapons without realizing the hazards they posed if someone tried to move or destroy them without realizing their contents. Harmon, noting the age of the munitions said that the 20-year-old degraded chemical weapons were "being spun up to support a political argument for the war and the public won't buy it for second." AND Rumsfeld, in a public question and answer session not two months ago, in answer to a direct question which made prime time news, denied finding any WMDs in Iraq. Who's lying now? Could it be Santorum, desparately trying to overcome an 18% deficit his re-election campaign finds itself in?