Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#5
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Thu, 29 Jan 2004 17:14:06 GMT, "Doug Kanter"
wrote: "John H" wrote in message .. . On Wed, 28 Jan 2004 21:16:46 GMT, "Doug Kanter" wrote: "John H" wrote in message .. . During several hours of testimony before the Senate Armed Services Committee, David Kay did not make Ted Kennedy happy. Kennedy tried valiantly to get Kay to indict Bush, to say that Bush, et al, had to have known that WMD weren't a threat to the USA prior to the war. But, it didn't work. Several other Dems also tried, but it didn't work. Let's see how many retractions there are to the "Bush lied" statements. Of course, now many will say that Kay lied. These will probably be the same people that praised Kay's honesty a few months ago. Extreme conclusions on your part, John. Perhaps Kay is being incredibly diplomatic, particularly in light of the fact that nobody has any idea yet where our intelligence fell to pieces. My prediction: Kay will end up with a lofty position in the next administration because he's demonstrating a unique ability to not offend people while presenting the facts. Nope. I watched Kay for several hours today. He was not being 'incredibly diplomatic' but was rebuffing the attempts to buffalo him by the senators, any of them. So, he resisted efforts to get him to condemn someone, anyone, and you don't consider that diplomatic? :-) In interviews, he's repeatedly stated that he's not sure where our intelligence failed (at what step in the chain, in other words), and he's pretty much refused to point at anyone and say "fool!" It's not his job to point out who the liars and fools are. The public will decide that next November. The bottom line, as you stated, was that he was 'presenting the facts', which refuted the position that Bush lied. That conclusion only works if you've chosen to ignore one of several possible scenarios: Bush may have been told that our evidence was flimsy, at best, and either he or his staff decided that the imperfect evidence was enough for them to run with. Do you recall that we have yet to hear anything specific about the nature of the "intelligence" that led Bush to believe this WMD nonsense? The excuse is that we need to protect our sources. Since those sources have been 100% wrong, why protect them? Wouldn't it be better to let "nature" takes its toll on bad sources, whether that means someone getting capped in a dark alley, or just losing their job so they're not hobbling our policy decisions in the future? You need to quit trying to earn money by pouncing on customers and instead waste your time watching C-Span! Nice idea, but I have to devote my full attention to truckers who call and say they missed a delivery because of icy roads in Los Angeles. In reality, they got hijacked by a casino or a whorehouse as they passed through Nevada. Kay ****ed off Democrats and the entire Bush administration, and you're calling him diplomatic? He ****ed everyone off because he stuck to what he thought was the truth. He admitted that he was also wrong and that he had access to all the intelligence available (as far as he knew). He stated he was convinced he would find something. He stated that we (the USA), the British, the French, and the Germans, not to mention the previous administration, all thought there were WMD to be found. "We were all wrong," was his main theme. He also suggested that an "outside" investigation be conducted to determine and fix the intelligence problems. McCain (sp?) loved that, but the administration doesn't much like the idea. I think the administration still thinks that something may be found. Kay also admitted that he wasn't "sure" that there was nothing to be found. Personally, I can't understand why they don't just call Mr. Krause, who knows everything, and get this mess cleared up. I think an investigation would be worthwhile. But if the results didn't show that Bush and Powell absolutely lied, then the Dems would say the committee was unduly influenced anyway. I hope those damn truckers weren't union folks. Why do they have to stop at a whorehouse? Isn't that why they have queen beds and jacuzzis in that 'motel' behind the seats? John H On the 'Poco Loco' out of Deale, MD on the beautiful Chesapeake Bay! |