Quote:
|
Originally Posted by scandium
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by The Avon Lady
It seems I need to make a small retraction. I said that David Kay does not contradict what Vice General Sada has been claiming.
My mistake.
David Kay is much in agreement with Sada. |
This is what Kay says in that article:
"We are not talking about a large stockpile of weapons," he said. "But we know from some of the interrogations of former Iraqi officials that a lot of material went to Syria before the war, including some components of Saddam's WMD programme. Precisely what went to Syria, and what has happened to it, is a major issue that needs to be resolved"
How does this corroborate anything when Kay can't state exactly what supposedly went to Syria? He says we know from some of the interrogations of former Iraqi officials, and this guy Sada is presumably one of those officials... so Sada says... and Kay says basically that people like Sadda are saying... and this is proof? So if I say Bigfoot exists and someone confirms I said that, then by this standard of "proof" Bigfoot must exist. Boggling. |
Your logic is indeed boggling.
First you say you'd rather believe in Kay than in some former Iraqi vice general. Then you say that Kay's informational is surely unreliable because certainly this guy Sada is in your exact words "presumably one of those officials".
Make up your mind.
BTW, If Sada is "presumably one of those officials", how many more were there? Did Kay's interviews with them indicate that Sada was not the only one to state that Syria was involved? Or may this simply be a case of 10 bigfoots dancing around David Kay, of whom you stated:
"I guess it comes down to which is more credible: David Kay and his team who've scoured Iraq and interogated members of the regime."
Actually, you're not boggling. You're juggling. Advice: keep your eye on the ball. Lord knows the west's intel agencies didn't.