re: Kay report

Current Events » in reply to Did either of you actually read the original report?

re: Kay report

Raoul — 12/29/2003 5:46:40 PM (archived)

Here?

First, David Kay is not exactly neutral; he's appointed by those who claimed there are WMD's.

Second, I don't find anywhere clear locations of a specific kind of WMD with a specific number of those weapons stored.

That would be a smoking gun.

Raoul

The whole thread (11 posts)

Bush's man rejects Blair weapon claim - Greg - 12/28/2003 3:28:57 AM
- re: weapon claim - Tom Brosz - 12/28/2003 6:19:30 AM
  - re: weapon claim - Raoul - 12/28/2003 10:16:35 AM
    - Did either of you actually read the original report? (n/t) - Tom Brosz - 12/29/2003 8:18:47 AM
      - re: Kay report - Raoul - 12/29/2003 5:46:40 PM
        
        No. Not the CNN transcript. - Tom Brosz - 12/29/2003 8:24:12 PM
        
        re: Kay is not lying - Raoul - 12/29/2003 9:11:11 PM
        
        And neither was Pres. Bush - ebnelson - 1/27/2004 6:09:32 AM
  - while you're at it try convincing Bremer - Greg - 12/28/2003 7:52:55 AM
    - re: convincing Bremer - Raoul - 12/29/2003 9:14:49 PM
      - re: convincing Bremer - D - 1/27/2004 12:13:22 AM

Recent posts

On this day in Current Events

The whole thread (11 posts)