Reborn you are completely in error on so many points that I do not know where to begin. I do not have the time or the will to devote to a complete rebuttal, so I will just touch upon one or two points.
No Reborn, 45 minutes is not an imminent threat.
What if it were true that New York could be destroyed with WMDs in lets say six to ten minutes, would that also be an imminent threat in your mind?
The fact is that New York can indeed be wiped out in such a short period.
There are nuclear subs just off the coast of the United States right now carrying WMDs that would make 9/11 pale in comparison. Fortunately those that are tasked with the protection of this nation actually do know what an imminent threat is and have taken the proper response to mitigate the existing threat level, which is in no way imminent, so that it never becomes an imminent threat. “Imminent threat” is in fact your emotionally charged words, not the somber reasoned words of Mr. Bush. Get the point?
As far as the credibility of the source that provided the 45-minute timeline, the papers got some of this wrong as they often do. But one thing that they did get correct is the fact that this intelligence comes from a single source. That is not the best form of Intel. To his credit, the gentlemen that provided this info has provided solid intelligence in the past.
What this individual said more or less is that <something> could be loaded and transported to front line positions in 45 minutes. This gentlemen is also one of several sources that provided information on the mobile labs, another <something> that has now been verified by physical evidence, or do you question that too? My question is why would he lie on this one point when much of the info he provided in the past has already proven to be correct?
I wonder, do you think Mr. Bush and the intelligence community at large ginned-up this entire story for some political gain? And do you seriously believe our military leaders had our soldier’s wear heavy restrictive bio-gear in 100 + degree weather, and be subjected to mandatory inoculations just to push an agenda ginned-up by Mr. Bush? How plausible is that?
In case you have not figured it out yet, let me spell it out for you. Part of the reason our soldier’s were ordered to remain partially clad in bio-gear with the rest of their gear nearby at all times was based on the very report you now question. At the time this Intel was deemed not only credible, but also actionable. I don’t question the report, but I do question your logic here.
On your point about Harken Energy, I think I do perhaps know just a tad more then you might think I know on this subject. I also believe you know substantially less then you should know, especially considering the accusations you make. Lets me show you just how little you really know about this subject. See if you are able to answer these very simple questions. Why did Harken suffer a loss? Specifically what caused it? Did Mr. Bush have any control or involvement over that loss? Did Mr. Bush know they would suffer a loss, was he even in a position to know? When the SEC looked at the disclosure statement that Mr. Bush lawfully made, what was the date that he signed it, did the date he signed the disclosure fall within the time period of the then existing regulations? Do you even know how long a period that is?
I’m not asking you to post your answers here or anywhere else. Just see if you can answer these questions for yourself with the knowledge you already have. If you can answer these questions for yourself, then you are well informed. And if you can’t answer these questions, then my friend IMHO you know substantially less about the subject then is necessary for you to make a proper assessment let alone make public accusations against someone’s character.
Regards,
Freeman
