Interesting that when it was announced that David Kay a former UN weapons
inspector was hired by the US to look for weapons in Iraq there is zilch
about questionable parts of his background. For one thing he has absolutely
no training as a scientist. Secondly, he admitted in effect making a
It might depend on your definition of finds. I bet that he finds
something awful once the election starts to heat up.
On Tue, Aug 05, 2003 at 01:21:08PM -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
If he verifiably finds or meaningfully helps find
whatever it is that also verifiably is confirmed to be
On 8/5/03, k hanly [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Interesting that when it was announced that
David Kay . . . was hired . . . to look for weapons
in Iraq there is zilch about questionable parts
of his background . . . . [that] he has . . . no
training as a scientist . . . [and] admitted in
But if someone shows u what is verifiably a tree and claims that it was
there all along the persons background is relevant to determining whether
that is true or whether he or she likely had it planted in order to convince
u that it was there. Of course a person's interests and background do not
On 8 /5/03 1:50:14 PM, Devine, James
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Kay made some published statements of
optimism concerning the imminent finding
of evidence concerning the WMDs, . . .
. . . so what? . . .
. . . along with statements that his group
had already found evidence . . .
. . .
.
Jim Devine [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://bellarmine.lmu.edu/~jdevine
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, August 05, 2003 10:21 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [PEN-L] Background of David Kay
On 8/5/03, k hanly [EMAIL PROTECTED
