Quote:
|
Originally Posted by ottopilot
Since Damien McElroy is mentioned, I'm assuming this is a follow-up to the Chinese/Iranian nuke issue. Again, the reason the article was posted was to bring attention to China's intentions, not whether the commentary about the event is accurate.
I see that railing on about who authored an article has become the "intellectual response".
|
Do you understand that the chances of China "hiding" these "secrets" when Cheney intimidated his parallel intelligence assets, as well as the official intelligence community, for a full year, to find something to counter the judgments in the NIE, with the "mission" of discrediting it's determinations, make the chances of anything in McElroy's article, actually being reliable or of any significance, about one in a hundred thousand?
I'll share the secret of how "the rest of us"....who always seem to get it right, get it right. We believe the opposite of whatever Bush, Cheney, and the IBD and WSJ editorial pages are selling. Know what? It works!!!!!