N. Korea Nukes Estimated as High as 15

Discussion in 'Asia' started by onedomino, Feb 22, 2005.

  1. onedomino
    Offline

    onedomino SCE to AUX

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2004
    Messages:
    2,677
    Thanks Received:
    474
    Trophy Points:
    98
    Ratings:
    +476
    -
     
  2. Comrade
    Offline

    Comrade Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2004
    Messages:
    1,873
    Thanks Received:
    167
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Seattle, WA.
    Ratings:
    +167
    And how much credibility should we give to an anonymous quote about second hand information which is heresay about what another agency is supposed to have thought of?

    Talk about a shaky source!

    That's ridiculous. Given all the estimates are recent, and that 15 is admittedly at the high end of the current estimates, the conclusion drawn that the 'rate of production' has increased during the last four years of Bush's administration is not supported by any data mentioned.

    I conclude this paragraph is a hint of the authors contempt for Bush and how he's willing to discard logic and honest reporting just to take a stab at the President. It seems to be typical of this reporters past themes.

    My first google hit on Knut Royce gave me this nugget of foresight:

    http://www.hartford-hwp.com/archives/27c/160.html

    Look, another shaky source!

    I imagine all his stories are based upon such mysterious sources who:

    1. Aren't in the administration.
    2. Weren't involved in the discussions.
    3. Can't name who briefed them second hand on what the discussions were about.
    4. Are still wrong... no oil money has been used to pay for U.S. occupation efforts, after more than two years.

    So I call bullshit on this author.
     

Share This Page