Some space to respond to comments and follow up to the prior week posts
Update-Kobe Bryant Case
======================
Last week Grandmother went into some detail about the Kobe Bryant case.
This week, more information turns up. Seems there’s reams of evidence against ole Kobe and more to come out. According to the AOL NEWS service:
During his interview with detectives, Bryant said the woman told him she had hoped he would have sex with her, according to the transcript released Friday. He said the woman never cried and he repeatedly told detectives the sex was consensual. He also said she gave him a kiss goodbye before she left his room.
Several times during the questioning, Bryant asked detectives whether the woman wanted money from him.
Bryant, 26, still faces a federal lawsuit filed by the woman that seeks unspecified damages for pain and suffering she says she has suffered since the incident last summer. No trial date has been set.
Several news organizations including The Associated Press had requested access to the sealed case files, including evidence and witness statements. More will be released late next week by the prosecution once the woman's name and some of her personal history is redacted.
The material from the sheriff's department included 354 pages of court filings; lists of evidence -- mostly clothing, hair, fiber, blood and other bodily fluids; and transcripts of interviews with witnesses, Bryant and the woman.
Another Response to the Liberal Question About CBS vs. Bush
==============================================
Last week, Grandmother responded to a Blog comment.
User Supercat at FreeRepublic.com gave me permission to re-post his response to the commenter’s assertion that Bush lied about weapons of mass destruction so why is he any better than CBS of the forged documents:
A Liberal Asks: Is Bush Any Better Than CBS?
First of all, one difference between CBS' lie and Bush's alleged "lie" is that CBS has claimed legitimate documents which were conclusively proven to be false. CBS may pretend that they're simply documents "for which proof of legitimacy hasn't been found", but every Microsoft Word CD contains absolute proof that the documents are fake.
By contrast, it hasn't been proven that Saddam had no WMD's, nor even that they're not in Iraq now. While at this point it appears more likely that the weapons Saddam had no longer exist within the borders of Iraq, than that they are hidden in Iraq and haven't been found, it is by no means proven.
More significantly, three things are indisputable: (1) Saddam at one time certainly had such weapons; (2) he agreed to, and was required to, surrender them or destroy them in such a manner that U.N. inspectors could confirm their destruction; (3) he has not done #2.
The job of the inspectors was never supposed to be to search throughout Iraq to find hidden weapons. The number of inspectors required for that would be orders of magnitude larger than the number that were sent. Instead, the inspectors were supposed to return with proof that the weapons had been destroyed. They have not done so.
The $20,000,000 question which everyone--liberal and conservative--should be asking is "what happened to the weapons"? It is conceivable that Saddam had them destroyed in such a manner as to leave no trace, though it's unclear why he would do that. It seems much more plausible that he either smuggled them somewhere or managed to (so far successfully) hide them. Even if the "smuggled" scenario now looks more likely than the "hid" scenario, I can't think of any way we could have determined that prior to invading.
No comments:
Post a Comment