Re: Ghosts and physcis and stuff

["Peter T. Chattaway" <petert at interchange_ubc.ca>]

On Mon, 9 Jun 2003, John Davis wrote:

> > Generally speaking, the burden of proof is on the one who makes the
> > assertion, and the default position is one of unbelief.
>
> Right on. Now, just give old Donald "Evidence of absence is not absence
> of evidence" Rumsfeld a call...

Ah, well, the situation there is complicated by the fact that Iraq claimed
for years that it *had* all sorts of weapons, and Iraq then promised to
*get rid* of those weapons and promised to let us inspect its facilities,
but then Iraq threw our inspectors out, etc.  It is always possible that
Iraq lied about having all those weapons stockpiles in the first place,
but why take that chance?  Why allow enemy regimes or agents to even
*think* that we would tolerate such claims when our enemies make them?

To put it differently, after Iraq's invasion of Kuwait was fought back in
1991, Iraq promised (i.e. made an assertion to the effect that) it would
destroy its various arsenals, many of which are *still* unaccounted for.  
The assertion in that case was Iraq's to prove, and it never did.

--- Peter T. Chattaway --------------------------- peter at chattaway_com ---
Nothing tells memories from ordinary moments; only afterwards do they
   claim remembrance, on account of their scars. -- Chris Marker, La Jetee

---------------
Unsubscribe by going to http://www.actwin.com/OtR/