Added: 4 years ago
From: ChoiceJJ
Views: 697
Sort by time | Sort by thread (beta)

Link to this comment:

Share to:
see all

All Comments (4)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • I have just watched all 3 parts of this interview.

    It doesn't change my opinion about these matters, it just corroborates it.

    One other point is clear, though. Col. Wilkerson is a typical - and skilled - diplomat / politician who evades accepting resposibility for his own failures.

    He says, in effect, "If 15 voices agree with what my boss wants me to believe, and there is only 1 voice of dissent, of course I'll go with those 15 voices and not bother to investigate that 1 voice of dissent."

  • For one involved in Intelligence AT THE HIGHEST LEVEL, given FIVE DAYS to prepare a policy that would decide his country's going to war or not - and cost more than 4000 lives ON HIS OWN SIDE - even if we discount the Iraqi lives lost as a direct result of this tactical "blunder", to make the claim that he "didn't have the time" to investigate a dissenting voice [and let's remember that this dissenting voice was that of another Intelligence EXPERT] is a case of CRIMINAL NEGLECT AND INCOMPETENCE!

  • Col. Wilkerson is no hero. To criticise his bosses (and the infrastructure that he was working for) YEARS after the fact - and at a time when PUBLIC OPINION was already beginning to swing against those decisions - is no great act of valour OR integrity.

    What's the good of whistle-blowing long after the criminals have made their escape?

    Interesting viewing, nonetheless...

  • Good interview.

Loading...
0 / 00Unsaved Playlist Return to active list
    1. Your queue is empty. Add videos to your queue using this button:
      or sign in to load a different list.
    Loading...Loading...Saving...
    • Clear all videos from this list
    • Learn more