Answer the question: Do you claim that Rumsfeld doesn't claim that Al Qaeda is behind the September 11th attacks? Yes or no?
What could be easier? Just type Yes or No.
Rumsfeld proven a liar. Twice.
- Thread starter CFLarsen
- Start date
What could be easier? Just type Yes or No.
Grammatron
Philosopher
- Joined
- Jul 16, 2003
- Messages
- 5,444
My claim is simple: that your claim of the claim that Rumsfeld claimed is not the claim that you claimed in the OP. Thus your current claim of his claim is not the claim we should be discussing not matter what you claim it should be.
If you don't want to engage in a serious discussion, please stay out of it.
OK, you chicken out of a serious discussion.
Your choice. Your loss of credibility.
Grammatron
Philosopher
- Joined
- Jul 16, 2003
- Messages
- 5,444
People keep telling you the same, yet here you are in Politics, Current Events, and Social Issues once again.
Let's recap, shell we?
1) You submit a claim that Rumsfeld link Saddam and 9/11
2) I refuted it with the article from which you claimed it originated.
3) You changed the subject and refuse to acknowledge #1
You can stump your drumsticks all you want and ignore it happened, but there it is, waiting for you to accept you are wrong so we can move on in this discussion. Until then I'll reply with your original claim.
Cain
Straussian
I was listening to the radio yesterday when I had heard about this exchange. Then the host said the "heckler" was former CIA analyst Ray McGovern. I recognized the name, "Hey, that's the guy who has written for _Counterpunch_," and I knew he was going to get smeared.
It's almost astonishing how f*cked up the resident, mutually supporting, circle-jerking conservatives have become. Rumsfeld failed miserably when it came prosecuting the war, and he has been called on his lies. See for instance the CBS program with Friedman and Schieffer. Now there's this whole business of knowing exactly where those threatening WMDs were located (around Tikrit!).
It doesn't matter, though. The cognitive dissonance will eventually overwhelm the hopelessly irrational Rumsfeld apologists and they'll pull their own Kodiaks ("I never defended the guy!").
What do you expect from people who cannot hold the Bush administration to the same standard as Michael Moore?
It's almost astonishing how f*cked up the resident, mutually supporting, circle-jerking conservatives have become. Rumsfeld failed miserably when it came prosecuting the war, and he has been called on his lies. See for instance the CBS program with Friedman and Schieffer. Now there's this whole business of knowing exactly where those threatening WMDs were located (around Tikrit!).
It doesn't matter, though. The cognitive dissonance will eventually overwhelm the hopelessly irrational Rumsfeld apologists and they'll pull their own Kodiaks ("I never defended the guy!").
What do you expect from people who cannot hold the Bush administration to the same standard as Michael Moore?
Until you answer it, I will reply with the question you seem most anxious to avoid:
Do you claim that Rumsfeld doesn't claim that Al Qaeda is behind the September 11th attacks? Yes or no?
Grammatron
Philosopher
- Joined
- Jul 16, 2003
- Messages
- 5,444
I am not avoiding it, I simply refuse to give you satisfaction of answering it because you do not want to acknowledge your claim once the facts are brought up. When that happens I will be happy to answer any and all of your questions.
Rob Lister
Unregistered
- Joined
- Apr 1, 2004
- Messages
- 8,504
corplinx
JREF Kid
- Joined
- Oct 22, 2002
- Messages
- 8,952
Nope he didn't say it. But he did say that America has links to Israel and therefore the latest assasination of a Hamas leader is therefore linked to America. Boy, logical fallacies sure are fun!
a_unique_person
Director of Hatcheries and Conditioning
It's about starting a war half way around the world based on lies.
Tricky
Briefly immortal
But he didn't do it while under oath. That's what makes a lie really really important, not the result of the lie.
Do you claim that Rumsfeld doesn't claim that Al Qaeda is behind the September 11th attacks? Yes or no?
There is nothing to clear up - at least not for me. So far, I have not seen sufficient links between Saddam and Al Qaeda.
The question is, what has Rummy claimed, and why is he lying about it?
OK, so Rummy says that Al Qaeda is not behind 9-11.
Could you explain to me just who Rummy says the war on terror is fought against?
Indeed. This is not about Rummy lying about getting a blowjob from an intern. This is about lying about a war that has cost thousands of lives of American soldiers (not to mention the many, many thousands civilian casualties).
I would think the latter to be somewhat more important. Apparently, such sentiments are not shared by all.
Grammatron
Philosopher
- Joined
- Jul 16, 2003
- Messages
- 5,444
Thank you for agreeing you are wrong and this discussion is over.
I have agreed to no such thing.
Do you claim that Rumsfeld doesn't claim that Al Qaeda is behind the September 11th attacks? Yes or no?
Cain
Straussian
Exactly. The liar frame obscures more than it elucidates. Have we learned nothing from Frankfurt's _On Bullsh!t_? Proving a lie can be difficult, especially when it comes to the dangerously incompetent and totally unaware nincompoops driving this administration. A better frame is to ask if Rumsfeld & co. are reliable sources of information. Are they trustworthy? No, they're bullsh!tters, and McGovern brought up prime examples. More than two-thirds of U.S. citizens at one time believed Saddam was involved in 9/11, and that's because of administration propaganda. Just as Bush would invoke 9/11 whenever talking about Iraq, Rumsfeld invokes "the troops" whenever someone mentions how badly he f*cked up this war of choice.
The fact is you can't reason with the war apologists -- Grammatron, Ziggurat, Corplinx, Jocko, Manny, etc. -- in this thread because they're hopelessly irrational. It doesn't matter if you prove Rumsfeld lied because "everyone lies" and, besides, the war is still morally and strategically justified (in their tiny minds). They need a face-saving mechanism. For Andrew Sullivan and the self-proclaimed "decent Left", this was the administration's bungling. Those folks argued the war was right, but Bush messed it up! For the resident tendentious, party hacks that won't work because they're too emotionally invested in supporting the administration; instead they need to find a way to pin blame a Democrat or the United Nations (or France). This will take years.
Rob Lister
Unregistered
- Joined
- Apr 1, 2004
- Messages
- 8,504
Cain, the assertion made by CFL is thus far unsupported. The "proof" he provided in his opening post turned out to be utterly false.
He has yet to retract his claim or provide other "proof" supporting it.
Instead, he attempts to change the subject.
Rummy may indeed be a liar but CFL has still not provided proof of it.
That is proof of someone else being a liar.
He has yet to retract his claim or provide other "proof" supporting it.
Instead, he attempts to change the subject.
Rummy may indeed be a liar but CFL has still not provided proof of it.
That is proof of someone else being a liar.
Do you want to claim that he doesn't claim that Al Qaeda is behind the September 11th attacks?
Yes or no, please.