Rumsfeld proven a liar. Twice.

Rumsfeld claims that he did not say he "knew" where the WMD's were. However, it's clear that he did claim to "know".

That's from the opening post.
 
thaiboxerken said:
No, they were lies.
Click to expand...

Well, let's just see.

Item 1:
Bush says that UN inspectors said Saddam's accounting of chemical and biological weaponry was incomplete. That's true.

Item 2:
Rumsfeld says Iraq has had and used chemical weapons. That's true.
Also says the threat to peace is Saddam and his WMD's. Since we've stablished that the accounting - by the UN's own admission - was incomplete, you cannot call this a lie. An inaccurate conclusion based on incomplete data, yes. But not a lie.

Item 3:
Bush says Saddam has WMDs, is a threat to America. Again, a wrong conclusion based on incomplete data. An overstatement, to be sure, but not really a lie. Saddam also fired on US warplanes on a regular basis, so I would consider that to be a threat to American insterests, if not America proper.

Since Stevie Nicks makes me gag, how about you listen to it all and get back when you have a nice, clear, convincing lie for me, Ken? I really don't have all day to validate (or not) your sources.
 
thaiboxerken said:
Rumsfeld claims that he did not say he "knew" where the WMD's were. However, it's clear that he did claim to "know".

That's from the opening post.
Click to expand...

Way to dodge the actual issue. Your BS Kung Fu is clearly very strong.
 
There is no convincing true bleevers such as yourself, Jocko.

It is a fact that they lied, you just don't like the facts.

The example in the first post is clear on this. Rumsfield claims to have never stated that he "knew" where WMD's were, but he did. He claimed he "knew" at one point, now he claims that he never said he "knew". Sorry, you lose. Bush administration are liars. But that's ok, as long as we can get the oil.
 
thaiboxerken said:
There is no convincing true bleevers such as yourself, Jocko.

It is a fact that they lied, you just don't like the facts.

The example in the first post is clear on this. Rumsfield claims to have never stated that he "knew" where WMD's were, but he did. He claimed he "knew" at one point, now he claims that he never said he "knew". Sorry, you lose. Bush administration are liars. But that's ok, as long as we can get the oil.
Click to expand...

I lose? Is that how you decide what's true and what's not? Easy does it, killer, let's take it down a notch, shall we? Since you're obviously getting confused and heated by conflating topics, especially the one that started this thread, let's refocus on one of your own choosing.

Point one of your happy little montage. Listen to it again.

Are you telling me that Bush's statement is, in any way, a lie?
 
thaiboxerken said:
Did it come from Bush's lips?
Click to expand...

Ken, don't be intransigent. Just tell me, was the first quote a lie or not?

If you want to enter a Clausalike contest, I'll be glad to set you up in Flame Wars. But right now, I want you to answer my simple question about your source.
 
thaiboxerken said:
Which quote? Paste it.
Click to expand...

It's your audio; there's no quote to paste. I asked you to listen to it again.

Since you're obviously not prepared to check your own source (let alone defend it), and rather whitewash the issue with the same tired cliches, talking points and, yes, lies you've been puking up for years, I see no percentage in continuing to discuss this with you.

I urge all posters to give Ken's little audio blurb a listen, and to judge for themselves. After all, someone's got to listen to it, and it seem Ken's just not that guy.
 
You can't type out the part that you have a problem with?

Did Rumsfield lie when he said that he never stated that he knew where the WMD's were?
 
thaiboxerken said:
You can't type out the part that you have a problem with?

Did Rumsfield lie when he said that he never stated that he knew where the WMD's were?
Click to expand...

What, I not only have to deconstruct and summarize your source... now I have to transcribe it? Think again, Grasshopper.

My question is simple and straightforward. Your responses have been convoluted, disingenuous, and blatantly evasive.

It's your choice. You can answer the question I asked about YOUR source, or I can try out this wonderful new "ignore" feature enhancement.
 
Did Rumsfeld lie about saying he knew where the WMD's were?

It seems to me that you are already ignoring the tough questions.
 
thaiboxerken said:
Did Rumsfeld lie about saying he knew where the WMD's were?

It seems to me that you are already ignoring the tough questions.
Click to expand...

I'm not saying your question isn't tough.
I am saying my question was first.

So are you going to answer it, or just keep repeating the same tired and discredited* memes over and over again?

*See previous 9 pages for details.
 
I think he admitted that that is a tough question.

What about the question he asked you. Is that tough too?
 
So you're saying that Rumsfeld was telling the truth about not having said that he knew where WMD's were?
 
Ray McGovern: You said you knew where they were.

Donald Rumsfeld: I did not. I said I knew where suspect sites were...


Donald Rumsfeld: We know where they are. They are in the area around Tikrit, and Bagdad, and East, West, South and North, somewhat.
March 30, 2003: ABC's "This Week".


Rumsfeld lied, that is a fact.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom