Oh, well, if a Democrat "reform" site says there was conflicting info and Rumsfeld is therefore misleading, I guess that's the end of the debate, right? Well done again, AUP, you've neatly closed your logical circle once more. For someone so rabid about LGF sourcing from Mycroft, you sure seem to be dense when presenting your own sources.
Rumsfeld proven a liar. Twice.
- Thread starter CFLarsen
- Start date
Oh, well, if a Democrat "reform" site says there was conflicting info and Rumsfeld is therefore misleading, I guess that's the end of the debate, right? Well done again, AUP, you've neatly closed your logical circle once more. For someone so rabid about LGF sourcing from Mycroft, you sure seem to be dense when presenting your own sources.
So that's what the hardcore Republican faithful are reduced to these days? Attacking the source?
Btw, sorry I haven't had much time to play lately...working about 18/7 this week.
Well, considering the "why it's misleading" is really no more than an expression of opinion, then yes, I think the source matters. If someone - anyone - could just come forth with an example of someone - anyone - saying that Saddam planned, funded or executed the 9/11 attacks, then it wouldn't matter what the source is.
But since such a quote is apparently not forthcoming, we must deal with the realm of the subjective... and this site is more "subjective" than most.
You know, one thing I never hear an explanation of is how, if this whole thing is a gargantuan effort to say something they're not saying, that of all these participants (or conspirators, depending on how rabid you are) have apparently never, ever, EVER slipped up. For as much as folks like to paint the whole administration as a bunch of fumbling boobs, they sure seem to be freaky clever about never misstating the "conspiracy."
No sweat. Hope things lighten up soon.
a_unique_person
Director of Hatcheries and Conditioning
LGF only pedals one line in thought.There are numerous right wing sources quoted from here, it is the only one I find an affront.
Well, your opinion really isn't the issue here, so much as the reliability of a biased site (whether it meets with your approval or not) declaring an opinion as a matter of fact, and your offering it as "proof."
Just saying you should not be surprised when the whole world looks sideways at that kind of tactic.
9 pages and still no evidence. And Claus appears to have disappeared from the thread as predicted. I will make another prediction: Claus will provide evidence that Rumsfeld linked 9/11 and Saddam at the same time that he provides evidence that the girl in the other thread was harmed.
And seeing as how Claus has no qualms about making claims without providing evidence, I think he has formally forfeited his right to ask anyone else to provide evidence of dubious claims from now on, or else he is a hypocrite.
I have to say, though, that I am disappointed by the inconsistent treatment of Claus as compared to some other posters who posts about homeopathy or astrology. Claus seems to be given preferential treatment...why? Had a woo-woo done the same thing that he repeatedly does, they would have been labeled a troll long ago. But I guess it's OK to look the other way, as long as the person who makes dubious claims is mentioned in Randi's commentary. And WTF is up with that? Claus is clearly not very bright. In 5 minutes, I could have explained to a 4 year old what Claus still does not understand after 6 days and 9 pages of posts. His 'reasoning' consists of obvious logical fallacies. If, out of the countless skeptics there are in the world, Claus is one of the few that is published on Randi's page, then we're in bad shape, fellas, bad shape.
And seeing as how Claus has no qualms about making claims without providing evidence, I think he has formally forfeited his right to ask anyone else to provide evidence of dubious claims from now on, or else he is a hypocrite.
I have to say, though, that I am disappointed by the inconsistent treatment of Claus as compared to some other posters who posts about homeopathy or astrology. Claus seems to be given preferential treatment...why? Had a woo-woo done the same thing that he repeatedly does, they would have been labeled a troll long ago. But I guess it's OK to look the other way, as long as the person who makes dubious claims is mentioned in Randi's commentary. And WTF is up with that? Claus is clearly not very bright. In 5 minutes, I could have explained to a 4 year old what Claus still does not understand after 6 days and 9 pages of posts. His 'reasoning' consists of obvious logical fallacies. If, out of the countless skeptics there are in the world, Claus is one of the few that is published on Randi's page, then we're in bad shape, fellas, bad shape.
Last edited:
a_unique_person
Director of Hatcheries and Conditioning
Are you disputing the quotes from the web page? I have not disputed the web pages from LGF accuracy, (although if you look them up, there is often more to the story than first appears to be the case), but that "LGF" is a hate site. I have been criticised for using sites that provide what I believe to be true information, and whose information is not disuputed, on the basis that they are hate sites. If information I provide is from such a site, as thrown up by google, I will usually qualify the site as one that I am not endorsing, but one that has a source of information that is true. Mycroft, on the other hand, had linked to such stories as the unfortunate Palestinian child born with a birth defect. What purpose did LGF have in such a story?
a_unique_person
Director of Hatcheries and Conditioning
Rob Lister
Unregistered
- Joined
- Apr 1, 2004
- Messages
- 8,504
AUP, whether you like it or not, nobody is going to fall for your strawman.
But keep on keeping on what it is you're famous at keeping on.
You will buy it. The willingly ignorant might buy it. But no reasonble thinking person will.
It doesn't matter what you think about LGF because this thread ain't about LGF.
But feel free.
But keep on keeping on what it is you're famous at keeping on.
You will buy it. The willingly ignorant might buy it. But no reasonble thinking person will.
It doesn't matter what you think about LGF because this thread ain't about LGF.
But feel free.
a_unique_person
Director of Hatcheries and Conditioning
I didn't raise the topic, Jocko did.
No, he said on page 1, that Rumsfeld linked together Saddam and 9/11 in a NY Times article. But the NY Times article says no such thing, instead it says that he linked Saddam and AQ, which is a COMPLETELY different thing. The article even says: "Administration officials say there is still no evidence to link Mr. Hussein directly to the attacks on Sept. 11 in the United States."
And if you do a search for Rumsfeld quotes, you will find that the only time he talks about Saddam and 9/11 is when he says there is no evidence to link the two. So Claus was flat out wrong, and so was the woman who addressed Rumsfeld. He has yet to admit his mistake or show a relevant quote by Rumsfeld.
Except, AUP, that it is not clear at all. 9 pages of debate - a debate that even got TOO FRIGGIN' MONOTONOUS FOR CLAUS, fer chrissakes - and still no one has proven a single lie, let alone two (whatever Claus meant in the title).
All he gives, all you give, and all your source gives is an opinion. A valid and reasoned opinion, to be sure, but not a fact, not evidence, and sure as hell NOT PROOF.
That much is clear.
thaiboxerken
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Sep 17, 2001
- Messages
- 34,594
Wanna pull your actual point out of that half-hour MTV montage for me? I don't have all day to listen to Fleetwood Mac.
thaiboxerken
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Sep 17, 2001
- Messages
- 34,594
It's a half-hour of Bush administration lies, just to show that it's not an isolated case with the Bush administration.
No, it's apparently a half-hour of statements that were untrue. Doesn't make them ipso facto lies, as you should well know.
Now, can you actually produce the "Saddam was behind 9/11" lie that everyone seems to have heard, yet cannot find? You may set it to whatever music you wish, but that is the topic of the thread. Thanks, bud.
thaiboxerken
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Sep 17, 2001
- Messages
- 34,594
No, they were lies.
Rob Lister
Unregistered
- Joined
- Apr 1, 2004
- Messages
- 8,504
Thai, please refer back to the opening post.