Article

2004-03-17 Home Front: Politix

Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.

Posted by Ralph 2004-03-17 7:15:58 PM|| || Front Page|| [3 views since 2007-05-07] Top

#1 Rummy's Drunken Monkey Shaolin Kung Fu is much stronger than MoveOn's Liar Kung Fu.

http://www.poe-news.com/features.php?feat=31845

* Site may be experiencing difficulties at this time.

Posted by ed 2004-3-17 7:25:22 PM|| 2004-3-17 7:25:22 PM|| Front Page Top

#2 You have go through some serious mental gymnastics to construe this as lying. Rummy says as far as I am aware... but if you claim this then cite examples. 2 examples cited. The first fairly weak. the second a little better but no context. No evidence of Rummy lying presented. This is the Michael Moore of school of argument. Juxtapose claims and unrelated 'facts' and pretend its an argument.

Posted by phil_b 2004-3-17 10:14:15 PM|| 2004-3-17 10:14:15 PM|| Front Page Top

#3 phil_b

If I wasn't clear, I apologize. I DO NOT believe MoveOn's claims, BUT I don't have the backup material to prove them wrong. The clip is pretty obviously "selectively snipped" since it doesn't even include the question to which Rummy is providing answers.

I'm hoping that some one commenting here will know how to find either the full video, or a full transcript of the session. I strongly suspect that the additional information would provide proof of MoveOn's games, but right now I have to admit that I can't prove their manipulation "in court," and I'd very much like to have the data to allow me to do that. The liberal friend who sent this too me is being as stubborn as normal and won't accept the apparent, but not proven, bias in the way the clip appears to have been edited. With a full transcript, I THINK that it would possible to incontrovertibly prove their manipulation of the data.

I've also sent the reference to Neal Boortz,
Andrew Sulivan, and Jim Taranto, in the hope that one of them may be able to provide the rest of the data. If I get it, I'll pass it along.

Thanks for the comment.

Posted by Ralph 2004-3-17 11:07:40 PM|| 2004-3-17 11:07:40 PM|| Front Page Top

#4 "imminent"

I would just like to say, "So fucking what?"

In the larger context that led up to the War in Iraq this is the tiniest zit on the ass of the smallest flea on the tip of the tail of the dog. Wag no more, puhleeze.

A red herring - chase it if you must, but don't read aloud or even move your lips. It's twaddle.

Posted by .com 2004-3-17 11:42:54 PM|| 2004-3-17 11:42:54 PM|| Front Page Top

#5 Ralph -

here is the link for the Rumsfeld speech from which the quotes that were cited on screen appeared:

http://www.house.gov/hasc/openingstatementsandpressreleases/107thcongress/02-09-18rumsfeld.html

It's testimony Rummy gave the House Armed Services Committee. You have to have a command of English on a par with Muck4Doo to misunderstand what Rummy is trying to say - that Iraq poses "the most immediate threat," i.e., the threat closest in time/space - whereas MoveOn etc want you to think he said "it's an immediate threat," i.e., it's gonna happen tomorrow.

As for the "I wouldn't be so certain" comment, Rummy is saying he is not as ready to accept expert statements that as of 9/18/02 Iraq was 5-7 years away from having an actual, deployable, usable nuclear weapon. He cites the fact that in 1991 evidence was found that proved the "experts," who had said at that time that Saddam was 5-7 years away from a nuke, wrong - he could have had a crude but effective nuke 6-12 months out from the time the shooting war began in Jan 1991.

Again, Moveon has to be either really really stupid - even stupider than they evidently are - or deliberately misunderstanding and misrepresenting what Rumsfeld said. Ain't that a news flash?

Here is the transcript of the "Face the Nation" show from which the clip was taken:

http://www.cbsnews.com/htdocs/pdf/face_031404.pdf

From my reading, it looks like Rummy is just trying to say - as best he can, given the interruptions from Schieffer and Friedman - that he thinks what he said is pretty plain. Poor man, he's assuming they can understand a simple declarative English sentence.

Anyway, hope this helps.

Posted by Sofia 2004-3-18 11:36:21 AM|| 2004-3-18 11:36:21 AM|| Front Page Top

17:24 Zenster
13:17 Jim Bosso
23:43 Tresho
23:21 Sid Cochran
11:36 Sofia
04:22 Howard UK
04:13 Howard UK
01:51 gromky
00:48 Lucky
00:29 Lucky
00:18 Lucky
00:16 ex-lib
00:07 Lucky
00:02 Alaska Paul
23:56 ex-lib
23:42 ex-lib
23:42 .com
23:36 .com
23:34 Jarhead
23:30 Old Patriot
23:27 Jarhead
23:25 .com
23:25 Anonymous2U
23:20 .com