Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

rummy blaming clinton, of course!

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU
 
displacedtexan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-09-03 09:03 AM
Original message
rummy blaming clinton, of course!
senate hearing on CNN and MSNBC (breaking away frequently).
he said they had "no new info" when they attacked iraq.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Walt Starr Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-09-03 09:06 AM
Response to Original message
1. If they had no new info since Clinton was in office
Then their incompetency level is far worse than anybody ever imagined.

NO COMPETENT MILITARY OFFICER WOULD ATTACK UNDER INOFRMATION THAT IS MORE THAN TWO YEARS OLD!!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NewYorkerfromMass Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-09-03 09:21 AM
Response to Reply #1
5. True, and additionally
no new information would mean that the situation had not changed, and hence an attack was NOT warranted.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
blm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-09-03 10:18 AM
Response to Reply #5
8. I sincerely believe that agents loyal to Poppy
pushed false info on Clinton when he was president, trying to lure him into taking Saddam down. Clinton shared that info with people around him, and that's why so many Dems believed the WMDs were there.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mwb970 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-09-03 09:08 AM
Response to Original message
2. He's definitely a character
I personally find Rumsfeld more "interesting" to watch on TV than most of the others, and do I have the book of poems made out of his remarks (a gem). Nonetheless, his remarks tend to be disingenuous and misleading. I guess he's just another "Loyalist".
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RUMMYisFROSTED Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-09-03 09:16 AM
Response to Reply #2
4. ..."disingenuous and misleading"....
Also known as LIES.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-09-03 10:15 AM
Response to Reply #2
7. "Loyalist"? If there ever was an understatement
He's one of the guys who planned this war like 10 years ago.

And his "interesting" statements are nothing but newspeak.

"As we know, there are known knowns. There are things we know we know. We also know there are known unknowns. That is to say we know there are some things we do not know. But there are also unknown unknowns, the ones we don’t know we don’t know."

"There's so many variables, that the numbers of possible point answers create a range that simply isn't usefull, that's simply not knowable."

So many words to say so little.



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Loonman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-09-03 09:15 AM
Response to Original message
3. Bullshit
They claimed they had all sorts of info(most of it false, though. Ha!)

Why are they blaming Clinton for their own intel manipulation?

Could be Rummy and shrub are no-account assholes.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
noonwitch Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-09-03 09:44 AM
Response to Original message
6. Sure they had new info, they had Hans Blixer's UN report
And they chose to ignore it so they could invade and steal the oil.
What makes me angry is that the american people will likely buy this lie, too.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
southernfried Donating Member (158 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-09-03 11:19 AM
Response to Reply #6
11. that report said that Hussein had not come clean RE WMD
It pointed out that he was in material breech.

I would not bring that up as reason.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
salmonhorse Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-09-03 10:23 AM
Response to Original message
9. It was Clinton's army that marched into Baghdad
You cannot re-constitute the armed forces of America, top to bottom, in little more than 1 1/2 yrs. Rumsfeld needs some cover on this shit he has started in Iraq, as do they all, and he, as well as they, will begin to say ever more amazing things to get the heat off of them. They are known for beginning with their bought-and-paid-for-by-Ken-Starr toady to the tune of $70,000,000 scapegoat named Bill Clinton but the time is running out on these guys and they know it oh well...

:spank:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
trof Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-09-03 10:44 AM
Response to Original message
10. Verbal Memo
From: Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld
To: All print, broadcast, and internet media
Subject: UNKNOWNS

Listen up, people. I'll try to put this into words that even you can understand.

1. Known Unknowns - Things that we know we don't know.
2. Probably Known Unknowns - Things that we think we know that we don't know.
3. Unknown Unknowns - Thing that we don't know that we don't know.
4. Probably Unknown Unknowns - Things we think we don't know that we know, but are not absolutely positive that we don't know that we don't know yet.
5. Things We Should Have Known - That's classified.
6. Things You Knew We Knew - See 5. above.
7. Things You Were Pretty Sure we Knew, or Should Have Known - See 5. above.
8. Things We Didn't Have a Clue About and Still Don't Care - See 5. above.

Henceforth, to keep these press conferences brief and orderly, when answering any questions from the media which are prefaced with the phrase "Did you know____", I'll simply answer with the number from the above list that applies.
Are we clear?
OK. Dan?
"Mr. Secretary? When did you know that the president was lying about 'yellowcake' uranium in his state of the union address?"
"8. Next question?"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Tue Apr 30th 2024, 08:37 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC