Kay's Senate Hearings on Weapons Inspections

[GePap]

Originally posted by rah
I think GEPAP is the same. He has some good things to say every now and then but his hatred is so obvious and powerful that he comes off worse then bigots. He will never convince anybody. I'm usually willing to listen and have been known to change my mind occasionaly. Che or MrFun have the ability and the skill to do that. GEPAP does not. If anything, his hatred makes me want to stick to my guns because to agree with him is to share the hatred.

You never win any arguements by calling your oponent an idiot. It's best that they don't figure it out for a few days.

Basically, you base your oposition ot my arguements not on their logical worth, but on your perception of mmy bias (your own bias)..yup, certainly you are open to debate.

Do I really need to add about the logical problems with thinking that being in agreement with somones logical point is to someone then share their world-view? I agree with the Bush program to spend more money to train ex-convicts: not becuase I agree with his world view, but becuase the proposal, on its own, is valid.

[Ben Kenobi]

Che:

Awesome "edit" line, Che.

Good to see you can step outside and laugh at yourself once in awhile.

[MrFun]

Originally posted by rah
I'm usually willing to listen and have been known to change my mind occasionaly. Che or MrFun have the ability and the skill to do that.

Wow -- I am honored.

[rah]

Just a different slant.

I'm dating a girl.
My twin brother and I share a lot of friends. 6 of them tell him that they have proof that my girlfriend cheated on me. He talks to 4 others and they tell him the 6 others are crazy. He decides to believe the 6 instead of the four.
He tells me that there's proof my girlfriend cheated on me. My other brother tells me there's no proof. I believe my twin.
I break up with my girlfriend and I tell her it's because there's proof that she cheated on me.
Did I lie to her? Or am I just an Ass?

Whether I personally find any proof later is immaterial to the original question. Did I lie to her?

If I truely believed there was proof, it was not a lie.

Unless you can 100% know what was in my mind when I said it, you can't be sure whether it's a lie or not. You can have opinions, but you don't know for sure.

If you pull 100 different INTEL people, you will get many many different opinions, theories, and offers of proof. Thats how intel works. It's possible to be wrong.

[MrFun]

No one is demanding that a president has to be perfect and flawless, Rah.

[chequita guevara]

I do.

[rah]

I know, and Bush doesn't qualify.

But my whole and ONLY point, is that we can't know absolutely if Bush actually lied. High probablility that there was some type of spin going on, but no proof has been offered. It's just a person's opinion that he lied. NOT YET FACT.

[Agathon]

It's quite simple - either the government are a load of idiots or they lied.

[MrFun]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara
I do.

Sorry to have underestimated your high standards, oh-great-one.

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi
Che:



Good to see you can step outside and laugh at yourself once in awhile.

Yeah, well, it's nice to be part of the crowd every once in a while.

[MrFun]

Originally posted by rah
I know, and Bush doesn't qualify.

But my whole and ONLY point, is that we can't know absolutely if Bush actually lied. High probablility that there was some type of spin going on, but no proof has been offered. It's just a person's opinion that he lied. NOT YET FACT.

Maybe some of base our opinions on a strong gut feeling, based on precedents of other politicians who back-pedal, spin, deceive, and misinform throughout their service in office in the past.

[Patroklos]

Yeah well back to Kay....

Still haven't caught the rest of teh CSPAN coverage, but it is very clear that he did not say what the media and the dems bent his words into.

At best he said it was six one way and half a dozen the other. BUT, if you're a president and you have equal evidence there is WMD threat as oppossed to not, isn't it the prudent course to play devils advocate?

I agree that you will always try to see what you want, and the Reps were given two ambiguous opinions and of course they picked the one they identified with. Do you think the Dems are not doing the exact same thing?

Che, I do think the missiles he was talking about were Bliss era, but Saddam never turned them over OR said whether they were destroyed. Kay said to Kennedy that Saddam was bieng ambiguous for two reasons.

1.) He actually needed the perception that he had WMD to keep his own populous in line. The Kurds in particular were sensative to this threat, especially since Saddam proved his resolve in using them.

2.) Saddam believed that the perception that he might have them would give him a bargaining chip amoungst other Mid East countries, as well as a deterant against full scale war against him by the west. Obviously a wrong assumption on his part.

[Ogie Oglethorpe]

dp

[Ogie Oglethorpe]

Originally posted by Agathon
It's quite simple - either the government are a load of idiots or they lied.

Too simple. There is always choice c) All of the above.

[GePap]

Originally posted by rah
But my whole and ONLY point, is that we can't know absolutely if Bush actually lied. High probablility that there was some type of spin going on, but no proof has been offered. It's just a person's opinion that he lied. NOT YET FACT.

What counts as proof? A memo titled "HOw I lied about WMD's", handwriten by Bush?

As agathon said, they are either utterly incompetent, or they lied.