Originally posted by jimnyc
I see that you are on the board.
I'm still waiting on an answer.
Can you handle answering those 2 little questions?
Why would you try so hard to avoid those questions?
Are you afraid your entire argument goes down the tubes when you answer them honestly?
This is quite a pickle you are in!
When faced with a painful situation, it's best to suck it in and get it over with.
We all know the truth about what David Kay stated, which is in direct contradiction to your statements.
Could that be why you are avoiding those questions?
Who do you think is in a better position to know, David Kay or yourself?
I'm still waiting...
OK.... Here's a quick response...
I now have experience with the way you and your 7 little dwarves operate on this board.
First - you.
You tried to make such a big issue, out of a little statement that I posted. "Bush regime overestimated the level of threat from Saddam Hussein".
Whenever the point was demonstrated to you, you proceeded to take the issue to inane trifle detail (i.e. Who in the Bush regime relayed "Saddam/Iraq", "imminent threat", to the "US"?). Despite the numerous examples that demonstrated it in general, you wanted a simple one line statement of it all in one. After numerous back and forth on the issue, I gave you the quote with Ari Fleischer which puts it all together. When you finally see it, instead of just admitting that you were wrong, you try to squirt out of it, by saying "he misspoke". As a test, I put the same level of burden of proof back on you, to show me that Ari Fleischer, ""Saddam/Iraq", "imminent threat", to the "US" was a "misspoken statement". You respond with a post, that I butcher to the same inane trifle detail as you had been butchering all the posts I put on. And as an extra bonus, your quote proves my point brilliantly with the following statement. "As we have pointed out before, many of the arguments for war made by the Bush administration were deceptive or false." from
http://www.spinsanity.org/columns/20031103.html.
So to wrap it up: It was proven that the Bush administration relayed "Saddam/Iraq", "imminent threat", to the "US". When proven you try to dismiss it as "misspoken", which you are unable to prove to the same level of inane detail that you wanted from me. And in the process your own parties article that you quote proves my original premise perfectly. After all of that, instead of admitting that you were proven wrong, you try to start the whole issue up again from a new direction.
Well, in order to respond to that with the way you argue, it would take another 30+ messages, so that at the end of the line you'll still just deny it, even if you are proven wrong. So, to even go down that path with take numerous messages. And the point will be wasted on your inability to comprehend or admit it anyway.
All the while, you and your 7 little dwarves will consistently take idiotic potshots that amount to nothing, contribute nothing, prove nothing, and ultimately say nothing.
Then when I rebut your maroonness, you will delete my messages, close the thread, chastise me for making potshots (even though all I did was rebut the ones thrown at me), and then threaten to boot me off the message board.
All the while you'll encourage the maroonness from your little dwarves. So much for following your own rules and running the board by example.
Well, I've got better things to do in real life, than to deal with that kind of dribble all day long.
