Lying Neocons revising history

[Taichiliberal]

And remember these gem, folks:

 

[NOVA]

Whenver stupid people can't argue further based on facts and logic, they give responses like Bravo does here to try and cover their intellectual impotence.

Panetta is VERY careful to say "some" intel was derived through torture...but he NEVER directly says, "we got to Bin Laden based on information directly derived from torture. Panetta just gives a generalization of "collaborative effort"....a difference from blowhard Peter King's more adamant statements.

As the information released details (see NYT article http://www.nytimes.com/2011/05/03/world/asia/03intel.html?_r=1) that information came from KSM when he went through regular interrogation techniques, because he gave up NOTHING after numerous torture sessions. Other detainees had been tortured and said they had heard about a courier, but when that info was given to KSM, he'd never heard of the guy they mentioned. The CIA had suspected there was a courier, but could NOT get the right name from detainees or KSM using torture.

A little fact that our chuckling barstool rummy Bravo, or our jumped up office boy Peter King just can't accept...so they just bluff and try to substitute supposition and conjecture for fact.

You knowledge of the military in general, and gathering intell. in particular is that of a child....you're must have been a draft dodger...of maybe because the service doesn't take felons........
180+ waterboarding sessions and he gave up nothing....?.....what a gullible shit you are...



And now, let us watch our Bravo bumpkin repeat his previously addressed points ad nauseum, peppering his responses with the usual dodges, lies, and childish insults and ineffective bluster. I'll respond if he actually decides to debate the issue further in a rational manner.

Yip Yip, Yap, Yap....

 

[PostmodernProphet]

Rumsfeld said NO, it did not. .

you've made that claim several times, but you've presented no link that documents this.....I have also googled it and found only statements saying the opposite......do you have some sort of link?.....

RUMSFELD: You are exactly right. I also agree that he made the right decision. And rather than using cruise missiles or drones to attack the facility, I think using the SEAL teams and going in there and actually getting him physically, identifying him, knowing that's what has happened and being certain about it was exactly the right call.

I'm told there was some confusion today on some programs, even one on Fox, I think, suggesting that I indicated that no one was who was waterboarded at Guantanamo, provided any information on this. That's just not true. What I said was, no one was waterboarded at Guantanamo by the U.S. military. In fact, no one was waterboarded at Guantanamo, period. Three people were waterboarded by the CIA, away from Guantanamo and then later brought to Guantanamo. And in fact, as you point out, the information that came from those individuals was critically important.

http://www.foxnews.com/on-air/hannity/transcript/rumsfeld-waterboarding-played-major-role-al-qaeda-intel

 

[NOVA]

No matter how many times you explain it to this pinhead, TCL, he will never admit to being wrong....he ain't man enough to admit to being mistaken....he takes statements out of context to insist his version of a issue is right and yours is wrong, but as we all see, the opposite is the truth....thats tactic #1

Then he will invariably change the issue in a subtle or minor way and again claim his version of the topic is right....tactic #2

If that isn't working, he'll ignore the main original issue completely and grab onto some detail of the issue like that detail was the main point of contention to begin with and claim his "victory"....tactic #3.....

Watch for them......its like a game, wondering when he'll switch to each tactic as you burn his ass on the facts......its fun for awhile ......

As he points out, the chronology shows these tactics of his on every thread hes get involved in......( if you screen out the superfluous bullshit thats mixed in...)

 

[NOVA]

No matter how many times you explain it to this pinhead, TCL, he will never admit to being wrong....he ain't man enough to admit to being mistaken....he takes statements out of context to insist his version of a issue is right and yours is wrong, but as we all see, the opposite is the truth....thats tactic #1

Then he will invariably change the issue in a subtle or minor way and again claim his version of the topic is right....tactic #2

If that isn't working, he'll ignore the main original issue completely and grab onto some detail of the issue like that detail was the main point of contention to begin with and claim his "victory"....tactic #3.....

Watch for them......its like a game, wondering when he'll switch to each tactic as you burn his ass on the facts......its fun for awhile ......

As he points out, the chronology shows these tactics of his on every thread hes get involved in......( if you screen out the superfluous bullshit thats mixed in...)

.

 

[NOVA]

No matter how many times you explain it to this pinhead, TCL, he will never admit to being wrong....he ain't man enough to admit to being mistaken....he takes statements out of context to insist his version of a issue is right and yours is wrong, but as we all see, the opposite is the truth....thats tactic #1

Then he will invariably change the issue in a subtle or minor way and again claim his version of the topic is right....tactic #2

If that isn't working, he'll ignore the main original issue completely and grab onto some detail of the issue like that detail was the main point of contention to begin with and claim his "victory"....tactic #3.....

Watch for them......its like a game, wondering when he'll switch to each tactic as you burn his ass on the facts......its fun for awhile ......

As he points out, the chronology shows these tactics of his on every thread hes get involved in......( if you screen out the superfluous bullshit thats mixed in...)

TCL EXPOSED

 

[Taichiliberal]

Originally Posted by Taichiliberal
Rumsfeld said NO, it did not. .

you've made that claim several times, but you've presented no link that documents this.....I have also googled it and found only statements saying the opposite......do you have some sort of link?.....

RUMSFELD: You are exactly right. I also agree that he made the right decision. And rather than using cruise missiles or drones to attack the facility, I think using the SEAL teams and going in there and actually getting him physically, identifying him, knowing that's what has happened and being certain about it was exactly the right call.

I'm told there was some confusion today on some programs, even one on Fox, I think, suggesting that I indicated that no one was who was waterboarded at Guantanamo, provided any information on this. That's just not true. What I said was, no one was waterboarded at Guantanamo by the U.S. military. In fact, no one was waterboarded at Guantanamo, period. Three people were waterboarded by the CIA, away from Guantanamo and then later brought to Guantanamo. And in fact, as you point out, the information that came from those individuals was critically important.

http://www.foxnews.com/on-air/hannity/transcript/rumsfeld-waterboarding-played-major-role-al-qaeda-intel

Rummy is, as usual, full of it! His entire stint with the Shrub consisted of him getting caught flat footed making callous statements or statements that contradicted the party line.....and then running to the neocon pundits like Hannity to try and spin his way out of it.

Here's what he orginally said to NEWSMAX, which by no means is liberal or progressive of democratic party leaning in any sense of the word:


Asked if harsh interrogation techniques at Guantanamo Bay played a role in obtaining intelligence on bin Laden’s whereabouts, Rumsfeld declares: “First of all, no one was waterboarded at Guantanamo Bay. That’s a myth that’s been perpetrated around the country by critics.

“The United States Department of Defense did not do waterboarding for interrogation purposes to anyone. It is true that some information that came from normal interrogation approaches at Guantanamo did lead to information that was beneficial in this instance. But it was not harsh treatment and it was not waterboarding.”http://www.newsmax.com/Headline/Don...n/2011/05/02/id/394820?s=al&promo_code=C30F-1

 

[PostmodernProphet]

Rummy is, as usual, full of it! His entire stint with the Shrub consisted of him getting caught flat footed making callous statements or statements that contradicted the party line.....and then running to the neocon pundits like Hannity to try and spin his way out of it.

Here's what he orginally said to NEWSMAX, which by no means is liberal or progressive of democratic party leaning in any sense of the word:


Asked if harsh interrogation techniques at Guantanamo Bay played a role in obtaining intelligence on bin Laden’s whereabouts, Rumsfeld declares: “First of all, no one was waterboarded at Guantanamo Bay. That’s a myth that’s been perpetrated around the country by critics.

“The United States Department of Defense did not do waterboarding for interrogation purposes to anyone. It is true that some information that came from normal interrogation approaches at Guantanamo did lead to information that was beneficial in this instance. But it was not harsh treatment and it was not waterboarding.”http://www.newsmax.com/Headline/Don...n/2011/05/02/id/394820?s=al&promo_code=C30F-1

apparently that would be one of the confused reports he was referring to.....

 

[NOVA]

Rummy is, as usual, full of it! His entire stint with the Shrub consisted of him getting caught flat footed making callous statements or statements that contradicted the party line.....and then running to the neocon pundits like Hannity to try and spin his way out of it.

Here's what he orginally said to NEWSMAX, which by no means is liberal or progressive of democratic party leaning in any sense of the word:


Asked if harsh interrogation techniques at Guantanamo Bay played a role in obtaining intelligence on bin Laden’s whereabouts, Rumsfeld declares: “First of all, no one was waterboarded at Guantanamo Bay. That’s a myth that’s been perpetrated around the country by critics.

“The United States Department of Defense did not do waterboarding for interrogation purposes to anyone. It is true that some information that came from normal interrogation approaches at Guantanamo did lead to information that was beneficial in this instance. But it was not harsh treatment and it was not waterboarding.”http://www.newsmax.com/Headline/Don...n/2011/05/02/id/394820?s=al&promo_code=C30F-1

Yuppieee.....you got it right....and guess what .....we all fuckin' have been telling you that for days.....

No water boarding at Gitmo
And intell gathered at Gitmo was beneficial to the mission.....

Damn....you finally got it....

Remembering that Rummy knowledge only goes so far....to maybe 2006 and he is history...out of the loop, out of the inner circle, out of the briefings, out of everything....

 

[Taichiliberal]

Originally Posted by Taichiliberal
Rummy is, as usual, full of it! His entire stint with the Shrub consisted of him getting caught flat footed making callous statements or statements that contradicted the party line.....and then running to the neocon pundits like Hannity to try and spin his way out of it.

Here's what he orginally said to NEWSMAX, which by no means is liberal or progressive of democratic party leaning in any sense of the word:


Asked if harsh interrogation techniques at Guantanamo Bay played a role in obtaining intelligence on bin Laden’s whereabouts, Rumsfeld declares: “First of all, no one was waterboarded at Guantanamo Bay. That’s a myth that’s been perpetrated around the country by critics.

“The United States Department of Defense did not do waterboarding for interrogation purposes to anyone. It is true that some information that came from normal interrogation approaches at Guantanamo did lead to information that was beneficial in this instance. But it was not harsh treatment and it was not waterboarding.”http://www.newsmax.com/Headline/Dona...mo_code=C30F-1

apparently that would be one of the confused reports he was referring to.....

Apparently, that's the lamest attempt to spin Rummy's contradicting himself I've seen to date from you! What Rummy says here coincides with the information in the NYT's article. Deal with it.

 

[Taichiliberal]

Originally Posted by Taichiliberal
Rummy is, as usual, full of it! His entire stint with the Shrub consisted of him getting caught flat footed making callous statements or statements that contradicted the party line.....and then running to the neocon pundits like Hannity to try and spin his way out of it.

Here's what he orginally said to NEWSMAX, which by no means is liberal or progressive of democratic party leaning in any sense of the word:


Asked if harsh interrogation techniques at Guantanamo Bay played a role in obtaining intelligence on bin Laden’s whereabouts, Rumsfeld declares: “First of all, no one was waterboarded at Guantanamo Bay. That’s a myth that’s been perpetrated around the country by critics.

“The United States Department of Defense did not do waterboarding for interrogation purposes to anyone. It is true that some information that came from normal interrogation approaches at Guantanamo did lead to information that was beneficial in this instance. But it was not harsh treatment and it was not waterboarding.”http://www.newsmax.com/Headline/Dona...mo_code=C30F-1

Yuppieee.....you got it right....and guess what .....we all fuckin' have been telling you that for days.....

No water boarding at Gitmo
And intell gathered at Gitmo was beneficial to the mission.....

Damn....you finally got it....

Remembering that Rummy knowledge only goes so far....to maybe 2006 and he is history...out of the loop, out of the inner circle, out of the briefings, out of everything....

Bravo is one stupid man, folks. Here's a DIRECT QUESTION Asked if harsh interrogation techniques at Guantanamo Bay played a role in obtaining intelligence on bin Laden’s whereabouts, Rumsfeld declares:

And Rumsfeld bottom line response: The United States Department of Defense did not do waterboarding for interrogation purposes to anyone. It is true that some information that came from normal interrogation approaches at Guantanamo did lead to information that was beneficial in this instance. But it was not harsh treatment and it was not waterboarding.

Bravo sees what he wants to see, folks.

 

[NOVA]

Bravo is one stupid man, folks. Here's a DIRECT QUESTION Asked if harsh interrogation techniques at Guantanamo Bay played a role in obtaining intelligence on bin Laden’s whereabouts, Rumsfeld declares:

And Rumsfeld bottom line response: The United States Department of Defense did not do waterboarding for interrogation purposes to anyone. It is true that some information that came from normal interrogation approaches at Guantanamo did lead to information that was beneficial in this instance. But it was not harsh treatment and it was not waterboarding.

Bravo sees what he wants to see, folks.

Have at it pinhead....this is MY POST way way back in POST # 9 telling you exactly the same thing you now suddenly agree with.....you don't even see whats right in front of your stupid face....

RUMSFELD REMARK:

"The United States Department of Defense did not do waterboarding for interrogation purposes to anyone. It is true that some information that came from normal interrogation approaches at Guantanamo did lead to information that was beneficial in this instance. But it was not harsh treatment and it was not waterboarding.

Do we need to recap for TC pinhead?

US DOD..did not waterboard at Gitmo...................(nothing about overseas interrogation)
Normal interrogation did yield helpful intell....from Gitmo

.I know what you need to do.....check the chronology of the fuckin' posts.....you fool....
and you keep comin' back for more.....how funny is that....


Whatsa matta pinhead....who dat lookin' stupid now, fool...????
\
It took you until post 87 to say the EXACT SAME THING I said in post 9.....

 

[Damocles]

Have at it pinhead....this is MY POST way way back in POST # 9 telling you exactly the same thing you now suddenly agree with.....you don't even see whats right in front of your stupid face.....I know what you need to do.....check the chronology of the fuckin' posts.....you fool....
and you keep comin' back for more.....how funny is that....


Whatsa matta pinhead....who dat lookin' stupid now, fool...????
\
It took you until post 87 to say the EXACT SAME THING I said in post 9.....

Are you saying the "chronology of the posts" have caught TCL again? BTW - The surest sign that TCL has lost an argument is the first time he says "chronology"...

 

[PostmodernProphet]

Apparently, that's the lamest attempt to spin Rummy's contradicting himself I've seen to date from you! What Rummy says here coincides with the information in the NYT's article. Deal with it.

and that is probably the other confused report he was referring to.......consider me old fashioned, but I would be inclined to take Rumsfeld's statement about what he said at a higher degree than your statement about what Rumsfeld said.......

 

[NOVA]

and that is probably the other confused report he was referring to.......consider me old fashioned, but I would be inclined to take Rumsfeld's statement about what he said at a higher degree than your statement about what Rumsfeld said.......

Now what are you talking about...????

Rummy DID NOT contradict himself at any time......
Rummy DID NOT contradict what Panetta said......
Rummy DID NOT contradict what King said......

Rummy has been consistent about the intell obtained in Gitmo and waterboarding at Gitmo and that is the only location Rummy was ever referring to in all his statements....Guantanamo....
See post 76.....

 

[NOVA]

Are you saying the "chronology of the posts" have caught TCL again? BTW - The surest sign that TCL has lost an argument is the first time he says "chronology"...

That is my post Damo...not TCliberals's.....there is something wrong with your {quote} {/quote} commands....

What the fuck is going on...can't anyone keep anything straight.....

 

[Taichiliberal]

Have at it pinhead....this is MY POST way way back in POST # 9 telling you exactly the same thing you now suddenly agree with.....you don't even see whats right in front of your stupid face.....I know what you need to do.....check the chronology of the fuckin' posts.....you fool....
and you keep comin' back for more.....how funny is that....


Whatsa matta pinhead....who dat lookin' stupid now, fool...????
\
It took you until post 87 to say the EXACT SAME THING I said in post 9.....

All parties concerned concede the FACT that while torture did provide some actionable intel from some detainees on some level (and we're taking that at face value from the CIA folk), they DID NOT provide the name of the courier necessary to get to Bin Laden. All parties concerned concede the FACT that the name of the courier that provided the lead to Bin Laden was provided by KSM. All parties concerned concede the FACT that KSM did not give up that name after being tortured over 100 times! All parties concerned concede the FACT that KSM gave that name up under Standard Interrogation Procedures.

So to say that torture led to Bin Laden's capture is patently INCORRECT., thus making Peter King, Dick Cheney WRONG. Leon Panetta DOES NOT state that it was torture the resulted in the courier's name that led to Bin Laden. Period.

Rummy flip flops to keep to the party line, as documented.

So unless Rummy, Cheney, King and Panetta are going to state for the record in no uncertain terms that KSM gave up the courier's name by torture (harsh interrogation, waterboarding, etc.), and provide proof there of, then they are all just either blowing smoke or covering their/the Shrub legacy's ass.

I can't put it any more plain than that, folks. See Post #10, 30, 34, 60, 73, 78, 80 and check the info provided by the links. Bravo will just repeat himself ad nauseum, as Bravo is not only willfully ignorant but insipidly stubborn as well. I leave him to it.

 

[Taichiliberal]

Originally Posted by Taichiliberal

Have at it pinhead....this is MY POST way way back in POST # 9 telling you exactly the same thing you now suddenly agree with.....you don't even see whats right in front of your stupid face.....I know what you need to do.....check the chronology of the fuckin' posts.....you fool....
and you keep comin' back for more.....how funny is that....


Whatsa matta pinhead....who dat lookin' stupid now, fool...????
\
It took you until post 87 to say the EXACT SAME THING I said in post 9.....



Are you saying the "chronology of the posts" have caught TCL again? BTW - The surest sign that TCL has lost an argument is the first time he says "chronology"...

So Damo, are you going on record that you agree 100% with Bravo here? I mean, can YOU logically or factually disprove the information I provided? And if not, WTF is your point posting here other than being a petulant child, Damo? Here, take a look at this and then get back to me:

http://www.justplainpolitics.com/sh...-Neocons-revising-history&p=811845#post811845

 

[Taichiliberal]

Originally Posted by Taichiliberal
Apparently, that's the lamest attempt to spin Rummy's contradicting himself I've seen to date from you! What Rummy says here coincides with the information in the NYT's article. Deal with it.

and that is probably the other confused report he was referring to.......consider me old fashioned, but I would be inclined to take Rumsfeld's statement about what he said at a higher degree than your statement about what Rumsfeld said.......

Ahhh, but Rummy's "statement" is a contradiction of his previous one.....something Rummy had done numerous times during the Shrub's administration. I referring to what Rummy said during an interview to a neocon friendly interviewer (NewsMax).

Here's how I explained it to Bravo for the last time

http://www.justplainpolitics.com/sh...-Neocons-revising-history&p=811845#post811845

I can't make it anymore clear than that.

 

[PostmodernProphet]

Ahhh, but Rummy's "statement" is a contradiction of his previous one.....something Rummy had done numerous times during the Shrub's administration. I referring to what Rummy said during an interview to a neocon friendly interviewer (NewsMax).

Here's how I explained it to Bravo for the last time

http://www.justplainpolitics.com/sh...-Neocons-revising-history&p=811845#post811845

I can't make it anymore clear than that.

/shrugs....so far everyone, including Rumsfeld, has pointed out to you that Rumsfeld did not contradict himself....the fact that you keep claiming he did doesn't make it more "clear" it just makes it more amusing......