What is Digg?238 Comments
- Lososaurus, on 10/12/2007, -38/+220I hope the whole administration gets put on trial for warcrimes......
- ReqX, on 10/12/2007, -27/+176They won't be in this country. They just made warcrimes legal.
- bloqmon, on 10/12/2007, -15/+117There are two things about this video that disturbed me. First was the amount of cheering that followed Rummy's lies. The second is the fact that they tried to remove him for asking a good question. So much for accountability.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -16/+113They legally can't be tried for warcrimes because of the Military Commissions Act of 2006 that was passed recently.
Pretty much grants the administration immunity for all that's happened since 9/11. Wonderful ***** country we live in, huh?
http://www.govtrack.us/congress/billtext.xpd?bill=h109-6166 - stevenstclair, on 10/12/2007, -16/+82Yes there are a lot of lies.
But when Clinton lied, no one died. - coheedcollapse, on 10/12/2007, -11/+65Robb, he was pressing for an answer because all Rummy was spewing was utter BS. Q+A's aren't just about what the government wants to answer, it should be about what the people want to know.
- mikeazorin, on 10/12/2007, -11/+58Filter: Is this the same measuring stick that almost got Bill Clinton impeached for a sex scandal, while the Bush Administration has nearly destroyed the American economy, sent thousands of Americans to their deaths, killed tens of thousands of innocent Iraqis, torchered innocent prisoners, and violated every American's right to free speech and privacy without even a major suggestion of impeachment? Is this what politics has come to?
- SkeletaLlama, on 10/12/2007, -11/+57And of course that man is now on a plane on his way to Gitmo.
- zaren, on 10/12/2007, -7/+49The cheering was because he was at a Republican-sponsored, Republican-invited, Republican-stocked forum, one of their "invitation-only" "public" events. How he got through the mind-scan, I'll never know :)
- jdb252, on 10/12/2007, -2/+39What's going on in our country is way more important right now than next-gen physics and Wii news.
- dukeinlondon, on 10/12/2007, -27/+61It's time Americans show that they can do just that..... Instead of applauding every lame attempt by Rumsfled to escape the fire of truth.
- snockhockster, on 10/12/2007, -3/+32The liberal or conservative in me, thinks that the liberal or conservative in you, focuses more on whether something is liberal or conservative then paying attentions to the facts.
The liberal or conservative in me, further thinks that the liberal or conservative in you, goes on to use the terms liberal or conservative to deflect from facts you can't ignore.
In conclusion, the liberal or conservative in me, would like you to know that being pwned knows no age restriction and that you probably meant to say that it was stupid and not ingorant, as it were, you were speaking out of ignorance. Which you readily admit. - Arramol, on 10/12/2007, -4/+33We know they all lie. Pointing to past mistakes by the Dems is pointless. At this point I'm ready to vote for them simply because they're the lesser of two evils. I'm not at all pleased with what Clinton did, but it pales compared to Bush's crimes. What I would really like is to have a government of honest, intelligent, altruistic moderates, but something tells me it'll never happen.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -11/+39bs.. did you see the look on his face when he knew he was busted after the guy quoted him verbatim on where he said he knew where wmds were?
i have seen the interview.. his words verbatim were 'we KNOW where they are' not 'we have a good idea, or we have a clue. He was trying to buy time, then when a ruckus started he was allowed to not finish answering the question.. that was absolutely his easy out, he just skipped it and then pretended like it wasnt asked. Look at his eyes stare at the lights as he is trying desperately to be able to draw something out of his brain right before.
Secondly, what the ***** is the press core doing CHEERING and clapping FOR rumsfeld. They arent supposed to be partisan, but thats exactly what you get. I wouldnt doubt if 50% of that room were clones of jeff gannon on the GOP payroll.
what a shame - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -5/+32The best part of this video is where Rumsfeld offers the fact that soldiers in Iraq were wearing protective gear as defense for his claims.
Yeah, Rummy, the troops did think there were chemical/biological weapons.
Because you told them there were. - pexor, on 10/12/2007, -8/+32I'm hijacking the top thread because it's worthless, please forgive me.
With that out of the way... I don't get it. If they had WMDs, why didn't they use them on us when we started shooting at them? Wouldn't that have made sense? If you say it's because Iraq moved them out when the inspectors came, then why did we invade if Iraq was no longer a threat? The story just doesn't fit together.
Also, I can't believe people still think Iraq has ties with Afghanistan and Al-Qaida. Yes, America, their brown faces look the same to us, but they're totally different peoples. I know, it's hard to imagine, but seriously give it a try.
And no, Rumsfeld, chemical weapons aren't weapons of mass destruction. They're weapons of warfare, used on the battlefield. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -2/+24Jsatt:
>What are you talking about kills our economy? We are at an all time high in the Dow.
$1000 invested in January, 2000 would be worth $1000.34 today, six years and one president later.
>Gas prices are the loweset they've been in years,
Hahahahaha... now that's excellent spin. Yes, gas prices are lower than they've been in years since Bush has been elected.
>inflation was actually averted.
Baloney. Our dollar has dropped continuously on the world stage, our debt is through the roof, so please don't make up stories about what a hypothetical world would have been like.
>Compared to other contries, we have lower unempoylement rates than most of the world. we are at 4.7% unemplyeed, lower than the averages for the last 4 decades.
What a crock. Unemployment is, of course, higher than in 1999. So what did you do? You fix the numbers with "averages" for "decades". Very dishonest of you. And disgusting. See how dishonest you are here:
http://data.bls.gov/PDQ/servlet/SurveyOutputServlet?request_action=wh&graph_name=LN_cpsbref3
>The average worker in america make over $16 an hour. Only 2.5% actually make minimum wage, most of which are Seniors or under 25, so they're not exactly raising a family on that.
Real wages have dropped for workers. And they're falling at the fastest rate in 14 years. I like your fake justification though that the workers really didn't need the money anyway.
>Yeah our economy could be worse, but I think it's great considering all this country has been through in the last 5 years.
Yeah, like Bush. - GeneralAntilles, on 10/12/2007, -3/+21All politicians need to be tried for treason, since they've all violated their oaths to defend the Constitution. No firing squad though, we'll just deport them to Haiti and shoot them on sight if they try and return.
- JonForTheWin, on 10/12/2007, -45/+62I hope the administration gets put on trial for warcrimes, found guilty, and then sentenced to be hung in public for betraying America.
- ani-pockdotnet, on 10/12/2007, -27/+44Digg this story. Help bring it to attention. Thank you to the person who submitted this. Everyone does need to see this.
- drizek, on 10/12/2007, -8/+24Whats the evidence the administration used to tell us that there were WMDs in iraq? Everything they said was *****. The maps, the personal accounts, all of it. Just total *****. They have consistently stated taht iraq was tied to 9/11 and that saddam had WMDs. They have not given us ANY concrete evidence whatsoever that these things are true.
- smitting, on 10/12/2007, -3/+18Pretty funny that the same day a federal judge said Bush and Cheney should be tried for felonies, they fly some guy in from the orient who is a "suspect" in the Jon Benet Ramsey case. Same weekend the NIE report won't go away a 6 year page sex scandal comes out. And then they immediately turn it into a gay issue.
Maybe we need some law about fairness in news or something :) I know we had one and both Reagan and Clinton deregulated the industry, which I thought was a good idea at the time. I'm just shocked that all the people who said the news would become infotainment back then actually guessed it right.
I really don't think any of this going on these days are anything new... we just get to find out about it because of the wonderous internet. Doesn't make it right though. Anyone have any ***** ideas how to fix it now that we do know about it? - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -5/+20webXL:
>What is the evidence that the administration knew there were no weapons in Iraq?
Well there were inspectors on the ground who said that they couldn't find any, anywhere, and that Iraq was cooperating.
Of course they never got to finish because the Bush administration ordered them out of Iraq even though they had been there for three months. - robbh66, on 10/12/2007, -23/+37You didn't watch the video.
Good job, forum warrior. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -7/+21I did. Rumsfeld was taken apart piece by piece. He couldn't refute what he had said. He couldn't refute that he had stated facts that were contrary to facts, both then and now. He tried three times to sidestep away and he was nailed each and every time.
- Joe_rigby, on 10/12/2007, -10/+24http://youtube.com/watch?v=X0ItyRocCCQ
http://youtube.com/watch?v=-Elr-TtqVB8
http://youtube.com/watch?v=mMBDCQ4cPx0
He lied, they all lied - I thought everyone knew that.
GET OUT AND VOTE. - youareretarded, on 10/12/2007, -10/+24"Destroyed the economy?!? Last I checked the economy is more robust since Clinton!"
You had better check again. While the economy certainly isn't as bad as people like to say it is, it certainly isn't more "robust". Unemployment is about the only thing Bush has done better than Clinton, but the unemployment rate isn't the only measure of the economy. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -1/+13lol how is it propaganda, showing rumsfeld using his own words?
rumsfeld did constatntly say he knew exactly where the wmds were.
it isnt propaganda to point out historical facts
it is on the other hand neo con propganda to suggest that saddam had relations with al quada
and concidering the president snumbers are in the low 30's, if anything this is good old honest american propaganda. - Phatt138, on 10/12/2007, -2/+14Filter: I agree that most high-ranking U.S. officials don't -want- to harm the country. However, you have to look a little more deeply and realize that, especially in a tightly-constructed circle of partisan yes-men and agenda pushers, people can convince themselves and eachother of almost anything.
They may be able to convince themselves that they're lying on a grand scale in order to protect their country and defend it's pole position in the future of politics and commerce, but that doesn't make it okay. - pintomp3, on 10/12/2007, -6/+18tito, the liberal don't own diebold..
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -1/+13false assumptions, you mean like how every intelligence agencies were telling us not to follow curveball as he was a historic liar and we needed back up to any of his claims.
False assumptions?? you mean like when the cia doesnt produce the intell you need to go to war, you make your own division of the cia called the OSP, to give you the intel you need?
false assumptions, you mean like the swift boating of scott ritter, republican war hawk and weapons inspector accused of going from hawk to dovew and becoming a liberal for suggesting there was no way saddam could have restarted his wmd program while under the our watchful eyes.
There is a difference between mistake intel and intel formed arround the premise you want to go to war...
like the downey street meo said.. they fixed intel to fit policy.
And to the neo con appologists, you are more like the nazi sympathers than the dems ever could be. The blood of our children is all over you as well. - Paroparo, on 10/12/2007, -5/+16They probably noticed there was someone in the audience not on the administration's payroll.
- omnithought, on 10/12/2007, -2/+12You know you can choose which kind of stories appear to you? If you don't like politics, deselect it.
- ElectricKetchup, on 10/12/2007, -4/+13http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mEqQeVL8iR0&NR Here's Jon Stewart's look on it
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -1/+11lol what i find funny, he hates a cute but effective slogan when the gop is the kings of bumpersticker slogans.
cut and run
stay the course
up or down vote
dems are tax and spend
vote for it before they voted against it
i think ,although it speaks volumes about the masses, is that the dems dont do enough bumper sticker slogans. - smitting, on 10/12/2007, -1/+11Can you please state the logical fallacies George McGovern (the report) made here? Seriously. As the reporter pointed out, Rumsfeld made a non-sequitor, but I didn't hear any logical fallacies.
McGovern: You lied, Rumsfeld.
Rumsfeld: No I didn't.
McGovern: Yes you did, you told us you knew for a fact there were WMDs.
Rumsfeld: No I didn't.
McGovern: Yes you did (and repeats the most repeated soundbite from the lead up to the Iraq war)
Rumsfeld: I didn't say that.
McGovern: Everyone has already seen you say this on TV.
Rumsfeld: But the troops belived me. You gotta support the troops.
McGovern: Thanks for not answering the question.
How exactly does this make McGovern the weasel?
And what does this have to do with North Korea? It looks like the Bush administration has already figured out how to deal with him... let the crazy man say his crazy things and ignore him and stop giving him all this attention that he wants so bad. - covertbadger, on 10/12/2007, -1/+11Where is the logical fallacy in pointing out that Rumsfeld said "I know where the weapons are" when it is perfectly clear that he cannot have known any such thing, since the weapons don't exist? He lied; straight up, flat out lied, and got exposed like the filthy deceitful ***** he is by this video.
- Riku67, on 10/12/2007, -3/+13Hmm, So what do you suppose was going on when Rumsfeld says "No No, let him stay"?
- tizz66, on 10/12/2007, -2/+10Because war is one of the biggest booster shots you can give an economy in a country? And it's even better when you're in bed with the companies profiting from it.
- slipknotrobb, on 10/12/2007, -13/+22@Filter
If that is what you believe, then you are ignorant and blind to what is taking place in the American government. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -2/+11victorp:
>questions ripe with logical fallacies
There weren't any. He was quoted directly, in context, no less.
What's the best way to get a Republican to call you a liar?
Quote them directly. - covertbadger, on 10/12/2007, -0/+9@bmacisaac
Rumsfeld said he knew were the weapons were. Not that he believed weapons to exist - he said he knew where they were. He's a filthy liar who mislead the world, and your defence of him is disgraceful. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -2/+11Now now Cage, just because the Intelligence report on the aluminum tubes had already come out saying that they almost certainly were not for nuclear weapons, and the Bush administration stated that that's what they WERE for, doesn't mean they were lying. They were... uhh... just... uhhh....
TSK? Help me out here... what does it mean again? - SkullWolf, on 10/12/2007, -2/+10How can someone even attempt to argue that Rumsfeld isn't caught in a lie in this video? The entire premise is that
1) He is called out for believing in WMDs that don't exist
2) He claims that the WMD knowledge was not concrete information and the location of said weapons was not certain
3) The questioner directly quotes Rumsfeld giving definite locations of weapons that, once again, don't exist.
Rumsfeld's response to the questioner was a lie. There is no way around it. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -3/+11Koosebane:
>Republicans don't seem to be in denial over voting for use of force or the speeches they gave on the subject.
Oh really? Have you even watched the video? How many of them are saying exactly what Rumsfeld says in the video above -- that they "never said that." That's denial.
>They don't seem to be shirking their role in this war by calling people liars for saying the same things they said.
Actually there's a reason why the Republicans are being called liars -- as anyone can see in the video above -- because they've been caught lying about all of this over and over again.
My favorite Bush lie - because it is so blatant and easy to expose - comes from his third debate against Gore in 2000. Talking about patients' rights in the age of HMOs, Bush said:
"As a matter of fact, I brought Republicans and Democrats together to do just that in the State of Texas to get a patient's bill of rights through. It requires a different kind of leadership style to do it, though."
"We have one of the most advanced patient's bill of rights. It says, for example, that a woman doesn't have to go through a gate keeper to go to her gynecologist. It says that you can't gag a doctor, doctor can advise you. The HMO, the insurance company, can't gag that doctor from giving you full advice. And this particular bill, it allows patients to choose a doctor, their own doctor if they want to. But we did something else that was interesting. We're one of the first states that said you can sue an HMO for denying you proper coverage."
"If I'm the president . . . people will be able to take their HMO insurance company to court. That's what I've done in Texas and that's the kind of leadership style I'll bring to Washington."
That is all a shameless lie from beginning to end.
The truth: Bush lobbied the legislature against the bill when it was first introduced in 1995.
When it was passed anyway, he vetoed it.
In 1997, the Texas legislature reintroduced the bill and Bush vowed to veto it again. This time, however, the bill passed by a veto-proof majority.
Bush still refused to sign it and it became law without his signature.
Once safely in the White House, Bush ordered the Justice Department to ask the Supreme Court to block Texas citizens from filing lawsuits under the very bill that Bush claimed false credit for.
So the question is: how can you believe that they AREN'T lying?
>You obviously missed Geppy's quotes above. He went straight to the CIA.
Which would have given him a copy of the NIE. - Arramol, on 10/12/2007, -0/+8Because war and terrorism make excellent buzzwords for increasing the president's power.
- ArianeB, on 10/12/2007, -0/+8@Koosebane
What makes your position so silly is that some of us real thinkers dont trust either party. I knew there were no WMDs in Iraq before we went to war. Dozens of impartial international experts were saying so, the most public being former UN weapons inspector Scott Ritter. The "yellowcake" documents were already out and already proved as forgeries months before President Bush made those 16 famous false words in the 2003 State of the Union address. Anyone who did even a little bit of study about Sadam Hussein's history with the rest of the Arab world knew that Sadam considered jihadists like Osama Bin Laden to be bitter enemies of his regime, and that fact, combined with the fact that Iraq suffered over 10 years of international sanctions, and therefore lacked the resources to even be a silent partner in 9/11.
I am one of the millions of thinkers who knew the war in Iraq was a huge mistake before it even began, despite the pro war rhetoric spewing out from both parties at the time. The Democrats lacked both the power and the political will to oppose what will surely go down in history as one of the America's biggest mistakes. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -7/+15"
I hate that slogan. If you were so unhappy with George W the first time around why didn't you do more to stop him from getting re-elected?
Bumper stickers and slogans do not change the world. Actions do."
well a lot of us did try to change things, but i think the majority of americans for the past few years has been more open ears to the conservatives who will feed them more fears and more anticdotes to those fears, rather than listening to the democrats.
and while i dont think slogans change the world, slogans do help people who believe in similar concepts to rally together and fight off the enemy.
"friggin liberals" ?
look the word liberal up in the dictionary you "friggin neo con", adn you will see that it isnt anything to be scared of. just come on out of the closet - garg, on 10/12/2007, -3/+11The cronies started escorting him out.
- covertbadger, on 10/12/2007, -0/+8@TSK06
"Nobody lied. That was what he was told by intelligence and he said it that way because he strongly believed it. You can digg me down all you want but it does not change the fact."
Rumsfeld said that he knew where the weapons were. 'He', as in, Rumsfeld personally knew where the weapons were. That is a lie, since he damn well did not know where the weapons were, since they didn't and don't exist. Unless you are suggesting that intelligence agents said to Rumsfeld "you know where the WMDs are" and Rumsfeld believed them, then Rumsfeld lied, straight up, no escaping, no excuses, flat out lied. It seems that these 'facts' are only 'facts' in delusional ***** fantasy land. -
Show 51 - 100 of 236 discussions
Check out the new & improved 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is