SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Stockman Scott's Political Debate Porch

 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: TigerPaw who wrote (25574)8/15/2003 2:11:30 PM
From: Sully-  Read Replies (2) of 89467
 
Well TP, if you consider what Rumsfeld said in context of
what he was talking about, it made reasonable & logical
sense. He was talking about the discovery of a bunch of
buried Iraqi war planes. They were discovered by soldiers
by chance due to the wind exposing the tail on on or more
of the planes. This group of soldiers had been in the area
for some time & had no idea of the vast number of planes
buried practically right under their noses.

"We'd heard a great many things had been buried, but we had
not known where they were, and we'd been operating in that
immediate vicinity for weeks and weeks and weeks … 12, 13
weeks, and didn't know they were (there)," Rumsfeld
said.


Rumsfeld used this highly unexpected find to point out how
hard it would be to find WMD's in Iraq.

He said it's a "classic example" of the challenges the
Iraqi Survey Group is facing in finding weapons of mass
destruction in the country.

"Something as big as an airplane that's within … a stone's
throw of where you're functioning, and you don't know it's
there because you don't run around digging into everything
on a discovery process," Rumsfeld explained. "So until you
find somebody who tells you where to look, or until nature
clears some sand away and exposes something over time,
we're simply not going to know.

"But, as we all know," he added, "the absence of evidence
is not evidence of absence."


As you now see, Rumsfeld's words clearly did not indicate
absence of evidence was proof of anything as Scott & X
falsely proclaimed. All Rumsfeld meant was that unless they
got specific documentary evidence of WMD location, or help
from Iraqi's who know their precise location, that, in & of
itself, does not indicate there were no WMD's.

And what Rumsfeld said was absolutely not sinister as Scott
& X repugnantly proclaimed about their false attribution to
Rumsfeld. His explanation was reasonable & logical.

However your agreeing with Scott & X's clearly
inappropriate twisting & distorting of Rumsfeld's words,
then attacking & maligning him is almost as malicious,
repugnant & arrogant in my book.

af.mil
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext