Rumsfeld's use of Bible quotes during briefings in Iraq War

You mean you see a difference between the 2? The major difference I saw is that Obama can speak the english language. As far as anything else, its just subsituting one puppet from the elite for another.

 

Barack is a lot sexier.

 

No, Obama can "read" the English language. Without a teleprompter and speech writers he's just a common every day idiot.

 

lol, I know. Personal experiance based on interaction with 3000+ Iraqis per month. Personal experiance based on interaction with large amounts of soldiers each day. Got, wha twas I thinking speaking from personal experiance.

They show not a single proof about your unsupported claims. Funny. this is one of those things that would have been all over the news had there been some sort of substantiation. A few soldiers handing out materials is not evideice of national policy. But, I keep forgetting, you will misconstrue, and take out of connotation, everything anyone says, unless, it suits your agenda. If it doesn't, you'll make something up, add things, take things away, just to suite your agenda. It's pathetic. It's a pathetic attempt, that is all it is.

Your anti americanism is hilarious. Lets not forget who saved your countries ass from hitler. If it wasn't for American's, you'd be speaking German right now instead of English. You need a new hobby. Or at least, new sources.

 

GW was the same way.....

All of the elite puppets are a bunch of idiots.

 

Still limited personal experience then...

it's certainly not national policy, in fact national policy explicitly forbids it, that's why the bibles were burned. But people still were doing it. People, in the army, were handing out religious material in an effort to convert people while in uniform and being paid by tax payers.

 

More of an experiance than this jackass.........

And people in the Army hand out White supremacy, Black supremacy, gang materials, drugs, all sorts of things while being paid by the tax payers (in case you didn't know, active duty military are paid 24/7 no matter what they are doing). The Army is just like the rest of the population. There are people that murder. There are people that rape. There are people that steal. There are people that hand ot religious materials. That is what happend when you take 1 million volunteers from around the country.

But, you still can't prove that this was sponsored by the Army. Sponsored by the White House/Congress. It is just another smearing campaign from you.

But, like you always do, you will pick one small thing and go with it, instead of admitting you are wrong.

 

3000 out of 1 million a "limited" experience. Do you have a clue how many people out of a population of 260 million are polled to track presidential popularity, or what tv show they watched at 8:00 last night? Do you know how many are required to have a sample size that will yield a poll with accuracy within 3%?

Every time you, with no personal experience, claim to know more about something than those having personal experience, you make yourself sound like a moron. If you want to get people to buy into your little hate movement, you've got to be clever about it. Spewing idiocy and obvious falsehoods in an effort to gain support will actually alienate people from your cause. Its like Bush supporters trying to get followers because he supposedly kept the country terrorist free for the years of his term following 911.

 

I never said it was. In fact, i explicitly stated that it is against national policy a few posts up. Which is why the bibles were burned.

I use factual evidence of it actually happening. So, as interesting as personal anecdotes of limited experiences are, they can't refute the claim that it happened if there is evidence that it happened.

Even if someone had met half of all the US army and half of all afghan people it still couldn't refute the claim that it occurred if there is evidence proving it did, Regardless how convenient sweeping it under the carper would have been for you.

 

Nice change of subject. Backing off your attack on his "limited" experience and changing the topic to I have "evidence" it did. And your evidence is somehow better because it isn't "Personal"? And your "evidence" is legitimate and proof because you say it is? Friendly advice, don't go into law practice. If the man provides personal and credible evidence, you should be working to discredit the witness. Simply saying nobody believes your personal anecdote doesn't cut it.

 

My evidence is better because it shows them actually doing it... So regardless how many people he personally met who weren't doing it, it can not refute the claim that some were because there is evidence of them doing it.

It's like me saying nobody has been in space on the grounds that i have met a few people and none of them have. Is this really a difficult concept for you to grasp or are you just pretending to not get it to give you an angle from ignorance to argue from?

 

So you are saying the incidence of people in the military handing out religious material is around the same incidence as the number of people on this planet that have been to outer space? Interesting. Sounds like you are backing Hostlonestar's argument.

I wouldn't want to plagiarize your strategy.

 

No, I'm saying the fact that i have never met an astronaut isn't evidence that they don't exist, Just like the fact that hostlonestar has never met someone handing out religious texts in the army isn't evidence that it didn't happen.

You do realise that when you intentionally fail to grasp simple things it just serves to make you look a bit slow, right?

 

I know reading isn't your favorite subject, but let me put it back up for you.

You are saying he claims it doesn't happen and you present evidence to the contrary, but obviously he claims the it DOES happen. That is what is called a strawman argument. were it not for strawman or arguing from ignorance, you'd have no argument at all.

Very true. Also true when you seriously just don't grasp simple things.

 

So you are both now admitting it does happen and i was right all along? well that's certainly a u-turn visible from space.

Want me to link to the specific posts where he called it "BS" and "unsubstantiated claims"?

 

/sigh. We all read the same posts stOx. You read the quote I just provided. You are clearly unable to glean the point hostlonestar was trying to make. Like most things relligious, even repetitive posting for clarity does not help in your ability to understand. Given that i am not going to waste my time(maybe) drawing illustrations, scanning them, and posting them for your edification, I guess we'll have to leave it there.

 

The point he made was that the claim was "BS" and "unsubstantiated". If he later changed his mind and wants to claim it did happen but it's not something done by the majority or national policy, then I'd agree. But it DID happen, It was NOT "BS" and the claims weren't "unsubstantiated".

It just looks like you are trying to find a way to agree with me, and claim you have been all along, now you have been proven wrong.

 

Yes yes stOx. If it makes you feel better to believe that, by all means do so. run along now.

 

that was probably the most humiliating of all your climb-downs. Hopefully you have learned your lesson now.

 

Of course stOx. I'm very humiliated. Thanks for pointing it out. I'll know better than to argue with you next time!