Memeorandum


Powered by TypePad

« Kristof Gets Results... Or Does He? | Main | If Al Jazeera Is With You... »

June 16, 2005

Comments

ed

Hmmm.

1. "Get a clue: in this administration, "bad analysis" is defined as "analysis that doesn't serve the big guy's political needs." Have you forgotten that George "slam-dunk" Tenet was handed a medal? That's not despite the fact he said "slam-dunk." It's because he said it."

Now that's funny. Bolton tried to deal with an analyst and is being roasted over a fire for it, and you're blaming the administration?

Please keep it up.

2. "I've clearly demonstrated that you have a track record of making a false statement and then refusing to be held accountable."

And as you pointed out, I was right.

Thanks.

jukeboxgrad

"Bolton tried to deal with an analyst"

English translation: "Bolton made sure analysts understood they should always say what they believed, as long as it was exactly what Bolton wanted to hear."

"And as you pointed out, I was right."

Now you're just blabbering incoherently and making stuff up. Nothing surprising about that. Just like you made stuff up here, at 6/13, 9:27 am. See my comment at 6/13, 1:11 pm.

ed

Hmmmm.

1. "English translation: "Bolton made sure analysts understood they should always say what they believed, as long as it was exactly what Bolton wanted to hear.""

Hehehe. There's no justification for that pose and you know it. But keep on trying.

2. "Now you're just blabbering incoherently and making stuff up."

The definition I pointed out is included in that laundry list.

But here you go:

http://www.askoxford.com/concise_oed/fix?view=uk

"verb 1 attach or position securely. 2 repair or restore. 3 decide or settle on. 4 make arrangements for. 5 make unchanging, constant or permanent. 6 (fix on) direct or be directed unwaveringly toward. 7 informal deviously influence the outcome of. 8 informal take an injection of a narcotic drug. 9 informal, chiefly N. Amer. provide with food or drink."

Hope that helps.

ed

Hmmmm.

You go right on ahead making those inane arguments. I'm sure if you keep repeating them they'll someday come true. Or at least they will if you click the heels of your red shoes three times and make a wish.

Sorry but Bolton not actually having fired anyone or administratively punished anyone is NOT evidence that he did so, or that he forced anyone to do anything.

And if your entire argument depends on the exact phrasing and writing style of a junior official of a foreign government at an informal meeting whereupon a member recounts a meeting held the week previous, then your problems are already legion.

jukeboxgrad

"The definition I pointed out is included in that laundry list."

Naturally. Trouble is, you didn't claim that "fixed" _sometimes_ means "attaching, positioning, or orienting." You said it "_always_" (emphasis added) means that (here, at 6/13, 9:27 am). Nice job pretending you don't understand the difference between sometimes and always.

"Hope that helps."

Indeed it does. It helps prove (as if it wasn't already abundantly obvious) that you're a fool who is determined to run away from your own words.

"not actually having fired anyone"

Nice job being sneaky (how typical). No one said he did. But he tried to get people fired, and then lied under oath to deny this. He's accustomed to running away from his own behavior, much like you .

"your entire argument depends on the exact phrasing and writing style"

There's every reason to believe that minutes taken at a top-level meeting of the British government are prepared with great care, and checked for accuracy before publication. Very unlike what you write.

"a foreign government"

Which just happens to be our closest ally in the war, and which was intimately involved in our planning for the war.

"an informal meeting"

This was virtually every top official in the British government, planning a war. I wonder what you would consider a "formal" meeting.

"a junior official"

Rycroft is a foreign policy aide senior enough to be present at an extremely critical and sensitive meeting, and to be assigned the reponsibility for taking minutes. If you think that's a job handed to "a junior official," that's your problem.

"a member recounts a meeting"

The "member" was the head of British intelligence, the equivalent of George Tenet. Nice job glossing over this by describing him as "a member." By the way, the "meeting" he recounted was apparently with Tenet himself. And there was probably more than one meeting, and with multiple officials.

By the way, "your entire argument" depends on the credibility of an administration that has a proven tracking record of telling lies (exhibit A: Pat Tillman).

"your problems are already legion"

Heh.

ed

Hmmmm.

1. "Naturally. Trouble is, you didn't claim that "fixed" _sometimes_ means "attaching, positioning, or orienting." You said it "_always_" (emphasis added) means that (here, at 6/13, 9:27 am). Nice job pretending you don't understand the difference between sometimes and always."

sigh. Did you not read the reference from the *Oxford* online dictionary?

2. "By the way, "your entire argument" depends on the credibility of an administration that has a proven tracking record of telling lies (exhibit A: Pat Tillman)."

I see you're now including all levels of government as part of "this administration". No doubt the next step is blaming Bush for your local DMV problems.

Keep on arguing this losing position. You're wrong, I've proven you wrong, but you go right on ahead.

ed

Hmmm.

"This was virtually every top official in the British government, planning a war. I wonder what you would consider a "formal" meeting."

One with, oh say, a *transcript* and not an after-meeting followup memo.

"There's every reason to believe that minutes taken at a top-level meeting of the British government are prepared with great care, and checked for accuracy before publication. Very unlike what you write."

These aren't "minutes", this is a followup memo. They are extremely distinct and different items.

Frankly your position is hopeless.

jukeboxgrad

"Did you not read the reference from the *Oxford* online dictionary?"

I did, and it's just more proof of what an idiot you are, since it indicates that "deviously influence the outcome of" is one of the meanings of "fixed." You denied this (here, at 6/13, 9:27 am): "I've read a great deal of English literature. The word 'fix' in English, as opposed to American, is _always_ used to denote attaching, positioning, or orienting." (emphasis added)

"I see you're now including all levels of government as part of 'this administration'. No doubt the next step is blaming Bush for your local DMV problems."

How tiresome that you invoke the same old Bush strategy of pushing blame as far down the ranks as possible. I realize in BushCo "the buck stops here" is quaint and obsolete, just like the Geneva Convention.

Senior officers lied about Tillman: "The Army's public release made no mention of friendly fire, even though at the time it was issued, investigators in Afghanistan had already taken at least 14 sworn statements from Tillman's platoon members that made clear the true causes of his death" (link).

Let me know who Bush or Rummy disciplined as a result. No one, because this attitude of deception starts at the top.

"These aren't 'minutes', this is a followup memo. They are extremely distinct and different items."

Gosh, you're really grasping at straws now. Glub, glub, glub. Not just "distinct," but "extremely distinct."

The document contains nothing except a detailed account of what was said at the meeting. Minutes are "an official record of the proceedings of a meeting." Let us know in what way this document appears to be anything other than that.

"One with, oh say, a *transcript* and not an after-meeting followup memo."

Transcripts are common only in legal proceedings, not in business or government meetings, even at a high level. If you can demonstrate otherwise, please do so.

Anyway, nice job making the asinine assertion that any meeting lacking a transcript, and "only" having detailed minutes, is an "informal" meeting, even though it's the top of UK government having a dead-serious discussion planning a war.

"I've proven you wrong"

Not on this planet.

Shad
"I've proven you wrong"
Not on this planet.

Oh wow, talk about setting the bar impossibly high. Now you insist that people must come to your homeworld to demonstrate your ignorance of the situation on Earth?

At least be sporting and give us a hint... what galaxy are you in?

jukeboxgrad

Shad, if you have an interest in saying anything remotely substantive to demonstrate your ostensibly superior understanding of the "situation on Earth," then go ahead. Otherwise, you're a waste of time.

Then again, I realize expecting you to say anything substantive is, in fact, "setting the bar impossibly high."

ed

Hmmmm.

"I did, and it's just more proof of what an idiot you are, since it indicates that "deviously influence the outcome of" is one of the meanings of "fixed.""

HAHAHAHAHA! You had to go to the 7th possible definition in order to bolster your case?

Why do you think those definitions are a. numbered and b. in that order? Because that's the order of general usage.

2. "How tiresome that you invoke the same old Bush strategy of pushing blame as far down the ranks as possible. I realize in BushCo "the buck stops here" is quaint and obsolete, just like the Geneva Convention."

Yeah cause Bush ordered the Army to tell the family a feel-good story. He's all knowing. All powerful.

Frankly it's not worth discussing this with you. When this fizzles out I'll have another good laugh at your expense. Until then:

HAHAHAHA!

jukeboxgrad

"Because that's the order of general usage."

Trouble is, you didn't say "The word 'fix' in English, as opposed to American, is _usually_ used to denote attaching, positioning, or orienting." You said (here, at 6/13, 9:27 am): "The word 'fix' in English, as opposed to American, is _always_ used to denote attaching, positioning, or orienting." (emphasis added)

Nice job pretending you said something other than what you actually said. That's what's commonly know as running away from your own words. Is your apparent inability to understand the elementary distinction between simple English words like "usually" and "always" a question of stupidity or dishonesty? Maybe both, I suppose.

You insist on repeatedly putting your foot in your mouth. How adorable. You might as well completely remove any lingering doubt about your lack of credibility. Please continue.

"Bush ordered the Army to tell the family a feel-good story. He's all knowing. All powerful."

Even if you'd like to pretend that he didn't know about the cover-up ahead of time, good luck making excuses for his lack of dealing with it after-the-fact.

"He's all knowing. All powerful."

Not exactly. He is, however, the Commander-in-Chief. That term used to be associated with a certain amount of accountability.

ed

Hmmm.

Still laughing at you.

HAHAHAHA!

The comments to this entry are closed.

Wilson/Plame