Col Karen Kwiatkowski, USAF : Bush Lied About WMDs to Justify Iraq War !!!!!!!!!!!!!

[konradv]

Salon is not a credible source. GEt back to me when this story grows some legs.

Salon isn't the source. The colonel is.

 

[Publius1787]

She was a Lieutenant Colonel which is an 0-5 in the AirForce. That's barely a field grade officer and well away from a general grade. So you can drop the term "high ranking" from your vocabulary. Most career officers achieve the ranks of major and lieutenant colonel. In the Air Force the rank is given out like candy. Likewise, Air Force intelligence deals with.. ... you got it !!!, Air threats, air assets, weather, and air capabilities. Good luck using her as an authority on Iraq.

What the fuck do either her rank, or the domain the article is hosted on, have to do with the content?

Talk about deflections....

Look at the title of the post. "High Ranking" it says, does it not? Why post it? Because obviously someone thinks it brings credibility to the "content." Next she derives her "bonifides" as an intelligence professional. Indeed she was, with respect to all things "Air."

That's a lot of words; you could have just said "I'm poisoning the well because I have no argument".

Indeed, to you a few lines might be "a lot of words."

Hey, I'm just saving you time by cutting to the chase of what you don't have the honesty to admit.

Thank you for reminding me of the opportunity cost of 30 seconds.

 

[Correll]

The new Pentagon papers

A high-ranking military officer reveals how Defense Department extremists suppressed information and twisted the truth to drive the country to war.

Karen Kwiatkowski

She was a Lieutenant Colonel which is an 0-5 in the AirForce. That's barely a field grade officer and well away from a general grade. So you can drop the term "high ranking" from your vocabulary. Most career officers achieve the ranks of major and lieutenant colonel. In the Air Force the rank is given out like candy. Likewise, Air Force intelligence deals with.. ... you got it !!!, Air threats, air assets, weather, and air capabilities. Good luck using her as an authority on Iraq.

What the fuck do either her rank, or the domain the article is hosted on, have to do with the content?

Talk about deflections....

Moreover the phrase "high ranking" is part of the subtitle on the link page itself. More moreover, the phrase could refer to her being "communications officer in the field and in acquisition programs, a speechwriter for the National Security Agency director, and on the Headquarters Air Force and the office of the secretary of defense staffs covering African affairs".

Salon is not a credible source. GEt back to me when this story grows some legs.

Salon is a web domain, Stupid. It's not a news company. Holy shit did you really post that?
How 'bout we take the same article and host it on assfuck.com. Better now?

Salon is the site host -- not the writer.

Try to be less hysterical.

If this story is to lame to even get printed by the LIb MSM...

 

[Contumacious]

Salon?

Yep, Salon..


Which of the facts she discloses is FALSE?


None.


Shut the fuck up then.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Because Publius has no argument against the writer, he attacks the host.

 

[Publius1787]

Salon is not a credible source. GEt back to me when this story grows some legs.

Salon isn't the source. The colonel is.

Legit news outlets pick this hot story up in 5, 4, 3, 2, NEVER.

 

[JakeStarkey]

"Try to be less hysterical. If this story is to lame to even get printed by the LIb MSM..." says the biggest bed wetter on the Board. Can't attack the facts, go on deflection, is the deflection of the far right and the far left.

 

[Contumacious]

The new Pentagon papers

A high-ranking military officer reveals how Defense Department extremists suppressed information and twisted the truth to drive the country to war.

Karen Kwiatkowski

She was a Lieutenant Colonel which is an 0-5 in the AirForce. That's barely a field grade officer and well away from a general grade. So you can drop the term "high ranking" from your vocabulary. Most career officers achieve the ranks of major and lieutenant colonel. In the Air Force the rank is given out like candy. Likewise, Air Force intelligence deals with.. ... you got it !!!, Air threats, air assets, weather, and air capabilities. Good luck using her as an authority on Iraq.

OK then , dumb ass

Let's play your game.


Lets pretend she was just a janitor.

Are her findings false?


.

 

[Publius1787]

Salon?

Yep, Salon..


Which of the facts she discloses is FALSE?


None.


Shut the fuck up then.

Indeed, because her citations, photographs, recordings, and evidence is clearly outlined in the bibliography. Look guys we have a winner here.

 

[Publius1787]

"Try to be less hysterical. If this story is to lame to even get printed by the LIb MSM..." says the biggest bed wetter on the Board. Can't attack the facts, go on deflection, is the deflection of the far right and the far left.

Hearsay isn't fact. None of it can be substantiated.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Publius and Correll have nothing except bed wetting and their own hearsay.

Guys, you have done nothing to counter the LTC's argument, nothing.

 

[Publius1787]

The new Pentagon papers

A high-ranking military officer reveals how Defense Department extremists suppressed information and twisted the truth to drive the country to war.

Karen Kwiatkowski

She was a Lieutenant Colonel which is an 0-5 in the AirForce. That's barely a field grade officer and well away from a general grade. So you can drop the term "high ranking" from your vocabulary. Most career officers achieve the ranks of major and lieutenant colonel. In the Air Force the rank is given out like candy. Likewise, Air Force intelligence deals with.. ... you got it !!!, Air threats, air assets, weather, and air capabilities. Good luck using her as an authority on Iraq.

OK then , dumb ass

Let's play your game.


Lets pretend she was just a janitor.

Are her findings false?


.

The true question is are they substantiated? Well... .. .. are they?

 

[Publius1787]

Publius and Correll have nothing except bed wetting and their own hearsay.

Guys, you have done nothing to counter the LTC's argument, nothing.

You can't disprove a negative. You can't disprove an unsubstantiated argument. I once saw aliens making love to Michelle Obama. Now prove me wrong.

 

[Pogo]

Salon is not a credible source. GEt back to me when this story grows some legs.

Salon isn't the source. The colonel is.

Legit news outlets pick this hot story up in 5, 4, 3, 2, NEVER.

This isn't a "news" story. For one thing it's 11 years old.

 

[Correll]

The new Pentagon papers

A high-ranking military officer reveals how Defense Department extremists suppressed information and twisted the truth to drive the country to war.

Karen Kwiatkowski

She was a Lieutenant Colonel which is an 0-5 in the AirForce. That's barely a field grade officer and well away from a general grade. So you can drop the term "high ranking" from your vocabulary. Most career officers achieve the ranks of major and lieutenant colonel. In the Air Force the rank is given out like candy. Likewise, Air Force intelligence deals with.. ... you got it !!!, Air threats, air assets, weather, and air capabilities. Good luck using her as an authority on Iraq.

OK then , dumb ass

Let's play your game.


Lets pretend she was just a janitor.

Are her findings false?


.

You got a point or a claim to make, make it.

THis chick? I don't know her from Adam.

At least with you I can call you on your claims.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Pogo! I have been waiting for that. Thank you. She was right then, and she is right now, and nothing that Publius or Correll can say can disprove her argument. They have nothing and argue from nothing.

 

[Pogo]

Because Publius has no argument against the writer, he attacks the host.

One attacks the web host, the other attacks the writer's military rank. It's the usual plan of trying to bury the issue under a lot of irrelevant noise hoping to drive interested readers away. It's the debate tactic of abject cowards.

 

[Publius1787]

Pogo! I have been waiting for that. Thank you. She was right then, and she is right now, and nothing that Publius or Correll can say can disprove her argument. They have nothing and argue from nothing.

Once again, I saw Michelle Obama making out with aliens. Now prove me wrong. THERES NOTHING YOU CAN SAY TO PROVE ME WRONG!!! Why? Because it's unsubstantiated. Like the article you posted.

 

[Publius1787]

Because Publius has no argument against the writer, he attacks the host.

One attacks the web host, the other attacks the writer's military rank. It's the usual plan of trying to bury the issue under a lot of irrelevant noise hoping to drive interested readers away. It's the debate tactic of abject cowards.

When an irrelevant news source has an irrelevant person making unsubstantiated claims that no one but the irrelevant propaganda source seems fit to print then I think they've got a point.

 

[Pogo]

The new Pentagon papers

A high-ranking military officer reveals how Defense Department extremists suppressed information and twisted the truth to drive the country to war.

Karen Kwiatkowski

She was a Lieutenant Colonel which is an 0-5 in the AirForce. That's barely a field grade officer and well away from a general grade. So you can drop the term "high ranking" from your vocabulary. Most career officers achieve the ranks of major and lieutenant colonel. In the Air Force the rank is given out like candy. Likewise, Air Force intelligence deals with.. ... you got it !!!, Air threats, air assets, weather, and air capabilities. Good luck using her as an authority on Iraq.

OK then , dumb ass

Let's play your game.


Lets pretend she was just a janitor.

Are her findings false?


.

You got a point or a claim to make, make it.

THis chick? I don't know her from Adam.

At least with you I can call you on your claims.

"This chick"?
You been living under a rock?

Perhaps it was for such rock dwellers that the first several sentences in the article specifically spell out who she is, what she's done and what puts her in a position to know what she's talking about.

--- or didn't you even bother to read it?