Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Creative Speculation
In reply to the discussion: 911: Window of Exposure [View all]William Seger
(11,031 posts)58. Looks like further nonsense
You have yet to establish that anything Rumsfeld did that morning had any impact whatsoever on the events of that day, nor have you established that his behavior was the best way to accomplish what you claim was his goal. You just keep asserting it over and over and over, while dodging the issue of the obvious "assuming the consequent" fallacy in your argument. What's the point of continuing to post if that's all you've got?
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
76 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
I don't expect much outcry when attempts are made to steal this election, either.
dixiegrrrrl
Sep 2012
#5
So, your proof of conspiracy is that Rumsfeld adhered to a course of action that YOU determine
MercutioATC
Sep 2012
#8
But I did "argue against it" and all you could do was reassert the same dubious premise
William Seger
Sep 2012
#19
No, if you're just going to keep repeating the same faulty argument, let's stop
William Seger
Sep 2012
#23
Every single point you raise is speculative, "I think this is what would have happened"
stevenleser
Oct 2012
#52
Not only have I done the homework, I'm former military (US Air Force) I understand this a lot better
stevenleser
Oct 2012
#54