http://www.reuters.com/newsArticle.j...oryID=391 626
7

Rumsfeld Ramble Wins 'Foot in Mouth' Award
Mon December 1, 2003 09:09 AM ET

LONDON (Reuters) - Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld's curious statement at
a press briefing was named on Monday as the year's most baffling comment by
a public figure.
Rumsfeld, usually renowned for his uncompromising tough talking, was awarded
the "Foot in Mouth" award for a confusing message which probably left his
audience in the dark as to its meaning, Britain's Plain English Campaign
said.

"Reports that say something hasn't happened are interesting to me, because
as we know, there are known unknowns; there things we know we know,"
Rumsfeld told the briefing.

"We also know there are known unknowns; that is to say we know there are
some things we do not know. But there are also unknown unknowns -- the ones
we don't know we don't know."

John Lister, spokesman for the campaign which strives to have public
information delivered in clear, straightforward English, said: "We think we
know what he means. But we don't know if we really know."

Rumsfeld, whose boss President Bush is often singled out by language critics
for his sometimes unusual use of English, took the booby prize ahead of a
bizarre effort from actor-turned politician Arnold Schwarzenegger.

"I think that gay marriage is something that should be between a man and a
woman," was the odd statement from the new California Governor.

Previous holders of the award include U.S. actress Alicia Silverstone and
British chancellor Gordon Brown. Last year's winner was actor Richard Gere.

Sandman wrote:

http://www.reuters.com/newsArticle.j...oryID=391 626
7

Rumsfeld Ramble Wins 'Foot in Mouth' Award
Mon December 1, 2003 09:09 AM ET

LONDON (Reuters) - Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld's curious statement at
a press briefing was named on Monday as the year's most baffling comment by
a public figure.
Rumsfeld, usually renowned for his uncompromising tough talking, was awarded
the "Foot in Mouth" award for a confusing message which probably left his
audience in the dark as to its meaning, Britain's Plain English Campaign
said.

"Reports that say something hasn't happened are interesting to me, because
as we know, there are known unknowns; there things we know we know,"
Rumsfeld told the briefing.

"We also know there are known unknowns; that is to say we know there are
some things we do not know. But there are also unknown unknowns -- the ones
we don't know we don't know."

John Lister, spokesman for the campaign which strives to have public
information delivered in clear, straightforward English, said: "We think we
know what he means. But we don't know if we really know."

Rumsfeld, whose boss President Bush is often singled out by language critics
for his sometimes unusual use of English, took the booby prize ahead of a
bizarre effort from actor-turned politician Arnold Schwarzenegger.

"I think that gay marriage is something that should be between a man and a
woman," was the odd statement from the new California Governor.

Previous holders of the award include U.S. actress Alicia Silverstone and
British chancellor Gordon Brown. Last year's winner was actor Richard Gere.


I'm afraid that this one will haven't any success...
LOL

"Sandman" wrote in message


Rumsfeld Ramble Wins 'Foot in Mouth' Award
Mon December 1, 2003 09:09 AM ET

"Reports that say something hasn't happened are interesting to me,
because as we know, there are known unknowns; there things we know we
know," Rumsfeld told the briefing.

"We also know there are known unknowns; that is to say we know there
are some things we do not know. But there are also unknown unknowns
-- the ones we don't know we don't know."

For one thing Sanders you got it wrong. You also formatted it quite poorly.
What Rumsfeld really said is:

http://slate.msn.com/id/2081042

The Unknown

As we know,
There are known knowns.
There are things we know we know.
We also know
There are known unknowns.
That is to say
We know there are some things
We do not know.
But there are also unknown unknowns,
The ones we don't know
We don't know.

Seems pretty clear. But I can see how it went sailing over your head,
Sanders. The bad quoting and poor formatting are typical of your sloppiness
and obfuscation.

On Wed, 3 Dec 2003 07:33:18 -0500, "Arny Krueger"
wrote:

"We also know there are known unknowns; that is to say we know there
are some things we do not know. But there are also unknown unknowns
-- the ones we don't know we don't know."

For one thing Sanders you got it wrong. You also formatted it quite poorly.
What Rumsfeld really said is:

http://slate.msn.com/id/2081042

The Unknown

As we know,
There are known knowns.
There are things we know we know.
We also know
There are known unknowns.
That is to say
We know there are some things
We do not know.
But there are also unknown unknowns,
The ones we don't know
We don't know.

Seems pretty clear.

Yes, considering that it's Krooglish.

"Sandman" wrote in message
...

http://www.reuters.com/newsArticle.j...oryID=391 626
7

Rumsfeld Ramble Wins 'Foot in Mouth' Award
Mon December 1, 2003 09:09 AM ET

LONDON (Reuters) - Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld's curious statement
at
a press briefing was named on Monday as the year's most baffling comment
by
a public figure.
Rumsfeld, usually renowned for his uncompromising tough talking, was
awarded
the "Foot in Mouth" award for a confusing message which probably left his
audience in the dark as to its meaning, Britain's Plain English Campaign
said.

"Reports that say something hasn't happened are interesting to me, because
as we know, there are known unknowns; there things we know we know,"
Rumsfeld told the briefing.

"We also know there are known unknowns; that is to say we know there are
some things we do not know. But there are also unknown unknowns -- the
ones
we don't know we don't know."


It is perfectly clear, except that one of the three possibilities is stated
twice.
basically, he says that for all the things we do not know, for some, we know
we do not know them
and for others, we have no idea that we don't know them





----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 100,000 Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

"Sockpuppet Yustabe" wrote in message

"Sandman" wrote in message
...


http://www.reuters.com/newsArticle.j...oryID=391 626
7

Rumsfeld Ramble Wins 'Foot in Mouth' Award
Mon December 1, 2003 09:09 AM ET

LONDON (Reuters) - Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld's curious
statement
at
a press briefing was named on Monday as the year's most baffling
comment
by
a public figure.
Rumsfeld, usually renowned for his uncompromising tough talking, was
awarded
the "Foot in Mouth" award for a confusing message which probably
left his audience in the dark as to its meaning, Britain's Plain
English Campaign said.

"Reports that say something hasn't happened are interesting to me,
because as we know, there are known unknowns; there things we know
we know," Rumsfeld told the briefing.

"We also know there are known unknowns; that is to say we know there
are some things we do not know. But there are also unknown unknowns
-- the
ones
we don't know we don't know."


It is perfectly clear, except that one of the three possibilities is
stated twice.

If you investigate other published quotes of the same statements, you find
that the repetition of one of the possibilities is due to Sanders'
carelessness. Rumsfeld actually described three distict and unique
possibilities. Sanders misquoted Rumsfeld in such a way that there were only
two.

basically, he says that for all the things we do not know, for some,
we know we do not know them and for others, we have no idea that we don't
know them

Agreed.

"Arny Krueger" wrote

For one thing Sanders you got it wrong. You also formatted it quite
poorly.
What Rumsfeld really said is:

(snip)

Arnii, now you've really gone and done it. You friggin' moron, I cited the
article and copied it exactly word for word. If you don't like the wording
or formatting complain to the editor of the article, you idiot, not me!

Seems pretty clear.

To you - it does resmemble Krooglish.

But I can see how it went sailing over your head,
Sanders. The bad quoting and poor formatting are typical of your
sloppiness
and obfuscation.

There you go again, Mr. Buffoon. See above.

BTW, the Rummy gobbledygook is old news - what's interesting about it is
that he was asked a specific question about a specific piece of intelligence
in a news conference and *that* was his incredibly garbled evasion of the
question.m Jaws literally dropped in the audience of newspeople.

The funny thing about the article, aside from also including the Gropinator
quote (not as well known) was the following comment about Rummy's botched
English:

"John Lister, spokesman for the campaign which strives to have public
information delivered in clear, straightforward English, said: 'We think we
know what he means. But we don't know if we really know.'"

"Sandman" wrote in message

"Arny Krueger" wrote

For one thing Sanders you got it wrong. You also formatted it quite
poorly.
What Rumsfeld really said is:

(snip)

Arnii, now you've really gone and done it. You friggin' moron, I
cited the article and copied it exactly word for word. If you don't
like the wording or formatting complain to the editor of the article,
you idiot, not me!

Seems pretty clear.

To you - it does resemble Krooglish.

Krooglish is a phrase you and Middius among others seem to apply to things
that are too complex for your withered little brains to comprehend, Sanders.

But I can see how it went sailing over your head,
Sanders. The bad quoting and poor formatting are typical of your
sloppiness
and obfuscation.

There you go again, Mr. Buffoon. See above.

Thanks for showing that you can't admit to making a clearly-defined error,
Sanders. Scotty will be crushed.

BTW, the Rummy gobbledygook is old news - what's interesting about it
is that he was asked a specific question about a specific piece of
intelligence in a news conference and *that* was his incredibly
garbled evasion of the question. Jaws literally dropped in the
audience of newspeople.

Their jaws dropped presumably because they actually had to think for a few
seconds before it sank in.

The funny thing about the article, aside from also including the
Gropinator quote (not as well known) was the following comment about
Rummy's botched English:

"John Lister, spokesman for the campaign which strives to have public
information delivered in clear, straightforward English, said: 'We
think we know what he means. But we don't know if we really know.'"

Thanks Sanders for showing that you're a humorless internet dweeb who can't
tell a witty play on words in the spirit of Rumsfeld's poetry, from a
statement of absolute truth. Never heard of poetic license, I take it. If
you ask a respectful question, I'll explain poetic license to you, Sanders.

On Sat, 06 Dec 2003 06:22:34 GMT, "Sandman"
wrote:

Arnii, now you've really gone and done it. You friggin' moron, I cited the
article and copied it exactly word for word. If you don't like the wording
or formatting complain to the editor of the article, you idiot, not me!

Yes, it was the article that misquoted the Secretary. However, it
really doesn't make the statement anymore incomprehensible.

Here's the *actual* quote, with a little extra added:
-----------------
Reports that say that something hasn't happened are always interesting
to me, because as we know, there are known knowns; there are things we
know we know. We also know there are known unknowns; that is to say we
know there are some things we do not know. But there are also unknown
unknowns -- the ones we don't know we don't know. And if one looks
throughout the history of our country and other free countries, it is
the latter category that tend to be the difficult ones.

And so people who have the omniscience that they can say with high
certainty that something has not happened or is not being tried, have
capabilities that are -- what was the word you used, Pam, earlier?

Q: Free associate? (laughs)

Rumsfeld: Yeah. They can -- (chuckles) -- they can do things I can't
do. (laughter)

Q: Excuse me. But is this an unknown unknown?

Rumsfeld: I'm not --

Q: Because you said several unknowns, and I'm just wondering if this
is an unknown unknown.

Rumsfeld: I'm not going to say which it is.
--------------------
I like the last statement especially.

BTW, I note that Arnold Krueger turned the quote into verse without
attributing it to other sources, who have already done that. The
implication is that it was his own work, but he plagiarized it from
other sources on the net.

Oooops!

"dave weil" wrote in message

On Sat, 06 Dec 2003 06:22:34 GMT, "Sandman"
wrote:

Arnii, now you've really gone and done it. You friggin' moron, I
cited the article and copied it exactly word for word. If you don't
like the wording or formatting complain to the editor of the
article, you idiot, not me!

Yes, it was the article that misquoted the Secretary. However, it
really doesn't make the statement anymore incomprehensible.

Here's the *actual* quote, with a little extra added:
-----------------
Reports that say that something hasn't happened are always interesting
to me, because as we know, there are known knowns; there are things we
know we know. We also know there are known unknowns; that is to say we
know there are some things we do not know. But there are also unknown
unknowns -- the ones we don't know we don't know. And if one looks
throughout the history of our country and other free countries, it is
the latter category that tend to be the difficult ones.

And so people who have the omniscience that they can say with high
certainty that something has not happened or is not being tried, have
capabilities that are -- what was the word you used, Pam, earlier?

Q: Free associate? (laughs)

Rumsfeld: Yeah. They can -- (chuckles) -- they can do things I can't
do. (laughter)

Q: Excuse me. But is this an unknown unknown?

Rumsfeld: I'm not --

Q: Because you said several unknowns, and I'm just wondering if this
is an unknown unknown.

Rumsfeld: I'm not going to say which it is.
--------------------
I like the last statement especially.

BTW, I note that Arnold Krueger turned the quote into verse without
attributing it to other sources, who have already done that.

That's lie. I provided the URL of the page that I copied the verse form
from.

Here's the place where quoted the verse from of Rumsfeld's quote:

http://www.google.com/groups?selm=-o...%40comcast.com

And here's the URL which I cited in that post, for the verse form of
Rumsfeld's quote:

http://slate.msn.com/id/2081042


The implication is that it was his own work, but he plagiarized it from
other sources on the net.

This one is very obvious, maybe he'll finally admit that he was wrong.
Nevertheless, don't hold your breath while you wait for Weil to apologize
for his libelous claim.

Oooops!

Oops, indeed.

On Sat, 6 Dec 2003 15:32:36 -0500, "Arny Krueger"
wrote:

"dave weil" wrote in message

On Sat, 06 Dec 2003 06:22:34 GMT, "Sandman"
wrote:

Arnii, now you've really gone and done it. You friggin' moron, I
cited the article and copied it exactly word for word. If you don't
like the wording or formatting complain to the editor of the
article, you idiot, not me!

Yes, it was the article that misquoted the Secretary. However, it
really doesn't make the statement anymore incomprehensible.

Here's the *actual* quote, with a little extra added:
-----------------
Reports that say that something hasn't happened are always interesting
to me, because as we know, there are known knowns; there are things we
know we know. We also know there are known unknowns; that is to say we
know there are some things we do not know. But there are also unknown
unknowns -- the ones we don't know we don't know. And if one looks
throughout the history of our country and other free countries, it is
the latter category that tend to be the difficult ones.

And so people who have the omniscience that they can say with high
certainty that something has not happened or is not being tried, have
capabilities that are -- what was the word you used, Pam, earlier?

Q: Free associate? (laughs)

Rumsfeld: Yeah. They can -- (chuckles) -- they can do things I can't
do. (laughter)

Q: Excuse me. But is this an unknown unknown?

Rumsfeld: I'm not --

Q: Because you said several unknowns, and I'm just wondering if this
is an unknown unknown.

Rumsfeld: I'm not going to say which it is.
--------------------
I like the last statement especially.

BTW, I note that Arnold Krueger turned the quote into verse without
attributing it to other sources, who have already done that.

That's lie. I provided the URL of the page that I copied the verse form
from.

Here's the place where quoted the verse from of Rumsfeld's quote:

http://www.google.com/groups?selm=-o...%40comcast.com

Message id or article number not
found.

And here's the URL which I cited in that post, for the verse form of
Rumsfeld's quote:

http://slate.msn.com/id/2081042


The implication is that it was his own work, but he plagiarized it from
other sources on the net.

This one is very obvious, maybe he'll finally admit that he was wrong.
Nevertheless, don't hold your breath while you wait for Weil to apologize
for his libelous claim.

Maybe if you'll post a correct link, I might be able to address it.

Oooops!

Oops, indeed.

On Sat, 06 Dec 2003 14:47:43 -0600, dave weil
wrote:

On Sat, 6 Dec 2003 15:32:36 -0500, "Arny Krueger"
wrote:

"dave weil" wrote in message
m
On Sat, 06 Dec 2003 06:22:34 GMT, "Sandman"
wrote:

Arnii, now you've really gone and done it. You friggin' moron, I
cited the article and copied it exactly word for word. If you don't
like the wording or formatting complain to the editor of the
article, you idiot, not me!

Yes, it was the article that misquoted the Secretary. However, it
really doesn't make the statement anymore incomprehensible.

Here's the *actual* quote, with a little extra added:
-----------------
Reports that say that something hasn't happened are always interesting
to me, because as we know, there are known knowns; there are things we
know we know. We also know there are known unknowns; that is to say we
know there are some things we do not know. But there are also unknown
unknowns -- the ones we don't know we don't know. And if one looks
throughout the history of our country and other free countries, it is
the latter category that tend to be the difficult ones.

And so people who have the omniscience that they can say with high
certainty that something has not happened or is not being tried, have
capabilities that are -- what was the word you used, Pam, earlier?

Q: Free associate? (laughs)

Rumsfeld: Yeah. They can -- (chuckles) -- they can do things I can't
do. (laughter)

Q: Excuse me. But is this an unknown unknown?

Rumsfeld: I'm not --

Q: Because you said several unknowns, and I'm just wondering if this
is an unknown unknown.

Rumsfeld: I'm not going to say which it is.
--------------------
I like the last statement especially.

BTW, I note that Arnold Krueger turned the quote into verse without
attributing it to other sources, who have already done that.

That's lie. I provided the URL of the page that I copied the verse form
from.

Here's the place where quoted the verse from of Rumsfeld's quote:

http://www.google.com/groups?selm=-o...%40comcast.com

Message id or article number not
found.

And here's the URL which I cited in that post, for the verse form of
Rumsfeld's quote:

http://slate.msn.com/id/2081042


The implication is that it was his own work, but he plagiarized it from
other sources on the net.

This one is very obvious, maybe he'll finally admit that he was wrong.
Nevertheless, don't hold your breath while you wait for Weil to apologize
for his libelous claim.

Maybe if you'll post a correct link, I might be able to address it.

Oooops!

Oops, indeed.


I found it. Of course, I had to find it on my own because Arnold's
link didn't work.

I retract my statement. Mr. Krueger *did* attribute his quote.

Maybe you can learn something from this Arnold. It's easy for the rest
of the world to admit that they are wrong. You should take the hint,
or keep taking the hits.

dave weil a écrit :
On Sat, 06 Dec 2003 14:47:43 -0600, dave weil
wrote:


On Sat, 6 Dec 2003 15:32:36 -0500, "Arny Krueger"
wrote:


"dave weil" wrote in message
om

On Sat, 06 Dec 2003 06:22:34 GMT, "Sandman"
wrote:


Arnii, now you've really gone and done it. You friggin' moron, I
cited the article and copied it exactly word for word. If you don't
like the wording or formatting complain to the editor of the
article, you idiot, not me!

Yes, it was the article that misquoted the Secretary. However, it
really doesn't make the statement anymore incomprehensible.

Here's the *actual* quote, with a little extra added:
-----------------
Reports that say that something hasn't happened are always interesting
to me, because as we know, there are known knowns; there are things we
know we know. We also know there are known unknowns; that is to say we
know there are some things we do not know. But there are also unknown
unknowns -- the ones we don't know we don't know. And if one looks
throughout the history of our country and other free countries, it is
the latter category that tend to be the difficult ones.

And so people who have the omniscience that they can say with high
certainty that something has not happened or is not being tried, have
capabilities that are -- what was the word you used, Pam, earlier?

Q: Free associate? (laughs)

Rumsfeld: Yeah. They can -- (chuckles) -- they can do things I can't
do. (laughter)

Q: Excuse me. But is this an unknown unknown?

Rumsfeld: I'm not --

Q: Because you said several unknowns, and I'm just wondering if this
is an unknown unknown.

Rumsfeld: I'm not going to say which it is.
--------------------
I like the last statement especially.

BTW, I note that Arnold Krueger turned the quote into verse without
attributing it to other sources, who have already done that.

That's lie. I provided the URL of the page that I copied the verse form
from.

Here's the place where quoted the verse from of Rumsfeld's quote:

http://www.google.com/groups?selm=-o...%40comcast.com

Message id or article number not
found.


And here's the URL which I cited in that post, for the verse form of
Rumsfeld's quote:

http://slate.msn.com/id/2081042



The implication is that it was his own work, but he plagiarized it from
other sources on the net.

This one is very obvious, maybe he'll finally admit that he was wrong.
Nevertheless, don't hold your breath while you wait for Weil to apologize
for his libelous claim.

Maybe if you'll post a correct link, I might be able to address it.


Oooops!

Oops, indeed.



I found it. Of course, I had to find it on my own because Arnold's
link didn't work.

I retract my statement. Mr. Krueger *did* attribute his quote.

Maybe you can learn something from this Arnold. It's easy for the rest
of the world to admit that they are wrong. You should take the hint,
or keep taking the hits.

And you "Monsieur je sais tout" what will you learn of that ?

dave weil wrote:

Here's the *actual* quote, with a little extra added:
-----------------
Reports that say that something hasn't happened are always interesting
to me, because as we know, there are known knowns; there are things we
know we know. We also know there are known unknowns; that is to say we
know there are some things we do not know. But there are also unknown
unknowns -- the ones we don't know we don't know. And if one looks
throughout the history of our country and other free countries, it is
the latter category that tend to be the difficult ones.

OK, dave, are you lucid enough to understand what Rumsfeld said, and if so,
does that not make Sanders an even bigger idiot than he has already demonstrated
himself to be?


GeoSynch

"dave weil" wrote in message

On Sat, 06 Dec 2003 14:47:43 -0600, dave weil
wrote:

On Sat, 6 Dec 2003 15:32:36 -0500, "Arny Krueger"
wrote:

"dave weil" wrote in message

On Sat, 06 Dec 2003 06:22:34 GMT, "Sandman"
wrote:

Arnii, now you've really gone and done it. You friggin' moron, I
cited the article and copied it exactly word for word. If you
don't like the wording or formatting complain to the editor of the
article, you idiot, not me!

Yes, it was the article that misquoted the Secretary. However, it
really doesn't make the statement anymore incomprehensible.

Here's the *actual* quote, with a little extra added:
-----------------
Reports that say that something hasn't happened are always
interesting to me, because as we know, there are known knowns;
there are things we know we know. We also know there are known
unknowns; that is to say we know there are some things we do not
know. But there are also unknown unknowns -- the ones we don't
know we don't know. And if one looks throughout the history of our
country and other free countries, it is the latter category that
tend to be the difficult ones.

And so people who have the omniscience that they can say with high
certainty that something has not happened or is not being tried,
have capabilities that are -- what was the word you used, Pam,
earlier?

Q: Free associate? (laughs)

Rumsfeld: Yeah. They can -- (chuckles) -- they can do things I
can't do. (laughter)

Q: Excuse me. But is this an unknown unknown?

Rumsfeld: I'm not --

Q: Because you said several unknowns, and I'm just wondering if
this is an unknown unknown.

Rumsfeld: I'm not going to say which it is.
--------------------
I like the last statement especially.

BTW, I note that Arnold Krueger turned the quote into verse without
attributing it to other sources, who have already done that.

That's lie. I provided the URL of the page that I copied the verse
form from.

Here's the place where quoted the verse from of Rumsfeld's quote:

http://www.google.com/groups?selm=-o...%40comcast.com

Message id or article number not
found.

And here's the URL which I cited in that post, for the verse form of
Rumsfeld's quote:

http://slate.msn.com/id/2081042


The implication is that it was his own work, but he plagiarized
it from other sources on the net.

This one is very obvious, maybe he'll finally admit that he was
wrong. Nevertheless, don't hold your breath while you wait for Weil
to apologize for his libelous claim.

Maybe if you'll post a correct link, I might be able to address it.

Oooops!

Oops, indeed.


I found it. Of course, I had to find it on my own because Arnold's
link didn't work.

You're nuts. I just tried the link, and it works.

I retract my statement. Mr. Krueger *did* attribute his quote.

Just replacing one lie with another, I see.

Maybe you can learn something from this Arnold. It's easy for the rest
of the world to admit that they are wrong. You should take the hint,
or keep taking the hits.

Let's see if you're man enough to retract your lie about my link not
working, Weil.

On Sat, 06 Dec 2003 22:49:52 GMT, "GeoSynch"
wrote:

dave weil wrote:

Here's the *actual* quote, with a little extra added:
-----------------
Reports that say that something hasn't happened are always interesting
to me, because as we know, there are known knowns; there are things we
know we know. We also know there are known unknowns; that is to say we
know there are some things we do not know. But there are also unknown
unknowns -- the ones we don't know we don't know. And if one looks
throughout the history of our country and other free countries, it is
the latter category that tend to be the difficult ones.

OK, dave, are you lucid enough to understand what Rumsfeld said, and if so,
does that not make Sanders an even bigger idiot than he has already demonstrated
himself to be?

It's a false dichotomy. Just because I can puzzle through what he says
doesn't make it any less funny.

I mean, really, to talk about unknown unknows *is* pretty funny in a
military briefing. Especailly when you talk about the difficulty of
knowing unknown unknowns.

On Sat, 6 Dec 2003 18:09:38 -0500, "Arny Krueger"
wrote:

I found it. Of course, I had to find it on my own because Arnold's
link didn't work.

You're nuts. I just tried the link, and it works.

I retract my statement. Mr. Krueger *did* attribute his quote.

Just replacing one lie with another, I see.

Maybe you can learn something from this Arnold. It's easy for the rest
of the world to admit that they are wrong. You should take the hint,
or keep taking the hits.

Let's see if you're man enough to retract your lie about my link not
working, Weil.

I just tried it and it now works.

I tried it three times earlier today and it didn't work.

Now, let's see you retract the lie that you just told about the link
not working for me. I'll bet you're not man enough to do it.

On Sun, 07 Dec 2003 02:16:52 -0600, dave weil
wrote:

On Sat, 06 Dec 2003 22:49:52 GMT, "GeoSynch"
wrote:

dave weil wrote:

Here's the *actual* quote, with a little extra added:
-----------------
Reports that say that something hasn't happened are always interesting
to me, because as we know, there are known knowns; there are things we
know we know. We also know there are known unknowns; that is to say we
know there are some things we do not know. But there are also unknown
unknowns -- the ones we don't know we don't know. And if one looks
throughout the history of our country and other free countries, it is
the latter category that tend to be the difficult ones.

OK, dave, are you lucid enough to understand what Rumsfeld said, and if so,
does that not make Sanders an even bigger idiot than he has already demonstrated
himself to be?

It's a false dichotomy. Just because I can puzzle through what he says
doesn't make it any less funny.

I mean, really, to talk about unknown unknows *is* pretty funny in a
military briefing. Especailly when you talk about the difficulty of
knowing unknown unknowns.

I don't find it too funny, but then again, I've probably sat through
too many military briefings. I equate it to "There are questions to
which we know the answers, questions to which we don't know the
answers, and questions we haven't thought to ask yet." That sounds a
little better to me, because it doesn't use "known" in so many forms.

Scott Gardner

dave weil said:

I mean, really, to talk about unknown unknows *is* pretty funny in a
military briefing. Especailly when you talk about the difficulty of
knowing unknown unknowns.

Are you assuming he was *not* trying to be funny? That would make him
an even bigger fool than some have alleged.

On Sun, 07 Dec 2003 04:01:43 -0500, George M. Middius
wrote:



dave weil said:

I mean, really, to talk about unknown unknows *is* pretty funny in a
military briefing. Especailly when you talk about the difficulty of
knowing unknown unknowns.

Are you assuming he was *not* trying to be funny?

Yes, that's my assumption.

That would make him an even bigger fool than some have alleged.

dave weil said:

dave weil said:

I mean, really, to talk about unknown unknows *is* pretty funny in a
military briefing. Especailly when you talk about the difficulty of
knowing unknown unknowns.

Are you assuming he was *not* trying to be funny?

Yes, that's my assumption.

That would make him an even bigger fool than some have alleged.

I don't believe any reasonably intelligent person could deliver those
lines without a wink. I don't suppose anybody actually heard him say
them.....