zlacker

I said you aren't arguing in good faith, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Good_faith

Maybe you aren't being intentionally deceptive, I can't say. But as I pointed out you are not being fair and honest about Hersh's argument, which is more nuanced than the one sentence.

>>boombo+(OP)
This is a misrepresentation of my argument. I'm not addressing Hersh's other argument about the other specifics of the Osama bin Laden raid, and therefore fairness or dishonesty to that part of his argument is not relevant. I'm addressing his quote, the quote in which he claimed that all words in the White House report/statement were lies. He denied that he made this claim; he didn't say he misspoke or that he's amending his original statement. To say that I'm being unfair or dishonest about Hersh's argument by misrepresenting my argument is itself unfair and/or dishonest.

As for the reason why Hersh did this, I cannot say, a person's intention is a black box. But this kind of behavior amounts to some amount of dishonesty. It's not much more complicated than that.

>>beebma+S5
> Hersh has pointed out that he was in no way suggesting that Osama bin Laden was not killed in Pakistan, as reported, upon the president's authority: he was saying that it was in the aftermath that the lying began

Is saying he misspoke. His words were interpreted in a way he did not intend them to be.

Addressing only the quote itself is unfair, as again that does not represent his actual argument.

I'm done with this.