The Children Overboard issue develops

[Anonymous]

He would agree with the Commander of the HMAS Adelaide that no children were thrown overboard... 'given the new evidence'. Something you're having trouble doing.

So is Howard lying?

 

[King of the Hill]

Nope

 

[Anonymous]

Nope

You're contradicting yourself now.

So you agree with Howard's hindsight assessment (given the subsequent evidence) that no children were thrown overboard.
Howard based this on information received from the CDF.

But earlier, based on the same evidence... I asked,

Do you concede that no children were thrown overboard?

Nope

Test case... use your imagination...
If Howard headbutted you, would you thank him?

 

[King of the Hill]

Nope

 

[Anonymous]

lol... thanks SS. You're in the middle of lost debate overload. Very gratifying. :lol:

 

[King of the Hill]

I havent lost anything
I dont think Howard's lying
You havent convinced me that he is
Youve convinced yourself, but you had already decided that
You then asked me if Prime Minister Howard headbutted me, would I thank him?
I said I wouldnt
#-o

 

[Anonymous]

I'll spell it out for you...

I asked if given the evidence of the CDF, if no children were thrown overboard.
You said, "Nope".

I then asked that Howard eventually agreed with the same evidence and if he got it wrong.
You said, "Nope"

It has to be one or the other.

I think this shows how good a sell job the whole children overboard affair was. Even years later, some people refuse to concede that the initial information was wrong.

 

[King of the Hill]

Not really

 

[Anonymous]

:lol: This must be confusing for you.

Now that you know that Howard accepts the subsequent evidence from the CDF, do you agree that no children were thrown overboard?

 

[King of the Hill]

Just because the people from the Navy say that they didnt see kids tossed overboard doesnt mean that no kids were tossed overboard

And just because PM Howard said originally that kids were thrown overboard, and now says otherwise, doesnt mean that he was deliberately lying to anyone in the first place

 

[Anonymous]

Still contradicting yourself.

Howard eventually conceded that the no children were thrown overboard, and yet you can't.
Ask him next time you see him.

Personally, I trust the version of events from the Commander of the Adelaide who was there.
And he doesn't agree with you either.

 

[King of the Hill]

Exactly what do you want from me?

 

[0neye]

He wants you to say there where NO CHILDREN THROWN OVERBOARD

But how would any one know unless they where on the boat :?:

Even form HMS Adelaide you could no see every thing

Did any one ask the children how they got in the water :?:

 

[millersnose]

willow

a short time ago you posted that red cross investigation was underway to investigate allawi murdering prisoners

although this was wrong you werent lying

unfortunately you were folowing a peice written by renouned liar paul mcgeogh

you didnt set out to deceive - therefor you werent lying just using poor information

it happens all the time - people acting in good faith on information available

 

[Jimbo]

willow

a short time ago you posted that red cross investigation was underway to investigate allawi murdering prisoners

although this was wrong you werent lying

unfortunately you were folowing a peice written by renouned liar paul mcgeogh

you didnt set out to deceive - therefor you werent lying just using poor information

it happens all the time - people acting in good faith on information available

Outstanding Millers. You've outdone yourself!!

 

[ibeme]

willow

a short time ago you posted that red cross investigation was underway to investigate allawi murdering prisoners

although this was wrong you werent lying

unfortunately you were folowing a peice written by renouned liar paul mcgeogh

you didnt set out to deceive - therefor you werent lying just using poor information

it happens all the time - people acting in good faith on information available

Which brings us to Mr Crafton, who claims, and is backed up, that Howard new the truth, but chose to stick with the original, untrue, but extremely emotive story.

We've gone full circle.

 

[^ Pando]

Are lie detector tests considered as conclusive evidence in a court of law?

 

[millersnose]

seems suspicious to me on the eve of an election this guy pops up years after the events

if that doesnt smell bad to the gullible left then i guess that explains the michael moore phenomenon

 

[Tighthead]

Are lie detector tests considered as conclusive evidence in a court of law?

The High Court hasn't considered their admissibility, but they have been deemed inadmissible as evidence in lower courts. I believe they breach the rule against hearsay evidence.

 

[ibeme]

Are lie detector tests considered as conclusive evidence in a court of law?

Jenny McKenry is not a lie detector test. She was the head of defence public affairs at the time.