A Stupid Man Talks
Tweet
Donald Rumsfeld, the secretary of defense who has presided over a botched war in Iraq and a torture scandal in the U.S. military under his watch has some harsh words. Some harsh words… for the media.
Yes, instead of Rumsfeld showing a little humility for the decisions he’s made that have contributed to the loss of 2,500 lives, he’s upset with the media for not being more upbeat about the fresh corpses coming in every day draped in U.S. flags. You see, everything is going according to plan, and those cars you see burning everyday because they just exploded and killed a bunch of Iraqi men, women, and children? Purely imaginary.
62 Responses to “A Stupid Man Talks”
Jennifer Aniston Reportedly Pregnant With Twins
PHOTOS: Tamara Ecclestone At The Langham Hotel
Red Front? “Center For American Freedom” Logo Echoes Communist Style
Romney Calls For Defunding Planned Parenthood, Wife Was A Donor
GOP Fundraising Email Asks Supporters To “Knock Out” Obama
Romney Comes Up Limp In Nevada
Obama Opens Lead On Romney In New Poll
What Time Is Super Bowl 2012 (Super Bowl XLVI)?
Latest Entries
Why Do Liberals Support Drone Strikes?
Weekly Standard Rolls Out The Iraq Argument For Iran
Equal Polarization, My Ass
Some Crazy Stuff That Happened In World War II
Maryland Republican Campaign Funds Used To Defend Voter Suppression
The Obama Jobs Record In One Graph
Martin O’Malley All In For Marriage Equality
Newt Gingrich, Filled With More Excrement Than Your Average Politician
New Year, Powerline Still Stupid
Thanks Again
Meta
Blogroll
Disclaimer
The views on this site are mine and mine alone, and do not reflect the views of my employer, Media Matters for America
© 2000-2011 Oliver Willis
Hmm. So you think Rummy is ‘stupid”. Went to Princeton on academic and NROTC scholarships. Navy pilot. Distinguished career in government and CEO of two Fortune 500 companies.
As to your would-be point: Rummy says the media exaggerated. Here’s what the general in the field said:
“On Friday, Casey said the military had confirmed about 30 mosque attacks and about 350 civilian deaths. CNN and other media outlets, citing local officials, have reported more than 100 mosque attacks and at least 500 deaths during the same time.”
That would be the same-said CNN that hired Jordan Eason and then saw him resign in disgrace over Iraq and the same CNN that admitted curtailing its reporting in Iraq to maintain a presence there.
Dugger Reports, You Decide
Actually, if you bother to read the article you link to, it notes that he points out that the situation has been exaggerated, much like what General Pace and some actual journalists have previously pointed out. He did not deny that it has been a tough stretch, but pointed out that the reporting has been somewhat hyperbolic.
All that good stuff is imaginary….cause nobody takes pictures of it, or writes stories about it…
Naa, the imaginary part is that their are kids going to new schools, clean water, electricity and an ability for young women to go wandering around without Uday decding to pick them up for a “date”.
In a country with Iraq’s recent history, the size of california I would say the rate of violence is about as expected.
Did you know that over 30,000 people were killed in France….AFTER the liberation? I’d say we are doing a pretty good job….
Pedro –
Would you care to provide a link to back up your claim about post-Liberation France?
JD –
Yes, JD, the American media was exaggerating because it’s a tool of Al-Qaeda (although Rumsfeld can’t prove it, he knows it in his gut) but the Pentagon is giving us the straight story because it has nothing to hide and no agenda of its own. JD, Rumsfled is lying to you.
It was officials at Baghdad’s main morgue which reported that 1300 people had been killed in sectarian violence after the bombing of the shrine, not some al-Qaeda media cell. Would you or Donald Rumsfeld care to explain why these officials of the new Iraqi government would lie? Which side do you think the morgue officials are on?
Or maybe you would care to explain which side the Iraqi police are on. Afterall, according to the Washington Post, the Statistics Department of the Iraqi police put the nationwide toll at 1,020 since the shrine bombing — although the hated WaPo goes on to explain that this number may be high due to hold ups in paper work, that is, some of the reported violent deaths may have occurred the week before. How comforting.
Of course the only reason why these official government organizations released these figures was because the US military and individual Iraqi officials were claiming that the violence was being exaggerated. Yes, friends, these specific numbers came out AFTER the US military claimed that the media was exagerrating the violence. From the WaPo:
“The disclosure of the death tolls followed accusations by the U.S. military and later Iraqi officials that the news media had exaggerated the violence between Shiites and Sunnis over the past few days.”
Again, the higher numbers didn’t come from some Al-Qaeda “media cell,” they came from the officials in charge of the Baghdad morgue and the Iraqi police who were trying to set the record straight AFTER the US military stepped in to muddy the waters. Apparently some people in Iraq actually care more about their country than saving face for Bush and Rumsfeld. Of course here in the states it’s all about CBA, Covering Bush’s Ass.
The New York Post’s Ralp Peters wrote, in a column I’m sured you lapped up like a good Bush puppy:
“A few days ago, a wild claim that the Baghdad morgue held 1,300 bodies was treated as Gospel truth. Yet Iraqis exaggerate madly and often have partisan interests. Did any Western reporter go to that morgue and count the bodies – a rough count would have done it – before telling the world the news? I doubt it.”
A wild claim? It was made by morgue officials. Furthermore, WaPo reporters Ellen Knickmeyer and Bassam Sebti DID VISIT THE MORGUE and provided this lovely first hand description:
“Hundreds of unclaimed dead lay at the morgue at midday Monday — blood-caked men who had been shot, knifed, garroted or apparently suffocated by the plastic bags still over their heads. Many of the bodies were sprawled with their hands still bound — and many of them had wound up at the morgue after what their families said was their abduction by the Mahdi Army, the Shiite militia of cleric Moqtada al-Sadr.”
We can agree that exact figures are hard to pin down in situations like this but you can bet that the truth lies somewhere in the middle between 1300 and the 350 Rumsfeld claims occurred which is not a pretty picture at all. Does 650 deaths from sectarian violence in just a few days sound like things are getting better in Iraq?
The WaPo article
“That would be the same-said CNN that hired Jordan Eason and then saw him resign in disgrace over Iraq and the same CNN that admitted curtailing its reporting in Iraq to maintain a presence there.”
This would be the same Donald Rumsfeld who planned and executed the invasion of Iraq and who, in the early days of the post-invasion period, completely dismissed the first signs of the insurgency as a little “untidiness”? Idiots.
Rumsfeld accuses the media of treason:
So according to Rumsfeld, the problem isn’t that the fight is going badly. It’s that the free press won’t stick to the facts the military is willing to confirm. Therefore, they must be on the other side.
I know it’s been a gradual slide that’s brought us to this point, but aren’t you wingnuts ready to say he’s gone too far?
Dugger tells us that Quaker is making a leap of logic to infer that Rumsfeld is accusing the media of treason. According to the article Rumsfeld went on to say that:
“the terrorist group al Qaeda ‘has media committees’ and tutors people on how to “manipulate” news organizations. ‘Now I can’t take a string and tie it to a news report and then trace it back to an al Qaeda media committee meeting. I’m not able to do that at all,’ he said ‘We do know that their goal is to try to break the will.’ ”
So Rumsfeld has no evidence whatsoever that the media is getting its reports of casualties from Al-Qaeda but he feels free to infer a connection anyway based solely on his “gut.”
Dugger and Rumsfeld must share a small intestine. At the very least, they’re both asses.
Quaker,
I can’t speak for your wingnuts, but the “therefore” portion of your post is represents your own little leap of ‘logic’. I believe,as I suspect Rummy does, that the overall foreign and domestic media generally exaggerates our woes and de-emphasize our successes in Iraq and elsewhere. And I believe that tendency is greater under conservative and Republican Admins. Must I withhold that judgment because you and/or the left thinks its tantamount to accusing them of treachery. I tend to believe, by and large, that they are hard core, left-wing biased incompetents, whose screwed -up reporting often gives comfort to the enemy. That ain’t good, but that ain’t treason.
Dugger
Oops, another one of those “al Queda media committees” just reported on how ‘wonderful’ things are going in Iraq…
“In its annual report on human rights abuses worldwide, the U.S. State Department said reports increased in 2005 of killings by the U.S.-backed Iraqi government or its agents and members of sectarian militias dominated many police units.
“Police abuses included threats, intimidation, beatings, and suspension by the arms or legs, as well as the reported use of electric drills and cords and the application of electric shocks,” the State Department said of Iraqi human rights three years after U.S. troops invaded…”
The U.S. State Department…??!
Must not have gotten Rummy’s memo…
Either that or they too have gone over to ‘the dark-side’…
My reference should have been post war europe, rather than france alone I suspect. Here is the reference however.
And my point stands that we continue to do a pretty good job helping to keep a lid on things, in spite of the lefty outrage.
http://www.fsmitha.com/h2/ch23set.htm
I love it when our proof is that things DIDN’T happpen. We’re doing great in Iraq because it could be worse, Bush is great because Chicago hasn’t disappeared, Bin Laden is on the ropes because we haven’t seen him…
Meanwhile, what we are actually seeing is denounced as propaganda and lies. *Sigh*
Quoted from the article:Rumsfeld said the United States had fewer troops in Iraq — 132,000 — than during the December elections and noted that future reductions will depend on the level of violence.
Interesting that this statement contradicts what Gen. Pace said on Meet the Press sunday when he told Russert that the military wants to keep a force of 130,000 troops on the ground in Iraq, but presently only have 126,000.
Gee, is it possible that the figures provided by the Pentagon may just be , oh, I don’t know, exaggerated on the low side to make things look rosier than they are?
Just a thought.
“I believe,as I suspect Rummy does, that the overall foreign and domestic media generally exaggerates our woes and de-emphasize our successes in Iraq and elsewhere.”
The media did not make up the casualty figures it reported in the aftermath of the shrine bombing. The WaPo article linked to above cites both the Baghdad morgue and the Iraqi Police Department as sources for the figures it reported. Rumsfeld says he can’t tie a string from media report to al-Qaeda but decides nevertheless to infer a link anyway — even in the face of ACTUAL, REPORTED connections between media reports and legitimate sources of infomration, namely, departments of the Iraqi government, itself.
And good point Duros.
Dugger,
Leap of logic?
Heck, maybe I’m reading Rummy all wrong. What would you figureis the point of Rumsfeld’s observation that all the exaggerations seem to fall in just one direction?
If there’s a rational interpretation of his observation that doesn’t suggest a willful intent to “give heart to the terrorists and to discourage those who hope for success,” it escapes me.
Yea Madcap, it is a common theme.
As soon as an open society and government is set up, all sorts of bad things come out.
You see, when Saddam was in power, they didn’t actually try to DOCUMENT their attrocities and arrest the people who did them. This is actually the difference between our democracy and a dictatorship.
People like Amnesty International didn’t actually go prowling around Saddams prisons…they wanted to live to see their kids grow up.
And Leroy, most of the rational world understands that you and your ilk wouldn’t EVER be satisfied, or think we were doing a good job while Bush is in power….this inspite of the fact that this has been the fastest “war” with the least amount of casualties, military and civilian, in the history of the world. Literally, the benchmark. Things could have been done better, but you know, when you are number 1, you shouldn’t have to kick yourself TOO hard.
So I, like the rest of the rational world, ignore you and your comments as not being serious, but simply partisan mewling….
“My reference should have been post war europe, rather than france alone I suspect.”
Gee Pedro, you wouldn’t have been exagerating to prove your point would you? What a hypocritical idiot.
Setting that aside, let’s look at your source, follow your logic and see how were doing in Iraq.
Your source says: “According to rough estimates, the French Resistance killed 2500 people between the autumn of 1943 and June 6, 1945.”
Well that’s a far cry from 30,000. But even then, how many of those people were killed before France was fully liberated in the fall of 1944? The source doesn’t say because the source can’t say. The Resistance could have taken hundreds, if not thousands of reprisals, in the year between the fall of 1943 and the fall of 1944 when the Allies finally had control of the whole country. On that level the whole comparison between post-liberation France and post-invasion Iraq is total hogwash.
A closer comparison might have been Yugoslavia which your source suggest saw 20 to 30 thousand people killed in awave of post-war violence. The comparison, however, is still hogwash when one realizes that this wave of violence was carried out largely on behalf of and at the behest of Yugoslavia’s newly appointed Communist government.
Second, according to this statistic the French Resistance killed 2500 people in about a year and a half. Estimates on the number of Iraqi dead after the recent shrine bombing range from 350 to 1300 in less than a week — and this is possible after three years of occupation! Ya, we’re doing a hell of a job, Brownie.
Finally, are you even sure you want go down this road of comparing post-war Europe to post-war Iraq? First of all it kind of undermines the Right’s whole “Islam is to blame” bullshit when it’s pretty clear that Christian Europe is just as liable to engage in violent retribution. And then there’s the whole question of retribution itself: The French resistance were executing those they suspected of collaborating with an occupying power. Are you condmening the French and Yugoslavian resistance movements for protecting their country against an occupying power?
They also used to have a guy named Eason Jordan. What a coincidence! I wonder if they got each other’s mail by mistake.
“what we are actually seeing is denounced as propaganda and lies”
Also known as the Chicolini Defense: “Who are you gonna believe? Me or your own eyes?”–Chico Marx as Chicolini in Duck Soup
Well, yes, Eason Jordan.
Well, yes, leap of logic. Again the errors seem (to us) to fall mostly on one side – a side that shows us in a worse light. I agree with Rummy. Don’t agree with you that the imputation is treason. I catch everything reflexively with my right hand. Its not a conscious decison but its consistent. The motive part is you, not Rummy, not me.
Hey and the truth is that criticism can give aid and comfort to the enemy. That need not be treason. Need not even be wrong. But it should lead to caution when criticizing during a war (like no Nazi metaphors for US troops!).
Dugger
“Again the errors seem (to us) to fall mostly on one side – a side that shows us in a worse light.”
I’m sorry Dugger could you actually point to some of these errors? All you and Rummy have now are the US military reporting lower casualty numbers than the Baghdad morgue and the Iraqi police. Essential Rumsfeld is saying, believe our numbers and not theirs. But where is the error?
When everyone is reporting higher casualty numbers than the US military does your brain even contemplate the possibility that the US military has its own agenda in downplaying the numbers? No, probably not.
And let’s get one thing straight, writing about the facts as presented is not criticism. It’s reporting. How is it that reporting the numbers provided by officials at the Baghdad morgue constitutes criticisizing the war?
This wasn t retribution against collaborators
http://mondediplo.com/2005/05/14algeria
This wasn’t retribution against collaborators
http://mondediplo.com/2005/05/14algeria
And this is a Civil War, that’s bloodier than Iraq’s media contrived Civil War, and the Media isn’y covering it because it’s a by product of Clinton’s Kosovo / Bosnia Lewinsky Diversion:
http://www.renewamerica.us/columns/mostert/060226
And this is a Civil War, that s bloodier than Iraq s media contrived Civil War, and the Media isn t covering it because it s a by product of Clinton s Kosovo / Bosnia Lewinsky Diversion:
http://www.renewamerica.us/columns/mostert/060226
Frank,um, you’re a total idiot. The figure cited above from the source provided by Pedro relates entirely to revenge killings carried out by the French Resistance in Europe. And again, I’m not sure you want bring France’s experience in Algeria into this, although the Pentagon reportedly screened the Battle of Algers at the outset of the insurgency in Iraq. Clearly, they shut the projector off before the final reel.
Hunh? Let’s rewind the tape and check what Rummy said again:
We’ll take this slowly. The errors are not random. There has been a stready stream of errors. All of these non-random errors give heart to the terrorists. All of these non-random errors discourage those who want success in Iraq.
BUT…in DuggerWorld, Rummy does NOT impute any motive to the people who make a steady stream of non-random errors that give heart to terrorists?
You should be so forgiving of Mr. Durbin.
My comment on the churches is pending moderation and Frank, you’re an idiot not because you misidentified the nature of the killings you referred to but because the whole link was totally and utterly irrelevant to the dicussion at hand.
Gee, Frameone, I missed being called an idiot by you. What has it been, 5 days? You’ll notice (or not, that’s up to you, my rabid adversary) that I wrote “This wasn t retribution against collaborators,” because it was a case of post war killings, not associated with retribution against collaborators. Even an idiot can figure that out.
But, of course, calling me an idiot is so much fun that you’re most likely unaware that you’re acting like one.
Oh yes, no comment on the Balkan Bungle, eh? I forgot… That was a Democratic f*ck up. We don’t talk about those, right?
“this is a Civil War, that s bloodier than Iraq s media contrived Civil War”
I’m getting a little sick and tired of Right wing whiners suggesting that their own inability to find a story about something in the paper suggests that the left wing media isn’t interested in covering it because of some anti-Christian bias. If you can’t read a damn newspaper, why is that my problem?
From Frank’s source:
“the bombing of more than 150 Serbian Christian Churches and monasteries in Kosovo by Albanian Muslims didn’t even make it to the back pages of most American and European newspapers?”
April 3, 2004 NY Times page 9:
“Treasured Churches in a Cycle of Revenge”
http://select.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.html?res=FB0F14FA385D0C708CDDAD0894DC404482
Total idiots.
I feel much better now. I’m sure you do, too.
“Media contrived civil war”?
What would constitute a genuine civil war?
cleo: one that isn’t media – contrived.
Oh, yes you feound a reference from 2004. That does it for me.
Ass.
And, incidentally, just how “utterly and totally relevant” is it to call another commenter an idiot in nearly three – quarters of your posts, eh, tough guy?
I agree with Mr Rumsfeld. If not for the media the US would have finished its job in Iraq, there would be no insurgency, no sectarian violence, no car bombs, IEDs, a major Baghdad street would be named Bush Boulevard. . . and pigs would fly.
Oh god Frank, don’t tell me you’re really that fucking stupid. One news story from 2004? You moron, that’s the exact incident the woman you cited is talking about:
“In 2004, under the watchful eyes of NATO troops, from March 17-20, Albanian Muslims totally destroyed or badly vandalized 30 Christian Churches in Kosovo.”
total idiot.
Hey look Frank the NY Times ran two articles on the 2004 incident cited by your source:
The New York Times
March 31, 2004 Wednesday
Late Edition – Final
SECTION: Section A; Column 1; Editorial Desk; Pg. 22
LENGTH: 449 words
HEADLINE: The Balkans Flare Up
BODY: As if the world needs a reminder of how hard it is for occupying outsiders to build a nation, Kosovo exploded this month. Five years after a NATO bombing campaign put an end to atrocities by ethnic Serbs against ethnic Albanians there, Albanian mobs burned Serb-owned houses to the ground. It’s yet another distressing instance in which victims of ethnic cleansing have resorted to the same horrific type of violence.
Kosovo, a province of Serbia that has been under international protection since the war, is a tinderbox even by the exacting standards of the Balkans. For years, Serbia’s dictator, Slobodan Milosevic, crushed the region, which is largely ethnic Albanian. Now Kosovo is a ward of the international community, governed by a United Nations mission alongside local administrators and policed by NATO. The Albanian majority is increasingly eager to take full control. Ethnic Serbs, about 10 percent of the population, and Gypsies are vulnerable to the whims of the Albanian majority.
The violence began earlier this month after three Albanian boys drowned in a river. A boy who survived said his friends had been chased to their deaths by a gang of Serbs. The story has not been confirmed, but it set off riots in Kosovo. Albanian mobs looted and burned Serbian villages, burned Orthodox churches and monasteries, and attacked property belonging to NATO and U.N. troops. About two dozen people died, and around 850 were hurt.
You know, the source that wrote it “didn t even make it to the back pages of most American and European newspapers?
“incidentally, just how utterly and totally relevant is it to call another commenter an idiot in nearly three – quarters of your posts”
Judging from your belief system, it’s clear that you can only learn through rote repetition. One of these days you just may stop to think and realize, that, yes, indeed, you are an idiot and then the healing will begin.
cleo: one that isn t media – contrived.
A contrived answer.
Quaker,
“BUT& in DuggerWorld, Rummy does NOT impute any motive to the people who make a steady stream of non-random errors that give heart to terrorists?’
I think your own preconceptions re Rummy are prejudicing your judgment. He does not say treason. You are saying “if he says this, then he must mean this (because you know how all those ‘treason accusin’ Rs think)”.
I can’t read his mind, neither can you.
I feel the same as he says and I believe the reason is bias – a pervasive and common bias within Big Media. That would explain the consistency (lack of randomness) of the problem.
Dugger, “And now the Great Quakerino will read your mind. May be have a volunteer from the audience. Your name , sir? Rummy, was it? Read mind. Read mind. (Rummy: GD press bias!!!! GD press bias!!!). Ahh, the great Quakerino sees that you believe the media is treasonous. Thank you. Thank you. I’ll be here all week.”
How many died?—–Rummy lied.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/03/08/AR2006030802692.html?nav=rss_email/components
Frame as usual misses the point.
All those killings in post wwII didn’t make the war a “failure”, anymore than the current terrorist actions in Iraq make that action a failure.
When mob violence has it’s way
And the militias rule
There is no safety net, save the fantasy of a fool.
If the rule of law holds little or no sway
The body count in dispute, like a basketball score
makes the Grandstand descend into Civil War
frameone: If arrogance were pennies, you’d be a billionaire. I know you think I deserve your contempt, but it’s getting real old, your fake justifications for it are lame, and, if anybody needs a “wakeup call”, it’s you: You’re just a nasty, hate – filled individual, who must (the evidence is glaring) view the world as dark, and filled with dangerous people – a frightening place, at best; a nightmare, at worst.
Your sullenness and bursts of hostility are obvious signs that there is something wrong with you. And you are right about one, and only one, thing — I mght change someday.
Unfortunately, you won’t.
“All those killings in post wwII didn t make the war a failure , anymore than
the current terrorist actions in Iraq make that action a failure.”
Pedro, I think it’s you who’ve missed the point. The acts of retaliation you referred to in post-war France were directed at defeated Nazis and those that collaborated with them. They were not directed at the Allied occupying armies.
In Iraq, the violence is directed at occupation troops by the same enemy we were fighting when we first invaded: Sadaam loyalists and deposed Sunnis. Only they have the additional assistance of crazy jihadists coming in from outside the country. There’s absolutely no comparison between post-WWII Europe and post-invasion Iraq, unless it’s a negative one.
Whuh?
Rummy says: “They give heart to the terrorists.”
Rummy says: “They discourage those who hope for our success.”
But Rummy isn’t calling it treason?
As I said, you should be so willing to give Mr. Durbin the benefit of so many doubts.
Why would Al Qaeda want to undermine our commitment to armed occupation of Iraq? Other than Bush and his lickers, I’d have to put bin Laden as the next happiest person to have our army grinding itself down in Iraq. It helps Al Qaeda with recruitment, training, funding, publicity, takes away US anti-terrorism resources, gives them Americans to shoot at, etc etc etc.
“If arrogance were pennies …”
Frank, give it a rest. You cited a source who claimed that the Western and European media completely ignored the destruction of Orthodox Christian churches in Kosovo. She then put this down to anti-Christian bias. You blindly accepted this wild generalization even though it’s ludicrous on its face. I went to the NY Times website and found two articles about the very same incident in 2004 that she cites an example of an overlooked desecration. It wasn’t overlooked. The New York Times covered it. Your source is either lying or stupid and yet you cite her in an attempt to make the exact the same point: That the Western media cares more about Muslim mosques than Christian churches.
Let’s talk about arrogance Frank:
“Oh yes, no comment on the Balkan Bungle, eh? I forgot& That was a Democratic f*ck up. We don t talk about those, right?”
No Frank, we do talk about Democratic fuck ups. But we talk about them in a reasonable manner and don’t muddy the waters with irrationality, stupidity and outright dishonesty. Your source was counting on your gullibility and stupidity. Not only did she succeed in duping you, she succeeded in getting you to pass her mendacity on as fact. You do this again and again in your posts when just a little fact checking would save you from embarassing yourself. But for all the scorn you heap on the liberals here, you regular give proof here that you desperately, desperately want to believe the lies you are fed. When confronted with the facts you dig in your heels and spit:
“Oh, yes you feound a reference from 2004. That does it for me. Ass.”
But Frank, that did indeed do it for you. You had no argument after that which is born out in the fact that you have yet to actually defend your original assertion. You’ve just been attacking my for pointing how gullible and stupid you are. Now if you want to get back a discussion, so-called, please tell me how your sources thesis still holds any water. Here’s what you wrote, aping her argument:
“And this is a Civil War, that s bloodier than Iraq s media contrived Civil War, and the Media isn t covering it because it s a by product of Clinton s Kosovo / Bosnia Lewinsky Diversion”
But Frank, the media did cover it and I gave you two examples from the most important paper in the country. Do I have to go and find more?
“I feel the same as he says and I believe the reason is bias – a pervasive and common bias within Big Media. That would explain the consistency (lack of randomness) of the problem.”
Holy god. Dugger, do you know what else would explain the consistency of “the problem”: THE MEDIA IS REPORTING THE TRUTH. You remember the truth don’t you? It’s closely tied to REALITY. You guys are just gone, totally gone.
It also keeps them locked up in Iraq, not wandering the streets of NYC shooting at unarmed, un body-armored civilians….
Quaker,
“Rummy says: They give heart to the terrorists.
Rummy says: They discourage those who hope for our success.
But Rummy isn t calling it treason?”
All (possibly) true and not treason.
Dugger (You assume intent of a certain kind)
Bands of terrorists roaming the streets of NYC? Say, you are delusional, aren’t you?
Are you saying that we’re using our soldiers to chum the waters?
Nice.
Oh my god Dr Pedro! You must be right, it explains so much. Our troops are over in Iraq with targets on their backs so the terrorists can attack them there instead of here! Genius.
That must be why:
They don’t have proper armor, without the ability to kill our soldiers, terrorists would soon lose interest and book flights for NY.
There aren’t enough troops to maintain order, again, booking flights comes to mind.
And it goes on! When we torture the citizens of Iraq in prisons like Abu Ghraib, we do it to incite the terrorists so they’ll be mad enough to want to kill our soldiers over there, instead of getting bored and sneaking over the border from mexico.
Nice theory, Dr Doper, nice “support” of the troops.
“It also keeps them locked up in Iraq, not wandering the streets of NYC shooting at unarmed, un body-armored civilians& .”
I’ve always loved this bit. Which is it guys? Are we there to liberate Iraq or turn it into a permanent warzone so we can “draw out” all the bad guys?
I guess in Pedro’s view it’s better that innocent Iraqis die than innocent Americans. Because, you know, all life is precious, it’s just that some life if more precious than others.
Army Guys: Mr. Secretary, we don’t have enough troops to seize and guard ammo dumps and weapons caches; and still push on to Baghdad.
Rumsfeld: Leave those ammo dumps alone guys, we need terrorists to seize those weapons or the invasion is all for naught. If the terrorists can only throw flowers like we keep saying will happen, they’ll lose heart and fly to Ohio. Gentlemen, those terrorists must be armed to the teeth or my brilliant plan of “kill our soldiers there, not our civilians here” will work.
Army Guys: this war will cost us billions of dollars, why don’t we just pour some of that into beefing up domestic security?
Rumsfeld: It’s just brilliant! I tell you!
Sheesh, Dugger, that’s some top-notch equivocating, that is.
“They’re giving heart to the terrorists and discouraging those who hope for our success, and it’s not just an accident either.”
But he didn’t actuall let slip the “T” word, so he might not have been implying treason?
If you say so.
Speaking of idiot-speak and DuggerWorld, here is a great quote and observation about Our Leader from Digby’s site:
why does Bush always sound like he’s talking to five year olds?
“He speaks to the audience as if they’re idiots. I think the reason he does that is because that’s the way these issues were explained to him.” – Graydon Carter
The funny thing is that he sounds irritated too. It has always puzzled me why he seems so inappropriately impatient in his town meetings, as if his rapt audience needs some sort of time-wasting remedial education before he can get to the subject, which he never does. (“See — social security is a program for older people. Older people like ta retire. When you retire you don’t work. When you don’t work you don’t earn money. That’s the problem.”)
Again, he’s just parroting his own tutorial.
Qauker,
Where did he say this?:
They re giving heart to the terrorists and discouraging those who hope for our success, and it s not just an accident either.
I don’t see it. He said this:
“Interestingly, all of the exaggerations seem to be on one side,” he said. “It isn’t as though there simply have been a series of random errors on both sides of issues. On the contrary, the steady stream of errors all seem to be of a nature to inflame the situation and to give heart to the terrorists and to discourage those who hope for success in Iraq.”
Thats different (obviously) from your quote.
Dugger
Sorry. Paraphrasing.
Quaker: “They re giving heart to the terrorists”
Rummy: “the steady stream of errors all seem to be of a nature to inflame the situation and to give heart to the terrorists”
Quaker: “and discouraging those who hope for our success”
Rummy: “and to discourage those who hope for success in Iraq”
Quaker: “and it s not just an accident either”
Rummy: “It isn t as though there simply have been a series of random errors on both sides of issues”
Yes, yes, I know. You’re willing to pretend that these are casual observations and that Rummy wasn’t questioning anyone’s motives.
No biggie. It did give me a start, however, as using your paraphrase, I thought you had a better case. Then I re-read …etc.
Dugger (And yes, I am willing to ‘pretend’ he meant no more than he said)
Dugger what errors are you talking about? What errors is he talking about? To report different numbers given by valid sources other than the US military is not an error.