ARE YOU NEW HERE? NOT LOGGED IN? PLEASE TAKE A MOMENT TO REGISTER FOR AN ACCOUNT AND LOGIN TO REMOVE THIS WINDOW
Welcome to PatsFans.com. Do you have an account? If not - please take a moment to register for our forum and experience a much smoother experience with fewer ads, along with no longer having to see this notification window. Also learn about how you can receive a free Patriots T-Shirt from the Patriots Official ProShop by CLICKING HERE. Please enjoy your stay here, and Go Pats!
MSNBC: Audio of Rumsfeld on Iraq creates buzz
Audio of luncheon with media military analysts posted on Newsvine http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/24629509/
WAIT what !!!? , this isn't Huffington , it is MSNBC , hmmmm msnbc must be a terrorist news service like Huffington .
DONATE TO PATSFANS.COM
RECEIVE A FREE PATS T-SHIRT AND SAVE 15% OFF WHEN YOU BUY FROM THE OFFICIAL PROSHOP!
Free T-Shirt & Save 15% Off!
Like Our Site? Please help support our site and server costs by DONATING TO PATSFANS.COM and receive a FREE PATRIOTS T-SHIRT and SAVE 15% off EVERY purchase you make from PatriotsProShop.com. You'll also receive added benefits to your account including Removing All Ads During Your Experience Here At Our Forum.
NEEDED YEARLY SITE DONATIONS: 345 | CURRENT # OF SUBSCRIBED SUPPORTERS: 98
Rumsfeld suggests that the American public lacked the "maturity" to understand that the nation remained under threat from terrorists and that the only "correction" would be another attack on the U.S.
Yes, of course, flight instructor, Nixon-disciple, chicken hawk guy... We lack the "maturity" to understand.
So let's advocate a new attack over tea with the very bloodhounds we'll be sending out to the various media outlets with our massaged message.
Anyhow, there's nothing to see here. It's all a "lie," and you just don't understand the "context."
Last edited by PressCoverage; 05-14-2008 at 11:31 PM..
Rumsfeld suggests that the American public lacked the "maturity" to understand that the nation remained under threat from terrorists and that the only "correction" would be another attack on the U.S.
Yes, of course, flight instructor, Nixon-disciple, chicken hawk guy... We lack the "maturity" to understand.
So let's advocate a new attack over tea with the very bloodhounds we'll be sending out to the various media outlets with our massaged message.
Anyhow, there's nothing to see here. It's all a "lie," and you just don't understand the "context."
Well, I understand you can read it either way, though you have to admit the more likely explanation of his words is that people have become lax about security because there hasn't been another attack, rather than actually advocating another attack.
Well, I understand you can read it either way, though you have to admit the more likely explanation of his words is that people have become lax about security because there hasn't been another attack, rather than actually advocating another attack.
depends on what your agenda is when you read it. I agree with your position though, most normal people would, even if you think Rumfield is a dope (and I do).
Well, I understand you can read it either way, though you have to admit the more likely explanation of his words is that people have become lax about security because there hasn't been another attack, rather than actually advocating another attack.
Really? How how have we become 'lax,' exactly? By voting Democrats into office in '06? Or do you just mean we're 'lax' because we've all become skeptical as one lie after another has been revealed? Is that your definition of lax? Dissent is 'lax?'
I would urgew all to listen to the entire talk, it sounds like it occured after the 2006 eection a going away brundh for rummy. Lots of interesting stugg there. The buzz is from clueless libs who will try to spin the quote totally out of context. the whole session is worth a listen. It raised my opinion of rummy.
__________________
"Some guys play in all-star games, some guys don't. I don't know who picks all those all-star teams. In all honesty, I don't know who picks the combine, for that matter," Belichick said. "How does (Miami-Ohio offensive lineman Brandon) Brooks not get invited to the combine? How did Vollmer not get invited to the combine? I don't know. We can't really worry about that. We just have to try to evaluate them the best we can."
Really? How how have we become 'lax,' exactly? By voting Democrats into office in '06? Or do you just mean we're 'lax' because we've all become skeptical as one lie after another has been revealed? Is that your definition of lax? Dissent is 'lax?'
That's excellent.
No no, not at all, I didn't mean it with respect to voting Dems in or anything like that (though now going back and reading it I can see how you might have thought that's what I was talking about). All I meant was that since it has (thankfully) been so long since 9/11 people have become inured to all the talk about national security and homeland defense. Citizens have become lax in that their focus is on other issues that in my opinion are not as important as security. I would say that I do think that lawmakers have become lax as well because they're talking about undoing the measures that were taken after 9/11, like the Patriot act, use of FISA courts etc. (And I understand that this is MY opinion here, I know many people see those things as unnecessary intrusions on our civil liberties and that's a valid viewpoint) My feeling is though that reversing what has worked (how well we can't really be sure I suppose) is a dangerous thing to do. Both lawmakers and citizens continue to ignore other huge problems with our security that aren't as controversial as say a preemptive foreign policy, like better security at our ports and rails, and better border monitoring. Anyway, should have been more specific in my previous post, but again I'm definitely not equating voting Dems into office with being lax. Same goes for questioning intelligence info from an administration that has certainly earned the lack of trust.
depends on what your agenda is when you read it. I agree with your position though, most normal people would, even if you think Rumfield is a dope (and I do).
I'm with you on Rummy, not a big fan, but you're right, even though he's done a lot of damage to our military and world standing I still think of him as a guy that at the end of the day wants the best for our country. I can't see a guy who's devoted his life to public service rooting for another attack that kills innocent Americans, and that does affect how I interpret what he said.
Rumsfeld suggests that the American public lacked the "maturity" to understand that the nation remained under threat from terrorists and that the only "correction" would be another attack on the U.S.
Yes, of course, flight instructor, Nixon-disciple, chicken hawk guy... We lack the "maturity" to understand.
So let's advocate a new attack over tea with the very bloodhounds we'll be sending out to the various media outlets with our massaged message.
Anyhow, there's nothing to see here. It's all a "lie," and you just don't understand the "context."
You know, it gets a little tiresome, this song of yours. Rumsfeld may well have been wrong about Iraq--but "chicken hawk guy"? Come one...this from wikipedia:
Quote:
Military service
Rumsfeld served in the U.S. Navy from 1954 to 1957 as a naval aviator and flight instructor. His initial training was in the North American SNJ Texan basic trainer after which he transitioned to flying the Grumman F9F Panther fighter. In 1957, he transferred to the Naval Reserve and continued his naval service in flying and administrative assignments as a drilling reservist until 1975. He transferred to the Individual Ready Reserve when he became Secretary of Defense in 1975 and retired with the rank of Captain in 1989."[11]
Yeah...Chickenhawk. One way or another he was in the military for 30 plus years.
__________________ Questions are a burden
and answers a prison
for oneself.
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
MSNBC: Audio of Rumsfeld on Iraq creates buzz
Linear Mode
