Rumsfeld Speech?


Diabloii.Net Member
Nope, its the one where he apparently accuses those who criticise the Bush Administration of appeasement by comparing opposition to the so-called appeasement of Hitler by Churchill. Olbermann's opinion is that he is seeking to undermine democratic descent, echoing in Olbermann's view McCarthyism-style doctrine, and exhibits fascist technique in the way he is portraying 'the enemy', not in this case terrorists but rather Liberal opposition.

It's interesting, but more than a little melodramatic.

Road Ratt

Diabloii.Net Member
Your right to free speech, to have an independant thought of your own, to question the administration = you being an appeaser, a fascist sympathizer, an enemy of the state, etc., How democratic of him! :rolleyes:

To whom it may concern,

It was with much interest I watched the secretary’s speech. While some of the points made by Mr. Rumsfeld were indeed salient, I felt many were misplaced. The secretary seems to feel that to question the administration’s tactics or policies is tantamount to appeasement of terrorists. This is not true. Mr. Rumsfeld also seems to believe all action amounts to progress. This is also not true. Every American feels strongly that terrorism must be fought bravely and intelligently. The reality is that if we’re missing one of these elements it plays into the terrorists hands. If I’m being charitable, I would say the Bush administration executes its policies with only one of these attributes.

A majority of the nation feels the war in Iraq was a mistake. They also fail to see the connection between Iraq and the general war on terror. When Mr. Rumsfeld chooses to insult and belittle the people who he supposedly has been appointed to protect and serve he does himself and the nation a disservice. Contrary opinions in an open society must be tolerated and considered, not condemned and disregarded out of hand. Furthermore, as many distinguished military leaders have also questioned Mr. Rumfeld’s decisions he insults the institution which is charged with carrying out his orders. I fail to see how that can be considered anything but counterproductive.

Instead of making speeches that lash out at his critics, Mr. Rumsfeld should instead be spending his time formulating a plan for a successful conclusion to the war in Iraq. Before the war started, he stated plainly he didn’t expect it to ‘last six months.’ He also stated they ‘knew where the weapons were.’ It was nearly three years ago that this predicted timeline expired. No weapons of mass destruction were ever found. For those reasons alone the secretary is in no position to answer his critics with charges of “intellectual confusion†or that we “have still not learned history’s lessons.†From what we’ve seen of his tenure, those charges more appropriately should be leveled at the secretary himself.


- Roger Hall


His calling you an appeaser is free speech as well. :)

However, he is an idiot who should be fired immediately.


Diabloii.Net Member
1) He can't pronounce "omniscience"

2) I immediately tune out when people say "if only we had a Winston Churchill around today"

I'll post again when I have the time to read Rumsfeld's original speech.


LonghornRob said:
Keith Olbermann was awesome on Sportscenter.

What?! He was!
Ugh. He was annoying on SC, he's annoying on The Dan Patrick Show, and he's annoying on Countdown!