Conservative Bastion
The only blog that can factually claim to shift the Bell Curve, along with the hearts & minds of America, to the right.
Wednesday, August 30, 2006
Rumsfeld Speech
The following is a speech by Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld. He was addressing the 88th Annual American Legion National Convention Salt Lake City, Utah on August 29, 2006.

Indeed, in the decades before World War II, a great many argued that the fascist threat was exaggerated or that it was someone else's problem. Some nations tried to negotiate a separate peace, even as the enemy made its deadly ambitions crystal clear. It was, as Winston Churchill observed, a bit like feeding a crocodile, hoping it would eat you last.

There was a strange innocence about the world. Someone recently recalled one U.S. senator's reaction in September of 1939 upon hearing that Hitler had invaded Poland to start World War II. He exclaimed:

“Lord, if only I had talked to Hitler, all of this might have been avoided!”

I recount that history because once again we face similar challenges in efforts to confront the rising threat of a new type of fascism. Today -- another enemy, a different kind of enemy -- has made clear its intentions with attacks in places like New York and Washington, D.C., Bali, London, Madrid, Moscow and so many other places. But some seem not to have learned history's lessons.

We need to consider the following questions, I would submit:
  • With the growing lethality and the increasing availability of weapons, can we truly afford to believe that somehow, some way, vicious extremists can be appeased?
  • Can folks really continue to think that free countries can negotiate a separate peace with terrorists?
  • Can we afford the luxury of pretending that the threats today are simply law enforcement problems, like robbing a bank or stealing a car; rather than threats of a fundamentally different nature requiring fundamentally different approaches?
  • And can we really afford to return to the destructive view that America, not the enemy, but America, is the source of the world's troubles?
These are central questions of our time, and we must face them and face them honestly.

We hear every day of new plans, new efforts to murder Americans and other free people. Indeed, the plot that was discovered in London that would have killed hundreds -- possibly thousands -- of innocent men, women and children on aircraft flying from London to the United States should remind us that this enemy is serious, lethal, and relentless.

But this is still not well recognized or fully understood. It seems that in some quarters there's more of a focus on dividing our country than acting with unity against the gathering threats.

It's a strange time:
  • When a database search of America's leading newspapers turns up literally 10 times as many mentions of one of the soldiers who has been punished for misconduct -- 10 times more -- than the mentions of Sergeant First Class Paul Ray Smith, the first recipient of the Medal of Honor in the Global War on Terror;
  • Or when a senior editor at Newsweek disparagingly refers to the brave volunteers in our armed forces -- the Army, the Navy, the Air Force, the Marines, the Coast Guard -- as a "mercenary army;"
  • When the former head of CNN accuses the American military of deliberately targeting journalists; and the once CNN Baghdad bureau chief finally admits that as bureau chief in Baghdad, he concealed reports of Saddam Hussein's crimes when he was in charge there so that CNN could keep on reporting selective news;
  • And it's a time when Amnesty International refers to the military facility at Guantanamo Bay -- which holds terrorists who have vowed to kill Americans and which is arguably the best run and most scrutinized detention facility in the history of warfare -- "the gulag of our times." It’s inexcusable. (Applause.)
Those who know the truth need to speak out against these kinds of myths and distortions that are being told about our troops and about our country. America is not what's wrong with the world. (Applause.)

The struggle we are in -- the consequences are too severe -- the struggle too important to have the luxury of returning to that old mentality of "Blame America First."
StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!
11 Comments:
Blogger Democrat said...
new type of fascism.

Wrong.

Fascism, by definition, is: "a governmental system led by a dictator having complete power, forcibly suppressing opposition and criticism, regimenting all industry, commerce, etc., and emphasizing an aggressive nationalism and often racism."

It is a complete logical fallacy to compare terrorists to fascists; you just can't do it. The new term "Islamo-Fascist" was created by RWW's in an attempt to scare the American people into submission.

Here is a web site that lists the 14 characteristics of a fascist government. Dr. Laurence Britt has studied fascist regimes extensively.

Note: Bush's America falls under every single one of them. No joke.


With the growing lethality and the increasing availability of weapons, can we truly afford to believe that somehow, some way, vicious extremists can be appeased?

Has Bush tried diplomacy? True diplomacy? NO!

Can folks really continue to think that free countries can negotiate a separate peace with terrorists?

Free country? Where?

Also, can folks, in good conscience, condone invading a country that never attacked us? Or had anything to do with 9/11? Which was the pretext to this BS war.

Can we afford the luxury of pretending that the threats today are simply law enforcement problems, like robbing a bank or stealing a car; rather than threats of a fundamentally different nature requiring fundamentally different approaches?

No, we can't. A fascist dictator who contorts and distorts the constitution to fit his politics is hardly a law enforcement problem; I'd say it is treason.

And can we really afford to return to the destructive view that America, not the enemy, but America, is the source of the world's troubles?

Terrorism has increased since we've been in Iraq, Right Wad.

These are central questions of our time, and we must face them and face them honestly.

Operative word being "honestly"... Try it sometime, Rummy.

Anyway, I'm not going to parse anymore of this idiots speech. Typical Right Wad BS.

Democrat

Blogger Media Tycoon said...
Your definition of fascism fell apart after the 10th word. "a dictator having complete power"...if any president falls under that definition, it is FDR.

If you can sit here and honestly say that the president of Iran is not a facist whilst you say President Bush is, then i can not respect your ability to come to a logical conclusion. Making a claim like that puts you in the blame America first crowd that Rummy was talking about.

As for diplomacy. Bush has had good diplomatic relations with many Islamic and non-islamic countries.

Saudi Arabia
Pakistan
Jordan
Denmark
Japan
Great Britain

to name a few...

Of course you do not have good diplomatic relations with countries you are at war with...Iran, North Korea, and Syria. It is just going to be that way.

It is also fallacious to say that terrorism has increased since the war in Iraq began. Terrorism also increased since we went into afghanistan. Violence always increases once a war starts.

Blogger Democrat said...
Your definition of fascism fell apart after the 10th word. "a dictator having complete power"...if any president falls under that definition, it is FDR.

No. No, far from correct. The only president in United States History that falls under that definition is George W. Bush. "Stop throwing the constitution at me, it's just a god damn piece of paper"

This son-of-a-bitch does whatever the hell he wants and you still have the audacity to support him and his naves?

FDR was a good man. He pulled us out of the great depression and was the only president to serve more than two terms. Must have been pretty decent to be elected three times, 'eh?


If you can sit here and honestly say that the president of Iran is not a facist whilst you say President Bush is, then i can not respect your ability to come to a logical conclusion. Making a claim like that puts you in the blame America first crowd that Rummy was talking about.


Iran is a Republic, like us. Yes, Bush is a fascist. Did you happen to look at that web site I provided? I blame the terrorists for 9/11 and any terrorist attack before. Every terrorist attack since we've been in Iraq I blame on Bush. Terrorism has increased since we've been there. I don't know how you can, in good faith, support this murderous pig just because he calls himself a conservative; he isn't. He's to the right of Hitler; that's fascism, not conservatism.

You wanna support a conservative? Support Hagel.

As for diplomacy. Bush has had good diplomatic relations with many Islamic and non-islamic countries.

Saudi Arabia

Not that great.

Pakistan

No. No, we don't. Where is Usama? Some believe he's in Pakistan. Also, you probably don't know this, but a large portion of the Pakistani army supports Usama.

Jordan

Slightly, but not much.

Denmark
Japan
Great Britain


After WWII every American president has had good relations with all of them countries.

Of course you do not have good diplomatic relations with countries you are at war with...Iran, North Korea, and Syria. It is just going to be that way.

You named six countries out of how many? That should tell you something. Bush has turned us into an imperialistc nation. Go to google and type in PNAC... Go to their web site and read what they want to do, then read who th founders of it are. If after that you can't connect the dots, then well, sorry for you.

It is also fallacious to say that terrorism has increased since the war in Iraq began. Terrorism also increased since we went into afghanistan. Violence always increases once a war starts.

No, it isn't. It would be a misrepresentation for me to say terrorism has increased in Iraq, which it has, but of course it is going to; we're at war. I was talking about the entire world not A country. The immutable fact of the matter is that terrorism has increased all over the world since we've been in Iraq. Now you can try to spin that any way you like, but it doesn't change reality.

Democrat

Blogger Media Tycoon said...
Bush I can more things that Bush has talked about doing than he has actually done. He does not have complete power. ask any historian, and they will tell you FDR had more power than Bush. FDR tried make the supreme court a 15 member bench because a lot of his new deal was struck down as unconstitutional. Bush has done no such thing. what programs of president bush have been over turned by the supreme court? they exist, but not as much as FDR.

Also i notice that in your mind...

FDR budget deficits are good

GWB budget deficts are bad

I won't argue the point of whether or not FDR was a good man. From everything i know, he probably was. All i am saying is that if you think Bush is a fascist, you should look at FDR. the freedoms we sacraficed during world war II were much more extreme than the freedoms we are sacraficing today. i can go point by point of this if you want, but just wikipedia FDR...you will see what he did.

Blogger Democrat said...
Bush I can more things that Bush has talked about doing than he has actually done.

What?

He does not have complete power. ask any historian, and they will tell you FDR had more power than Bush.

Bush has more power because he takes article II of the constitution and contorts it. A historian would not say such a thing about FDR; that is typical Right Wing bashing of a damn good Democrat.

FDR tried make the supreme court a 15 member bench because a lot of his new deal was struck down as unconstitutional.

You need to read your history, fella. The bill FDR proposed was called the "Court-Packing Bill" which asked for ONE more Justice on the Supreme Court, not 6. Secondly, the majority of the "New Deal" was deemed constitutional. Conservatives opposed the bill because it gave federal money to people in need... Ya know, compassion. Something Republicans are not familar with anymore. The "New Deal" permanetly changed our system of government for the better.


Bush has done no such thing. what programs of president bush have been over turned by the supreme court? they exist, but not as much as FDR.

Gitmo, for one. Secondly, Bush uses article II of the constitution as reason to do what he has done. The spying programs, which were deemed unconstional, etc... Also, you obviously know nothing about FDR or his policies or about his presidency. He did not exceed his power; he followed the constitution. Proposing a bill means shit. It still needs to be passed by Congress...

FDR budget deficits are good

FDR's defictis were not nearly as bad... Futhermore, the money went to help those in need.


GWB budget deficts are bad

BS wars are bad.


I won't argue the point of whether or not FDR was a good man. From everything i know, he probably was.


No, you'd lose, because he was a very good man. Let me tell you a true story about FDR... First of all you must know he was in wheelchair... He couldn't walk, nor could he stand up on his own. If he did stand up he had to be helped up from his chair and held onto. Now, after the Japs bombed Pearl Harbor FDR wanted revenge, pay-back, etc... His generals told him that what he was asking could not be done... FDR looked them square in the eye, stood up from his wheelchair with NO HELP, then kicked his wheelchair behind him and said: "Don't tell me it can't be done"... And guess what? We bombed the shit out of Japan and severely depleted their military force. Ultimately giving us the victory in WWII...

All i am saying is that if you think Bush is a fascist, you should look at FDR. the freedoms we sacraficed during world war II were much more extreme than the freedoms we are sacraficing today.

Did you peruse the 14 characteristics of fascism? Bush fits under everyone, FDR does not. Secondly, we did not relinquish any freedoms under FDR, that is a very weak Republican talking point.


i can go point by point of this if you want, but just wikipedia FDR...you will see what he did.

I major in sociology and minor in history at the University of Michigan... Trust me, I know much about FDR...

Bottom line... You can go on supporting Bush all you want, but don't do it blindly or ignorantly. Go do some reading. A.C.L.U is a good place to start. Listen to his speeches... Listen to Karl Rove, Rummy, etc... They are waging a war against freedom and democracy and they're doing it quietly. Little by little. Inch by inch.

If you know anything about the founding fathers you would know they would be rolling over in their grave if they knew what Bush has done and is doing; not FDR. Social Programs were not needed back then, nor were they thought of. Library of Congress has a web site... Go there, read the Thomas Jefferson papers... You will see and understand by his writings that he would have supported social programs that Democrats propose...

Democrat

Blogger Media Tycoon said...
this is from time magazine...

http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,954983-14,00.html

Roosevelt had always been the total politician, immensely gifted in all the arts of power, combining public spirit with guile. Politicians tend to judge themselves by election returns, and the results of 1936 apparently convinced Roosevelt, never an exceptionally modest man, that he could do almost anything. He devised his vengeance on the Supreme Court in total secrecy; just two days after inviting the aged Justices to the White House for a formal dinner, he summoned his staff to work at 6:30 a.m. to start typing and distributing the Judicial Reform Act of 1937. This artful document alleged that the entire federal Judiciary was overburdened and falling behind in its work, so the President should have the right to name an extra judge to supplement anyone who refused to retire at 70. In practical terms, that meant increasing the Supreme Court to as many as 15 Justices.

What became known as the "court-packing scheme" aroused fierce resistance not only among conservatives but among many who revered the independence of the Judiciary. Influential Senators openly balked. Chief Justice Hughes sternly wrote to a Senate committee and demonstrated that the court was neither overburdened nor behind in its work. At the same time that Hughes defended his court, however, it began to shift its position. As usual, the Justices admitted no change, but a series of decisions now began to uphold key New Deal legislation, notably Social Security and the Wagner Act. Friends urged Roosevelt to accept his victory gracefully by dropping the court-packing bill, but the President had committed too much personal pride to the struggle. After months of rancorous debate, which dominated the politics of 1937, the Senate humiliatingly rejected Roosevelt's project.


*********

as for that first sentence...

what i meant to say was that i can think of more legislation that bush has talked about, but failed to implement...as opposed to bills he has actually gotten passed.

Seriously, i don't know what they are teaching you at that school, but I could use a list of some examples of Bush’s absolute power. I have a hard time believing anyone with half a brain and any knowledge about FDR could honestly think that President Bush has abused his power more.

Case in point is the Japanese internment camps. That's the end of the argument. you could take away all of bush's other so called "abuses of power", give him an internment camp like the ones FDR had, and he would be worse than he is now.

Blogger Democrat said...
Go go to wikipedia and read up on the "Court-Packing Bill". Regardless, it didn't happen, and even then it is a far cry from what Bush is doing. Bush is stripping us of our freedoms.

Seriously, i don't know what they are teaching you at that school, but I could use a list of some examples of Bush’s absolute power.

A list you say? A list you shall have. Okay, here we go.


--Cabal of naves rigging elections, stealing the American peoples right to choose their leader

--It's been driven into our heads that Muslims are bad. You can say people don't feel that way, but they do. Just like Hitler's Germany hating the Jews

--Bush and his naves now want to racial profile at Air Ports

--America is now a Police State. Spying Programs, eavesdropping programs, etc...

--Any individual Bush deems as a terrorist is to be placed under the control of the Secretary of Defense. And before you make a fool out of yourself denying that go and look up 11/14/01; Google it

--People are now being held in American prisons being deprived of their fifth amendment right

--If the prisoners are allowed to speak with an attorney the conversation is monitored by Justice officials

--Anyone who disagreed with Hitler was branded as a traitor, much like Bush's America

--He violated international law by invading a country for no reason

--He has continually deceived congress in order to do whatever it is he wishes

--Violated the Genevea Convention---According to a Republican Supreme Court

There is your list... If you ask Bush he will tell you he has the power to do such things under Article II of the constitution, hence the contortion of the consitution. My school is obviously teaching me much more than whatever school you go to is teaching you.

I have a hard time believing anyone with half a brain and any knowledge about FDR could honestly think that President Bush has abused his power more.

That's becaues you are not well-read. You've had it drilled into you that Bush is doing the world a great service; he isn't.

Case in point is the Japanese internment camps. That's the end of the argument. you could take away all of bush's other so called "abuses of power", give him an internment camp like the ones FDR had, and he would be worse than he is now.

Dude, you don't know much about the constitution, do ya? FDR signed the executive order, but he didn't propose it. Even then, Internment Camps are 100% legal in a time of war. Most of America was behind FDR on that, too. What Bush is and has done is not legal in a time of war or any other time; fact. FDR never led this nation into a war, Bush did.

Conservatives have attacked FDR for years and years, and you are no different. I've dealt with people like you who try and destroy FDR's good name before. It isn't hard to defend the a man who quite possibly is the best president we've ever had. Conservatives have no facts when they try to destroy him, and you've no facts. Conservatves have misguided opinions, you've got misguided opinions. FDR never mislead the American people, he never destroyed the constitution, and has gone down in history as a hero... Bush will go down as the worst president ever. He'll leave office being hated, despised, and if the Democrats take back the House he will be impeached and possibly, if we grab the senate, put behind bars. Keep supporting him, Media. You only show how un-American you are when you do so.

As I said: Support Hagel.

If Hagel runs, depending on the Democrat, he might get my vote. I won't vote for Joe Biden, he's an idiot. Though, I don't think Biden will get the nomination.

Democrat

Blogger Media Tycoon said...
You are telling me internment camps are legal, but wiretaps aren't? I have never heard anyone defend the Japanese internment camps. You would not feel that way if your family's positions were confiscated and you were thrown into prison based on your race. Talk about racial profiling.

I don't know about you, but I would much rather have my phone wiretapped as opposed to having all my property and 2 years of my life taken away.

-you believe in the election conspiracy, despite the New York Times saying it was legit.

-People think Muslims are bad? I guess you know what everyone thinks at all times...I however do not. I guess I’m not well read enough.

-profiling in airports?
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2003/06/26/politics/main560558.shtml
http://www.usatoday.com/news/opinion/editorials/2006-08-30-chertoff-qanda_x.htm

-police state? I’m sure there are holocaust Jews that could argue that point with you

-your next point I know nothing about and could find nothing on it

-a link to the loss of 5th amendment rights please

-if you are talking about terrorists, then I don't care. If you are talking about normal people, please provide a link.

-please name one time bush or anyone in his admin has called anyone a traitor. Frankly, I think Democrats have guilty consciences regarding the patriotism because deep inside, they know what they are doing is wrong. For instance, voting for a war, then claiming the president lied and tricked you when you get to see the same intelligence he sees.

-he didn't violate international law. The UN did. We had a ceasefire with Iraq. 10 years of broken promises, later a US president finally got the balls to do something about it. fuck saddam and fuck anyone who thinks he didn't get what he deserved.

-continually deceived congress...a more specific example of this would be nice.

-violated the Geneva conventions...we will see what happens. However, Scalia made an interesting point in his opinion...

On December 30, 2005, Congress enacted the Detainee Treatment Act (DTA). It unambiguously provides that, as of that date, “no court, justice, or judge” shall have jurisdiction to consider the habeas application of a Guantanamo Bay detainee. Notwithstanding this plain directive, the Court today concludes that, on what it calls the statute’s most natural reading, every “court, justice, or judge” before whom such a habeas application was pending on December 30 has jurisdiction to hear, consider, and render judgment on it. This conclusion is patently erroneous. And even if it were not, the jurisdiction supposedly retained should, in an exercise of sound equitable discretion, not be exercised.

http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/05-184.ZD.html

as for hagel...I agree. However, I don't know how you could vote for him. He is conservative...actually very conservative. More so than bush...at least by my definition.

Blogger Democrat said...
You are telling me internment camps are legal, but wiretaps aren't!

That's what I'm telling you. Wire taps require a warrant.

I have never heard anyone defend the Japanese internment camps.

I'm not defending them; I think they were ridiculous, but nonetheless legal.

Talk about racial profiling.

Again... I'm not defending them.

I don't know about you, but I would much rather have my phone wiretapped as opposed to having all my property and 2 years of my life taken away.

How about neither?

People think Muslims are bad? I guess you know what everyone thinks at all times...I however do not. I guess I’m not well read enough.

Yes, people do. Listen to Hannity, Limbaugh, Coulter, and any other RWW. Listen to some of those idiots on Yahoo Chat and other Chat mediums.

-you believe in the election conspiracy, despite the New York Times saying it was legit.

It was rigged. 2000 was, anyway. 2004 I don't know about. Secondly, fascists countries use their Judicial system to pick leaders a lot of the time.

They WANT to profile at Air Ports... Bill Kristol, Horrowitz, etc... You know, the disgrace to the Jewish people.

police state? I’m sure there are holocaust Jews that could argue that point with you

And more than half the American people could argue that one with the Jews who would argue with me...

a link to the loss of 5th amendment rights please

No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

-if you are talking about terrorists, then I don't care. If you are talking about normal people, please provide a link.

Talking about both. Terrorist or not, they are entitled to humane treatment.

-please name one time bush or anyone in his admin has called anyone a traitor. Frankly, I think Democrats have guilty consciences regarding the patriotism because deep inside, they know what they are doing is wrong. For instance, voting for a war, then claiming the president lied and tricked you when you get to see the same intelligence he sees.

Karl Rove called Democrats socialist and traitors... No, Republicans are the ones who should have guilty consciencies. What the Democrats are doing is 100% right. Thomas Jefferson said that dissent was the highest form of patriotism... I'll form my opinions of patriotism in America by the thoughts and sayings of those who founded America as it is today... Bush did lie about the war... What world do you live in?


-he didn't violate international law. The UN did. We had a ceasefire with Iraq. 10 years of broken promises, later a US president finally got the balls to do something about it. fuck saddam and fuck anyone who thinks he didn't get what he deserved.


Yes. Yes, he did. No. No, the UN did not. The UN resolution requring Iraq to disarm did not authorize military force. Bush and Blair asked the UN to authorize military force, then withdrew their request once they learned of France, Russia, and China's intentions of vetoing it; he violated international law; fact.

-violated the Geneva conventions...we will see what happens. However, Scalia made an interesting point in his opinion...

Fuck Scalia. He's a pig anyway. He violated the Geneva Convention. That according to a slew of Repukes.


as for hagel...I agree. However, I don't know how you could vote for him. He is conservative...actually very conservative. More so than bush...at least by my definition.?

Yes, much more conservative. He doesn't waste money on BS wars. He also spoke out against Bush regarding the spying programs...

"I took an oath to the constitution, not to my party or my president"

Oh, and before commenting on the fifth amendment bit, which I know you will, and I also know what parts you are going to mention, read it thoroughly. The latter part of the fifth amendment is what is being violated.

Democrat

Blogger Democrat said...
Actually, the entire fifth amendment is being violated. Well, most of it.

Democrat

Blogger Democrat said...

Links to this post:
Create a Link