Rummy: Opposing Iraq War Now Is Like Helping Nazi's In The '30s

[blueturk]

Aug. 29, 2006, 3:47PM
Rumsfeld lashes out at Bush's critics


By ROBERT BURNS AP Military Writer
© 2006 The Associated Press

SALT LAKE CITY — Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld said Tuesday the world faces "a new type of fascism" and likened critics of the U.S. war strategy to those who tried to appease the Nazis.

In unusually explicit terms, Rumsfeld portrayed the Bush administration's critics as suffering from "moral or intellectual confusion" about what threatens the nation's security. His remarks amounted to one of his most pointed defenses of President Bush' war policies and was among his toughest attacks on the president's critics.

Speaking to several thousand veterans at the American Legion's national convention, Rumsfeld recited what he called the lessons of history, including the failure to confront Hitler in the 1930s. He quoted Winston Churchill as observing that trying to accommodate Hitler was "a bit like feeding a crocodile, hoping it would eat you last."

"I recount this history because once again we face similar challenges in efforts to confront the rising threat of a new type of fascism," he said.

"Can we truly afford to believe that somehow, some way, vicious extremists can be appeased?" he asked.

"Can we truly afford to return to the destructive view that America _ not the enemy _ is the real source of the world's troubles?"

Rumsfeld spoke to the American Legion as part of a coordinated White House strategy, in advance of the fifth anniversary of the Sept. 11, 2001 terrorist attacks, to take the offensive against administration critics at a time of doubt about the future of Iraq and growing calls to withdraw U.S. troops.

Rumsfeld recalled a string of recent terrorist attacks, from 9/11 to deadly bombings in Bali, London and Madrid, and said it should be obvious to anyone that terrorists must be confronted, not appeased.

"But some seem not to have learned history's lessons," he said, adding that part of the problem is that the American news media have tended to emphasize the negative rather than the positive.

He said, for example, that more media attention was given to U.S. soldiers' abuse of Iraqi prisoners at Abu Ghraib than to the fact that Sgt. 1st Class Paul Ray Smith received the Medal of Honor.

He did acknowledge that the U.S. military has its own "bad actors _ the ones who dominate the headlines today _ who don't live up to the standards of the oath and of our country." But he added that they are a small percentage of the hundreds of thousands of troops who have served in Iraq and Afghanistan.

"Those who know the truth need to speak out against these kinds of myths and lies and distortions being told about our troops and about our country," he said.

Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice was addressing the American Legion convention later Tuesday, and Bush is scheduled to speak here later in the week. On Monday, Vice President Dick Cheney and Rumsfeld made separate addresses to the national convention of the Veterans of Foreign Wars in Reno, Nev.

Rumsfeld made similar arguments in Reno about doubters of the administration's approach to fighting terrorism, saying too many in this country want to "blame America first" and ignore the enemy.

Rumsfeld's remarks ignited angry rebukes from Democrats.

"It's a political rant to cover up his incompetence," said Sen. Jack Reed, D-R.I., a former Army officer and member of the Senate Armed Services Committee.

Reed said he took particular exception to the implication that critics of Pentagon policies are unpatriotic, citing "scores of patriotic Americans of both parties who are highly critical of his handling of the Department of Defense."

Rep. John Murtha, the hawkish Pennsylvania Democrat who voted in favor of the war but recently called for troops to withdraw, said in a statement: "It's interesting to me that they generalize the support for the war. They're not realistic with the fact that there's no progress."

Sen. Christopher Dodd, D-Conn., chimed in that Rumsfeld's remarks were trying to "shoot the messenger" rather than examine failed policy.

Rumsfeld defended the war in Iraq, saying that while U.S. military tactics have changed as conditions on the ground have changed, the administration's war strategy has remained constant: "to empower the Iraqi people to defend, govern and rebuild their own country."

In arguing against giving up in Iraq, he said people should know from history that wars are never easy.

"You know from experience that in every war _ personally _ there have been mistakes and setbacks and casualties," he said. "War is," as Clemenceau said, `A series of catastrophes that results in victory."

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/ap/politics/4149738.html

[LoungeMachine]

Originally posted by Don Rumsfeld
[B]


"Can we truly afford to believe that somehow, some way, vicious extremists can be appeased?" he asked.




No.

We Can't.


Which is why you and your fellow BushCO members should be tried on war crimes.


It doesn't get much more vicious, or extreme than this.

:rolleyes:

[Nickdfresh]

"Rumsfeld...suffering from "moral or intellectual confusion" about what threatens the nation's security."

Um yeah, who's the new "IslamoFascist Hitler" again? Osama 'Doesn't Matter' Bin Laden?

[Dr. Love]

Lounge quit helping nazis ok?

[Dr. Love]

You too nick.

[Nickdfresh]

Does that mean I have to stop sending Hitler those chocolate-covered amphetamines he likes so much? :(

[blueturk]

I'm so fucking confused! Morally and intellectually!

"I would guess, I would surmise that some of the more spectacular bombings are done by al Qaeda suiciders." --George W. Bush, on violence in Iraq, Washington, D.C., Aug. 21, 2006

[Guitar Shark]

Kind of a misleading thread title, but still an offensive story.

[FORD]

Why doesn't Chimp tell Rummy that nothing was wrong with helping Nazis in the 30's?

That's what his grandpa did, and he got elected to the Senate. Even before there were Diebold machines and corrupt Supreme Courts.

[LoungeMachine]

Originally posted by Dr. Love
Lounge quit helping nazis ok?


Easier said than done.

[Nitro Express]

Fighting Islamic Facism while arresting the border patrol for doing their jobs.

Having China run Mexican ports so we can run the stuff through the NAFTA Superhighway that will be built by a Spanish contracting firm.

Hell, we don't even use Smith & Wesson or Colt when we go to war. It's Fabrique National from Belgium, Barretta from Italy, and Heckler and Koch from Germany. The ammo? Made in Israel by IMI.

Forget about giving Winchester any war contracts, they went out of business. Yeah, wars are suppossed to be good for the economy. Not when we buy other people's stuff to fight it with. How much money has China made supplying us with uniforms? Funny, they are the ones making the money. Polytech and Norrinco supply the terrorists and Iran with weapons and ammo and textile factory No. 5 in guangdon supplies us with uniforms, hats, duffle bags. Not to mention the electronics they sell the military. Want rare earth magnets for a guidance system. China bought the US company and sent the machinery to there.

Bush didn't declare war on Bin Ladden, he's declared war on the United States. Bush has killed more Americans and lost more jobs than Bin Ladden.

[LoungeMachine]

Rumsfeld's Declaration of War, on America

Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld declared war on the world yesterday, weaving an elaborate picture of an enemy made up of terrorists, morally confused and cynical westerners, disagreeable military strategists and experts, and the news media.


Enlisting every citizen in a mass ceremony, Rumsfeld stated that there could be no appeasing of the enemy and any "any moral or intellectual confusion about who and what is right or wrong can weaken the ability of free societies to persevere."


The "who" Rumsfeld is talking about is himself.


Rumsfeld is the "who" that is right, and everyone who disagrees is not only wrong, but a danger to freedom.

Within minutes of Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld's speech yesterday, I received an Email from Thayer C. Scott, the Secretary's speechwriter, delivering talking points.


The Defense Department then took the unusual step, usually reversed for its broadsides against Seymour Hersh of The New Yorker, of issuing a statement saying that the Associated Press coverage of Rumsfeld's Salt Lake City remarks mischaracterized Rumsfeld's remarks.


Either Rumsfeld has delivered one of the most important speeches of the modern era, or he's gone crazy.


I think crazy, not just because I think the Secretary is wrong on his intellectual characterization of terrorism, and not because he is wrong about the media and its intentions, and not because he is so pugnacious, or because he has been wrong so many times because.


Rumsfeld is so wrong about America. His use of World War I history and the specter of fascism and appeasement, and his argument about moral weakness or even treason in any who oppose him, is not only polarizing but ineffective in provoking debate and discussion about the proper course this nation must take to "fight" terrorism.


This is not the first time that Rumsfeld has shown himself to be so out of touch, so contemptuous of America. Rumsfeld as Secretary of Defense has displayed a contempt from long before 9/11 for anyone who disagrees with him, particularly in his initial wars against those in the uniformed military.


Moreover, Rumsfeld's declaration of war yesterday follows from his basic view that the Defense Department has to do it all: He has created an intelligence bureaucracy because he is distrustful and contemptuous of the CIA and all others. He has built up a secret army and covert capabilities in special operations forces because he wants to control and to rely only upon his own warriors. He has created a homeland security apparatus that looks over the shoulder of the Department of Homeland Security and is the ultimate arbiter of security. He has created his own FBI in the Counterintelligence Field Activity (CIFA), and fought to ensure that the NSA stays under Pentagon control. He has created his own law and his own human rights policy. He has subverted Congress through unexamined supplemental budgets and super-secret programs.


Even as a military strategist, Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld pushed a losing strategy in Afghanistan. This is not just because he went to war with an initially small force. After all, the war against the Taliban and al Qaeda began just weeks after 9/11 and that was what could be mobilized in that short period. The tragic error was that Rumsfeld continued to think that the terrorist threat existed in the form of a small army to be routed by his fabulous "transformed" warriors.


It is Rumsfeld who declared "mission accomplished" long before President Bush stepped on to the deck of the USS Abraham Lincoln. Rumsfeld has been wrong in fighting and too quick to declare victory thereafter.


Rumsfeld declared victory in Afghanistan, in addition, because he was twitching to move on to the next enemy, and the next and the next. But even when the weaknesses and problems became apparent about how the Afghanistan war had been fought, Rumsfeld still pushed an identical military strategy in Iraq, brushing aside any criticism as naïve and appeasing and out of touch with the new gathering storm of weapons of mass destruction.


And even as Iraq has become one of the biggest hornet's nests in history, the Secretary has convinced himself over and over that progress is being made and victory is just around the corner. America, Rumsfeld says, is not to blame, conflating a just war with a preemptive American strike. America is not to blame and therefore Rumsfeld is not to blame: no missteps, no errors of judgment. The Secretary just wants his soldiers to believe now that he anticipated all along that the enemy was totalitarian and fascist and that Iraq was part of the big plan.


If I were the conspiratorial type, I'd say Rumsfeld was a particular menace to America because in his view of a monolithic and totalitarian terrorist enemy, and in his analysis of the weakness of American society, he can only come to the messianic conclusion that he indeed needs to takeover the country in order to save it. And this might even be worth speculating about were it the case that Rumsfeld reflected the views of those in the military leadership, or were it the case that Rumsfeld could actually engineer such a coup.


But alas, the Secretary would get the intelligence wrong, employ too few troops, and send tank columns on thunder runs through Manhattan and Hollywood, prematurely declaring victory and then being befuddled about the American desire to recover and preserve its way of life, which is not the Rumsfeld way.


"Can we truly afford to return to the destructive view that America -- not the enemy -- is the real source of the world’s troubles?," Rumsfeld asked yesterday.


This has got an easy answer: World troubles? Rumsfeld is the source of troubles much closer to home.

By William M. Arkin | August 30, 2006; 8:01 AM ET

[Nitro Express]

Rumsfeld is an arrogant shithead who like the president, tighten their buttcheeks and act like John Wayne when questioned.

I'll be glad to see these jerks gone in two years. Unlike Hitler, who was widely popular and a God in his own Nazi Party, Bush and his assholes are widely unpopular even in the Republican Party.

That being said, it still doesn't give people their lives back, the billions of dollars wasted, and desolve the distrust the US has brought apon it by the rest of the world.

Many in the world view Bush and his big military as Hitler, lying and using excuses to invade other countries.

We were attacked by a small terrorist group composed mostly of Saudi nationals and the opperation ran out of Afganistahn. Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11 nor have any weapons of mass deustruction ever been found.

[FORD]

<object width="425" height="350"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/Eb9KuZ5i5LA"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/Eb9KuZ5i5LA" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" width="425" height="350"></embed></object>

[blueturk]

Originally posted by Guitar Shark
Kind of a misleading thread title, but still an offensive story.

"Can we truly afford to return to the destructive view that America _ not the enemy _ is the real source of the world's troubles?" - Rummy

With all due respect, I don't think the title is misleading. Rummy speaks of the "return" of a view that he says proliferated in the days before World War II. Not to mention the fact that he quotes Winston Churchill.

[Guitar Shark]

Originally posted by blueturk
With all due respect, I don't think the title is misleading. Rummy speaks of the "return" of a view that he says proliferated in the days before World War II. Not to mention the fact that he quotes Winston Churchill.

You are wrong. I don't deserve any respect.

[Dr. Love]

Well in all fairness, he didn't say how much, if any, you were due.

[blueturk]

Originally posted by Dr. Love
Well in all fairness, he didn't say how much, if any, you were due.

I figured I'd leave it up to Guitar Shark, and he has spoken!:D

[Nickdfresh]

But remember, the Bush FrAudministraion isn't challenging people's patriotism that disagree with their nonsensical, self-serving view of the world.

[Va Beach VH Fan]

Surprised no one mentioned Keith Olbermann's comments last night on "Countdown"...

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/12131617/

Feeling morally, intellectually confused?


The man who sees absolutes, where all other men see nuances and shades of meaning, is either a prophet, or a quack.

Donald H. Rumsfeld is not a prophet.

Mr. Rumsfeld’s remarkable speech to the American Legion yesterday demands the deep analysis—and the sober contemplation—of every American.

For it did not merely serve to impugn the morality or intelligence -- indeed, the loyalty -- of the majority of Americans who oppose the transient occupants of the highest offices in the land. Worse, still, it credits those same transient occupants -- our employees -- with a total omniscience; a total omniscience which neither common sense, nor this administration’s track record at home or abroad, suggests they deserve.

Dissent and disagreement with government is the life’s blood of human freedom; and not merely because it is the first roadblock against the kind of tyranny the men Mr. Rumsfeld likes to think of as “his” troops still fight, this very evening, in Iraq.

It is also essential. Because just every once in awhile it is right and the power to which it speaks, is wrong.

In a small irony, however, Mr. Rumsfeld’s speechwriter was adroit in invoking the memory of the appeasement of the Nazis. For in their time, there was another government faced with true peril—with a growing evil—powerful and remorseless.

That government, like Mr. Rumsfeld’s, had a monopoly on all the facts. It, too, had the “secret information.” It alone had the true picture of the threat. It too dismissed and insulted its critics in terms like Mr. Rumsfeld’s -- questioning their intellect and their morality.

That government was England’s, in the 1930’s.

It knew Hitler posed no true threat to Europe, let alone England.

It knew Germany was not re-arming, in violation of all treaties and accords.

It knew that the hard evidence it received, which contradicted its own policies, its own conclusions — its own omniscience -- needed to be dismissed.

The English government of Neville Chamberlain already knew the truth.

Most relevant of all — it “knew” that its staunchest critics needed to be marginalized and isolated. In fact, it portrayed the foremost of them as a blood-thirsty war-monger who was, if not truly senile, at best morally or intellectually confused.

That critic’s name was Winston Churchill.

Sadly, we have no Winston Churchills evident among us this evening. We have only Donald Rumsfelds, demonizing disagreement, the way Neville Chamberlain demonized Winston Churchill.

History — and 163 million pounds of Luftwaffe bombs over England — have taught us that all Mr. Chamberlain had was his certainty — and his own confusion. A confusion that suggested that the office can not only make the man, but that the office can also make the facts.

Thus, did Mr. Rumsfeld make an apt historical analogy.

Excepting the fact, that he has the battery plugged in backwards.

His government, absolute -- and exclusive -- in its knowledge, is not the modern version of the one which stood up to the Nazis.

It is the modern version of the government of Neville Chamberlain.

But back to today’s Omniscient ones.

That, about which Mr. Rumsfeld is confused is simply this: This is a Democracy. Still. Sometimes just barely.

And, as such, all voices count -- not just his.

Had he or his president perhaps proven any of their prior claims of omniscience — about Osama Bin Laden’s plans five years ago, about Saddam Hussein’s weapons four years ago, about Hurricane Katrina’s impact one year ago — we all might be able to swallow hard, and accept their “omniscience” as a bearable, even useful recipe, of fact, plus ego.

But, to date, this government has proved little besides its own arrogance, and its own hubris.

Mr. Rumsfeld is also personally confused, morally or intellectually, about his own standing in this matter. From Iraq to Katrina, to the entire “Fog of Fear” which continues to envelop this nation, he, Mr. Bush, Mr. Cheney, and their cronies have — inadvertently or intentionally — profited and benefited, both personally, and politically.

And yet he can stand up, in public, and question the morality and the intellect of those of us who dare ask just for the receipt for the Emporer’s New Clothes?

In what country was Mr. Rumsfeld raised? As a child, of whose heroism did he read? On what side of the battle for freedom did he dream one day to fight? With what country has he confused the United States of America?

The confusion we -- as its citizens— must now address, is stark and forbidding.

But variations of it have faced our forefathers, when men like Nixon and McCarthy and Curtis LeMay have darkened our skies and obscured our flag. Note -- with hope in your heart — that those earlier Americans always found their way to the light, and we can, too.

The confusion is about whether this Secretary of Defense, and this administration, are in fact now accomplishing what they claim the terrorists seek: The destruction of our freedoms, the very ones for which the same veterans Mr. Rumsfeld addressed yesterday in Salt Lake City, so valiantly fought.

And about Mr. Rumsfeld’s other main assertion, that this country faces a “new type of fascism.”

As he was correct to remind us how a government that knew everything could get everything wrong, so too was he right when he said that -- though probably not in the way he thought he meant it.

This country faces a new type of fascism - indeed.

Although I presumptuously use his sign-off each night, in feeble tribute, I have utterly no claim to the words of the exemplary journalist Edward R. Murrow.

But never in the trial of a thousand years of writing could I come close to matching how he phrased a warning to an earlier generation of us, at a time when other politicians thought they (and they alone) knew everything, and branded those who disagreed: “confused” or “immoral.”

Thus, forgive me, for reading Murrow, in full:

“We must not confuse dissent with disloyalty,” he said, in 1954. “We must remember always that accusation is not proof, and that conviction depends upon evidence and due process of law.

“We will not walk in fear, one of another. We will not be driven by fear into an age of unreason, if we dig deep in our history and our doctrine, and remember that we are not descended from fearful men, not from men who feared to write, to speak, to associate, and to defend causes that were for the moment unpopular.”

And so good night, and good luck.

[Nickdfresh]

Originally posted by Va Beach VH Fan
Surprised no one mentioned Keith Olbermann's comments last night on "Countdown"...

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/12131617/

Feeling morally, intellectually confused?


The man who sees absolutes, where all other men see nuances and shades of meaning, is either a prophet, or a quack.

Donald H. Rumsfeld is not a prophet.

Mr. Rumsfeld’s remarkable speech to the American Legion yesterday demands the deep analysis—and the sober contemplation—of every American.

For it did not merely serve to impugn the morality or intelligence -- indeed, the loyalty -- of the majority of Americans who oppose the transient occupants of the highest offices in the land. Worse, still, it credits those same transient occupants -- our employees -- with a total omniscience; a total omniscience which neither common sense, nor this administration’s track record at home or abroad, suggests they deserve.

Dissent and disagreement with government is the life’s blood of human freedom; and not merely because it is the first roadblock against the kind of tyranny the men Mr. Rumsfeld likes to think of as “his” troops still fight, this very evening, in Iraq.

It is also essential. Because just every once in awhile it is right and the power to which it speaks, is wrong.

In a small irony, however, Mr. Rumsfeld’s speechwriter was adroit in invoking the memory of the appeasement of the Nazis. For in their time, there was another government faced with true peril—with a growing evil—powerful and remorseless.

That government, like Mr. Rumsfeld’s, had a monopoly on all the facts. It, too, had the “secret information.” It alone had the true picture of the threat. It too dismissed and insulted its critics in terms like Mr. Rumsfeld’s -- questioning their intellect and their morality.

That government was England’s, in the 1930’s.

It knew Hitler posed no true threat to Europe, let alone England.

It knew Germany was not re-arming, in violation of all treaties and accords.

It knew that the hard evidence it received, which contradicted its own policies, its own conclusions — its own omniscience -- needed to be dismissed.

The English government of Neville Chamberlain already knew the truth.

Most relevant of all — it “knew” that its staunchest critics needed to be marginalized and isolated. In fact, it portrayed the foremost of them as a blood-thirsty war-monger who was, if not truly senile, at best morally or intellectually confused.

That critic’s name was Winston Churchill.

Sadly, we have no Winston Churchills evident among us this evening. We have only Donald Rumsfelds, demonizing disagreement, the way Neville Chamberlain demonized Winston Churchill.

History — and 163 million pounds of Luftwaffe bombs over England — have taught us that all Mr. Chamberlain had was his certainty — and his own confusion. A confusion that suggested that the office can not only make the man, but that the office can also make the facts.

Thus, did Mr. Rumsfeld make an apt historical analogy.

Excepting the fact, that he has the battery plugged in backwards.

His government, absolute -- and exclusive -- in its knowledge, is not the modern version of the one which stood up to the Nazis.

It is the modern version of the government of Neville Chamberlain.

But back to today’s Omniscient ones.

That, about which Mr. Rumsfeld is confused is simply this: This is a Democracy. Still. Sometimes just barely.

And, as such, all voices count -- not just his.

Had he or his president perhaps proven any of their prior claims of omniscience — about Osama Bin Laden’s plans five years ago, about Saddam Hussein’s weapons four years ago, about Hurricane Katrina’s impact one year ago — we all might be able to swallow hard, and accept their “omniscience” as a bearable, even useful recipe, of fact, plus ego.

But, to date, this government has proved little besides its own arrogance, and its own hubris.

Mr. Rumsfeld is also personally confused, morally or intellectually, about his own standing in this matter. From Iraq to Katrina, to the entire “Fog of Fear” which continues to envelop this nation, he, Mr. Bush, Mr. Cheney, and their cronies have — inadvertently or intentionally — profited and benefited, both personally, and politically.

And yet he can stand up, in public, and question the morality and the intellect of those of us who dare ask just for the receipt for the Emporer’s New Clothes?

In what country was Mr. Rumsfeld raised? As a child, of whose heroism did he read? On what side of the battle for freedom did he dream one day to fight? With what country has he confused the United States of America?

The confusion we -- as its citizens— must now address, is stark and forbidding.

But variations of it have faced our forefathers, when men like Nixon and McCarthy and Curtis LeMay have darkened our skies and obscured our flag. Note -- with hope in your heart — that those earlier Americans always found their way to the light, and we can, too.

The confusion is about whether this Secretary of Defense, and this administration, are in fact now accomplishing what they claim the terrorists seek: The destruction of our freedoms, the very ones for which the same veterans Mr. Rumsfeld addressed yesterday in Salt Lake City, so valiantly fought.

And about Mr. Rumsfeld’s other main assertion, that this country faces a “new type of fascism.”

As he was correct to remind us how a government that knew everything could get everything wrong, so too was he right when he said that -- though probably not in the way he thought he meant it.

This country faces a new type of fascism - indeed.

Although I presumptuously use his sign-off each night, in feeble tribute, I have utterly no claim to the words of the exemplary journalist Edward R. Murrow.

But never in the trial of a thousand years of writing could I come close to matching how he phrased a warning to an earlier generation of us, at a time when other politicians thought they (and they alone) knew everything, and branded those who disagreed: “confused” or “immoral.”

Thus, forgive me, for reading Murrow, in full:

“We must not confuse dissent with disloyalty,” he said, in 1954. “We must remember always that accusation is not proof, and that conviction depends upon evidence and due process of law.

“We will not walk in fear, one of another. We will not be driven by fear into an age of unreason, if we dig deep in our history and our doctrine, and remember that we are not descended from fearful men, not from men who feared to write, to speak, to associate, and to defend causes that were for the moment unpopular.”

And so good night, and good luck.

Ha! It's on Youtube.com (http://www.youtube.com/results?search_type=search_videos&search_sort=relevance&search_query=Keith+Olbermann+donald+rumsfeld&search=Search)

<object width="425" height="350"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/mKrWTFOFNBw"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/mKrWTFOFNBw" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" width="425" height="350"></embed></object>

[Va Beach VH Fan]

Yeah, he was pretty passionate, no doubt...

And of course quite the popular topic on AAR yesterday....

[EAT MY ASSHOLE]

Originally posted by Guitar Shark
You are wrong. I don't deserve any respect.

I see the bitch manages to tell the truth, at last.

And, no, I'm not looking forward to the payback from this statement. You twat.

[EAT MY ASSHOLE]

P.S. Keith Olberman is my hero these days. Better than anyone else on network news, and funnier than Stewart.

[FORD]

Originally posted by Va Beach VH Fan
Yeah, he was pretty passionate, no doubt...

And of course quite the popular topic on AAR yesterday....

And a convenient way for them to dodge the 2,000 pound elephant in the room.......

[Guitar Shark]

Originally posted by EAT MY ASSHOLE
I see the bitch manages to tell the truth, at last.

And, no, I'm not looking forward to the payback from this statement. You twat.

Turtle Heaven
by Damien Barrett

On the edge of a dusty, potholed, blacktop road in upstate New York lies the bleached remains of a large snapper turtle. The shell is cracked and the soft tissue inside is withered away into nothing.

Alex poked it with a stick.

"Don't mess with that, Alex. It's just a dead turtle. Leave it alone."

"But, Mom. Shouldn't we bury it? It's dead...we bury dead things don't we?"

Faith grimaced. Yes, we bury dead things, she thought to herself. Like David. It had been over a year and still the hurt hadn't faded. She hadn't brought her son out to the country to think about David. The opposite, actually. Faith had thought that some new scenery and fresh country air would help her refocus on her life, help her to get back on track. Losing David was something she was trying not to think about. It would be better to forget about the past and move on.

Looking down at the dried-up remains of the turtle, she saw nearby the small bodies of the mother turtle's young, also withered and parched-dead. Faith fought hard to hold back tears. She didn't want Alex to see her crying. It was easy to see what had happened. The mother turtle and her young had been trying to cross the road. Probably late at night, things were going fine until a speeding truck crushed her rear side, killing her instantly and knocking her to the side of the road. Her young, so faithful, had probably remained at her side, waiting for their mother to lead them to safety. Dehydrated, they died one by one, not far from the decimated remains of their mother.

"Alex. Get the shovel out of the truck and bring it back here," Faith said in a cracked and tired voice. She would give the dead turtle her due respect. Far more than David got, anyway.

Faith carefully scooped up the remains of the mother turtle and her young and carried them several yards into the grassy embankment. There, she dug a hole and laid the bodies down. And, carefully, so carefully, she filled the hole back in, placing scoopful after scoopful of dirt on top of the turtles, hoping for them a safe journey into whatever heaven dead turtles reside in.

[Guitar Shark]

http://msnbcmedia.msn.com/j/msnbc/Components/Photos/060117/060117_turtle_vmed_730a.widec.jpg

[EAT MY ASSHOLE]

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!

[FORD]

Yertle the Turtle
by dr. seuss

On the far-away island of Sala-ma-Sond,
Yertle the Turtle was king of the pond.
A nice little pond. It was clean. It was neat.
The water was warm. There was plenty to eat.
The turtles had everything turtles might need.
And they were all happy. Quite happy indeed.

They were... untill Yertle, the king of them all,
Decided the kingdom he ruled was too small.
"I'm ruler", said Yertle, "of all that I see.
But I don't see enough. That's the trouble with me.
With this stone for a throne, I look down on my pond
But I cannot look down on the places beyond.
This throne that I sit on is too, too low down.
It ought to be higher!" he said with a frown.
"If I could sit high, how much greater I'd be!
What a king! I'd be ruler of all that I see!"

So Yertle, the Turtle King, lifted his hand
And Yertle, the Turtle King, gave a command.
He ordered nine turtles to swim to his stone
And, using these turtles, he built a new throne.
He made each turtle stand on another one's back
And he piled them all up in a nine-turtle stack.
And then Yertle climbed up. He sat down on the pile.
What a wonderful view! He could see 'most a mile!
"All mine!" Yertle cried. "Oh, the things I now rule!
I'm the king of a cow! And I'm the king of a mule!
I'm the king of a house! And, what's more, beyond that
I'm the king of a blueberry bush and a cat!
I'm Yertle the Turtle! Oh, marvelous me!
For I am the ruler of all that I see!"

And all through the morning, he sat up there high
Saying over and over, "A great king am I!"
Until 'long about noon. Then he heard a faint sigh.
"What's that?" snapped the king
And he looked down the stack.
And he saw, at the bottom, a turtle named Mack.
Just a part of his throne. And this plain little turtle
Looked up and he said, "Beg your pardon, King Yertle.
I've pains in my back and my shoulders and knees.
How long must we stand here, Your Majesty, please?"
"SILENCE!" the King of the Turtles barked back.
"I'm king, and you're only a turtle named Mack."
"You stay in your place while I sit here and rule.
I'm the king of a cow! And I'm the king of a mule!
I'm the king of a house! And a bush! And a cat!
But that isn't all. I'll do better than that!

My throne shall be higher!" his royal voice thundered,
"So pile up more turtles! I want 'bout two hundred!"
"Turtles! More turtles!" he bellowed and brayed.
And the turtles 'way down in the pond were afraid.
They trembled. They shook. But they came. They obeyed.
From all over the pond, they came swimming by dozens.
Whole families of turtles, with uncles and cousins.
And all of them stepped on the head of poor Mack.
One after another, they climbed up the stack.
Then Yertle the Turtle was perched up so high,
He could see fourty miles from his throne in the sky!
"Hooray!" shouted Yertle. "I'm the king of the trees!
I'm king of the birds! And I'm king of the bees!
I'm king of the butterflies! King of the air!
Ah, me! What a throne! What a wonderful chair!
I'm Yertle the Turtle! Oh, marvelous me!
For I am the ruler of all that I see!"

Then again, from below, in the great heavy stack,
Came a groan from that plain little turtle named Mack.
"Your Majesty, please... I don't like to complain,
But down here below, we are feeling great pain.
I know, up on top you are seeing great sights,
But down here at the bottom we, too, should have rights.
We turtles can't stand it. Our shells will all crack!
Besides, we need food. We are starving!" groaned Mack.

"You hush up your mouth!" howled the mighty King Yertle.
"You've no right to talk to the world's highest turtle.
I rule from the clouds! Over land! Over sea!
There's nothing, no, NOTHING, that's higher than me!"

But, while he was shouting, he saw with suprise
That the moon of the evening was starting to rise
Up over his head in the darkening skies.
"What's THAT?" snorted Yertle. "Say, what IS that thing
That dares to be higher than Yertle the King?
I shall not allow it! I'll go higher still!
I'll build my throne higher! I can and I will!
I'll call some more turtles. I'll stack 'em to heaven!
I need 'bout five thousand, six hundred and seven!"

But, as Yertle, the Turtle King, lifted his hand
And started to order and give the command,
That plain little turtle below in the stack,
That plain little turtle whose name was just Mack,
Decided he'd taken enough. And he had.
And that plain little lad got a bit mad.
And that plain little Mack did a plain little thing.
He burped!
And his burp shook the throne of the king!

And Yertle the Turtle, the king of the trees,
The king of the air and the birds and the bees,
The king of a house and a cow and a mule...
Well, that was the end of the Turtle King's rule!
For Yertle, the King of all Sala-ma-Sond,
Fell off his high throne and fell Plunk! in the pond!

And tosay the great Yertle, that Marvelous he,
Is King of the Mud. That is all he can see.
And the turtles, of course... all the turtles are free
As turtles and, maybe, all creatures should be.

[Sarge's Little Helper]

Yertle the Turtle
by dr. seuss

On the far-away island of Sala-ma-Sond,
Yertle the Turtle was king of the pond.
A nice little pond. It was clean. It was neat.
The water was warm. There was plenty to eat.
The turtles had everything turtles might need.
And they were all happy. Quite happy indeed.

They were... untill Yertle, the king of them all,
Decided the kingdom he ruled was too small.
"I'm ruler", said Yertle, "of all that I see.
But I don't see enough. That's the trouble with me.
With this stone for a throne, I look down on my pond
But I cannot look down on the places beyond.
This throne that I sit on is too, too low down.
It ought to be higher!" he said with a frown.
"If I could sit high, how much greater I'd be!
What a king! I'd be ruler of all that I see!"

So Yertle, the Turtle King, lifted his hand
And Yertle, the Turtle King, gave a command.
He ordered nine turtles to swim to his stone
And, using these turtles, he built a new throne.
He made each turtle stand on another one's back
And he piled them all up in a nine-turtle stack.
And then Yertle climbed up. He sat down on the pile.
What a wonderful view! He could see 'most a mile!
"All mine!" Yertle cried. "Oh, the things I now rule!
I'm the king of a cow! And I'm the king of a mule!
I'm the king of a house! And, what's more, beyond that
I'm the king of a blueberry bush and a cat!
I'm Yertle the Turtle! Oh, marvelous me!
For I am the ruler of all that I see!"

And all through the morning, he sat up there high
Saying over and over, "A great king am I!"
Until 'long about noon. Then he heard a faint sigh.
"What's that?" snapped the king
And he looked down the stack.
And he saw, at the bottom, a turtle named Mack.
Just a part of his throne. And this plain little turtle
Looked up and he said, "Beg your pardon, King Yertle.
I've pains in my back and my shoulders and knees.
How long must we stand here, Your Majesty, please?"
"SILENCE!" the King of the Turtles barked back.
"I'm king, and you're only a turtle named Mack."
"You stay in your place while I sit here and rule.
I'm the king of a cow! And I'm the king of a mule!
I'm the king of a house! And a bush! And a cat!
But that isn't all. I'll do better than that!

My throne shall be higher!" his royal voice thundered,
"So pile up more turtles! I want 'bout two hundred!"
"Turtles! More turtles!" he bellowed and brayed.
And the turtles 'way down in the pond were afraid.
They trembled. They shook. But they came. They obeyed.
From all over the pond, they came swimming by dozens.
Whole families of turtles, with uncles and cousins.
And all of them stepped on the head of poor Mack.
One after another, they climbed up the stack.
Then Yertle the Turtle was perched up so high,
He could see fourty miles from his throne in the sky!
"Hooray!" shouted Yertle. "I'm the king of the trees!
I'm king of the birds! And I'm king of the bees!
I'm king of the butterflies! King of the air!
Ah, me! What a throne! What a wonderful chair!
I'm Yertle the Turtle! Oh, marvelous me!
For I am the ruler of all that I see!"

Then again, from below, in the great heavy stack,
Came a groan from that plain little turtle named Mack.
"Your Majesty, please... I don't like to complain,
But down here below, we are feeling great pain.
I know, up on top you are seeing great sights,
But down here at the bottom we, too, should have rights.
We turtles can't stand it. Our shells will all crack!
Besides, we need food. We are starving!" groaned Mack.

"You hush up your mouth!" howled the mighty King Yertle.
"You've no right to talk to the world's highest turtle.
I rule from the clouds! Over land! Over sea!
There's nothing, no, NOTHING, that's higher than me!"

But, while he was shouting, he saw with suprise
That the moon of the evening was starting to rise
Up over his head in the darkening skies.
"What's THAT?" snorted Yertle. "Say, what IS that thing
That dares to be higher than Yertle the King?
I shall not allow it! I'll go higher still!
I'll build my throne higher! I can and I will!
I'll call some more turtles. I'll stack 'em to heaven!
I need 'bout five thousand, six hundred and seven!"

But, as Yertle, the Turtle King, lifted his hand
And started to order and give the command,
That plain little turtle below in the stack,
That plain little turtle whose name was just Mack,
Decided he'd taken enough. And he had.
And that plain little lad got a bit mad.
And that plain little Mack did a plain little thing.
He burped!
And his burp shook the throne of the king!

And Yertle the Turtle, the king of the trees,
The king of the air and the birds and the bees,
The king of a house and a cow and a mule...
Well, that was the end of the Turtle King's rule!
For Yertle, the King of all Sala-ma-Sond,
Fell off his high throne and fell Plunk! in the pond!

And tosay the great Yertle, that Marvelous he,
Is King of the Mud. That is all he can see.
And the turtles, of course... all the turtles are free
As turtles and, maybe, all creatures should be.

Oops. I wasn't paying attention. Tell me again what is going on.

[EAT MY ASSHOLE]

i'm speechless...

[LoungeMachine]

http://groups.msn.com/TURTLELOVERANCH

[Hardrock69]

I saw this in Seattle....was not able to post until now.

So he says critics of Chimpy's administration are like people who tried to appease the Nazis?

WHAT A FUCKING IDIOT!!!!
:mad:

Critics of the Chimpy Administration are more like CRITICS of the Nazis......NOT in FAVOR of the Nazis.....

He is a fucking Nazi Fascist Bastard!!!!

He should have said that the REPUBLICAN PARTY are like those who tried to appease the Nazis....it is MUCH closer to the truth!!!
:mad: :mad: :mad:

Anyone who is for Chimpy and his regime could easily be seen as a proponent of Fascism, in favor of Der Homeland Security Gestapo goose-stepping down the street!!!:

http://www.berkaweb.com/world_cultures/images/nazi_parade.jpg