digg

Join DiggAbout

Discover and share the best of the web!
Learn more about Digg by taking the tour.

Rumsfeld Agrees Terrorists Want Democrats To Win

thinkprogress.org — In an interview with North Dakota radio host Scott Hennen, Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld said that “it would be logical” that terrorist groups are ramping up violence in Iraq and elsewhere to give liberals a boost in November’s election.

Bury
show profanity settings
expand all
  • yakimushi, on 10/12/2007, -26/+112Wait, shouldn't that read "Rumsfeld will say anything to keep the Republicans in power"?
    • whiskeymb, on 10/12/2007, -20/+75that's pretty much the republican mantra right now, say anything and everything you can to try to save your hold on power.

      I can't figure out which is worse though, that the republicans think that abhorrent lying like this would work on the US voters, or that it DOES work on voters.

    • Chompy, on 10/12/2007, -15/+91Actually I think the terrorists are happy with Bush in charge. They love this war, it's driving thousands of former moderates to their way of thinking. They don't really want us out of Iraq and Afghanistan anytime soon because the more people get pissed off, the more power they have.
    • The_Wallbanger, on 10/12/2007, -19/+50Rumsfeld states, "It would be logical," but doesn't offer a single fiber of evidence. Republicans pulled this garbage on who outed Foley. They are desperate.
    • isasusinfinite, on 10/12/2007, -13/+31Exactly.
      This, after it was shown that the directors of the CIA found out that Osama himself wanted Bush re-elected in the previous election. Where is that story... Here is one copy of it:

      http://consortiumnews.com/2006/070306.html

      So really, it has been shown, and at the level of the top heads of the CIA, that terrorists back the Democrats in order to have the sheeple vote for the Republicans. Of course, you won't find that little fact on the news at 7.
    • 66o66o, on 10/12/2007, -15/+16does anyone actually see any of these "terrorists" on TV, in Iraq?
      are these people not just fighting against an occupying army that
      has no right to be there - the only reason they are there is the greed
      of a government!
      We've seen this before when Britain had the biggest empire on earth,
      claiming all the indigenous people where savages or the like!
      The republicans wave a carrot in people's faces every so often to give the hint that terrorist are
      waging war on America , like that guy who masterminded all those terror cells, although he was practically deaf and blind!

      And besides can you actually believe the intelligence when the majority of it has been purely fabricated so far.
      Honestly people really need to start thinking for them selves and remember more than just yesterdays news!!!!
    • Zarchon, on 10/12/2007, -58/+5Be proud of your hate.

      The Left, a party that hates like no other. Really, seriously, no kidding, why don't you guys leave this horrible horrible country? Is it money? Canada is NOT that far away, they are already socialist, and with global warming and all, weather wise it would not be a bad place to be.

      Or you could go to Mexico where the government IS totally corrupt and you would have lots more to bitch about. Oh wait, immigrants in Mexico are not, by LAW, allowed to complain about the government there.

      You're all just a bunch of Jane Fonda/Sean Penn anti-American liberals.
    • youareretarded, on 10/12/2007, -5/+27@Zarchon

      Wow! You have absolutely no clue what it means to be an American!
    • millixaw, on 10/12/2007, -7/+34You would think the terrorists would want Republicans to stay in power. Both groups have very similar ideologies...

      - Both use religion as an excuse for their actions
      - Both hate women and abortion
      - Both hate the gays
      - Both hate the US constitution
      - Both love guns
      - Both are profitting from the Iraq war
      - Both are pro-death penalty
      - Both are pro-torture

      Plus, I'm sure Osama would prefer the president who can't catch him stay in power: George W Bush
    • NoStoppingUs, on 10/12/2007, -16/+5what is so difficult about this? do you really think the increase in violence is a coincidence? if the terrorists were winning in iraq, they would want to keep us there. how would they do that? by making bush look great (ending violence). instead, the opposite is happening, and you liberals are just afraid to admit the truth. whats new.
    • jasz, on 10/12/2007, -5/+12I'd say Rumsfeld is right.

      If democrats win, terrorists wouldn't have to be terrorists in the first place since at least someone competent would handle diplomatic affairs rather than just using brute force (like the current administration does).

      And nobody wants to be the victim of brute force.

      PS. Yeah, I'm exaggerating... putting a democrat in power won't stop terrorism, but I'm pretty sure diplomacy would have more chance of success to do so.
    • VolatileWhimsy, on 10/12/2007, -9/+4Actually it does make sense.. :/
      The Democrats are against this war, any soldier's life lost add's fuel to the fire, anything at all to poke at they do..
      Honestly if I was an insurgent I would want the Dem's to win..
    • labmouse42, on 10/12/2007, -0/+7@VolatileWhimsy
      "The Democrats are against this war"
      Is this the official stance of the democratic platform? 'We need a change of course in Iraq, not just a change in rhetoric and more spin from the Bush Administration,' said Democratic National Committee Chairman. If you can find where the National Democratic Party states that their focus is to leave Iraq
      and within a time line, please let me know -- I honestly cannot find one .
      http://www.democrats.org/a/2006/10/dean_on_bushs_l.php

      Hope your day has gone well :D
    • labmouse42, on 10/12/2007, -5/+1double post :(
    • willcode4beer, on 10/12/2007, -1/+7Exactly who are these "the terrorists" ?

      Sounds like a bunch of crap when you can spout out a label instead of naming someone.
      Its the damn neo-cons, its the damn liberals. Say who it is, not some ***** label.
      "The Terrorists" could mean anything, Hamas, the Sunni insurgents, the IRA, the Khmer Rouge, the Tamil Tigers. I think each of those groups has a different agenda.

      The media are just as stupid to accept this as an answer too. They should make them be specific. Otherwise you get these stupid memes floating around making people stupid.
    • funkychikensays, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1i think both the us and the terrorists are very tired of fighting, and they think if we have a democrat president the war will stop.
    • NoStoppingUs, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1what is so difficult about this? do you really think the increase in violence is a coincidence? if the terrorists were winning in iraq, they would want to keep us there. how would they do that? by making bush look great (ending violence). instead, the opposite is happening, and you liberals are just afraid to admit the truth. whats new
    • polyGone, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2are you just going to keep posting this till someone doesn't digg yo down?

      "nostoppingus"....thats sad
  • storm8956, on 10/12/2007, -11/+39Rumsfeld: It’s hard. No one likes to think they’re being manipulated. They believe that they can make their own judgments...

    Ironic in that that very statement is a manipulation. Thanks, Rumsfeld, for twisting the truth. I think that time you twisted it at least three or four times over.
    • Nougat, on 10/12/2007, -8/+29It's a truthiness pretzel with plenty of salt and mustard.
    • eklipsse, on 10/12/2007, -3/+20as Groucho Marx said: "The secret of life is honesty and fair dealing. If you can fake that, you've got it made"
  • hawkeye17, on 10/12/2007, -12/+47This makes no sense. The terrorists have gotten more from the Bush Administration than they could have ever dreamed of. Why risk helping to make a change to Democrats who may actually fight the 'war on terror' with a bit of intelligence??
    • storm8956, on 10/12/2007, -6/+39Yeah, the Bush Administration has done a lot of things for the terrorists unintentionally. By going into Iraq, America MADE Iraq part of the war on terror, not the terrorists. Though the media never seems to deliver this message! Iraq was not a war front until we invaded. And yeah, the administration did take the "Eye of Mordor" off of America and put it on Iraq, but now about 50,000 - 700,000 Iraqis and 3,000 American troops are dead...the terrorists now do not have to worry about traveling across an ocean to attack something. The war is at their doorstep, and that makes even more people want to be terrorists. From Al Qaeda letter: "Indeed, prolonging the war is in our interest, with God’s permission." I guess the administration's logic is that it is better to throw the spotlight on thousands of other innocent people in another country than to have any American civilians killed. To make it worse, a lot of the people the administration chose to throw the spotlight on had already been persecuted enough under Saddam.
    • alanspach, on 10/12/2007, -16/+8"'war on terror' with a bit of intelligence"

      oxymoron
  • toasty168, on 10/12/2007, -3/+31Vote!

    voting isn't about what you can do individually. it's what we can do as a group.
  • IHaveIssues, on 10/12/2007, -9/+29That, my friends, is the sound of desperation.
    • dvfreelancer, on 10/12/2007, -2/+12True, but it worked in '04. Someone's believing their brain turd sound bites.
  • thespace, on 10/12/2007, -12/+29Rumsfeld also agrees "Bush is our great leader, because the sun and moon were born on his birthday. All give thanks to this great day, because Bush is our glorious leader."

    (insert squishing noises from ass-to-nose rubbing here)
  • JonForTheWin, on 10/12/2007, -8/+15The republicans don't want the domocrats to win. What the hell is he talking about?
  • alanspach, on 10/12/2007, -9/+22What a dick
  • oxigen, on 10/12/2007, -12/+17LOL More republican Democrat = terrorist *****.
    When are we going to stop bickering between parties and start actually DOING something useful?
  • Chompy, on 10/12/2007, -11/+23Nah nah *nah nah*, Nah nah *nah nah*, hey hey hey, goooodbye! (republican majority)
  • ThisIsBob, on 10/12/2007, -22/+11Rumsfield - Now there's a really smart guy who can get things done right. Good of him to weigh in.

    • kp3469, on 10/12/2007, -3/+14missing /sarcasm tags? i hope ...
    • youareretarded, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5The comment was too obvious to need any sarcasm tag!
  • feelingfunky, on 10/12/2007, -2/+22Rule that we learned from WWII (sadly learned):
    Say whatever you want, repeat it over and over again and it will become truth. Repetition of any falsehood can make a monster into a leader.
    Don't let the fear mongering change your opinion. Go out there and vote who you believe in. and God help us al.
    • JonForTheWin, on 10/12/2007, -4/+16God has already helped us with his blessing of diebold machines.
  • xutopia, on 10/12/2007, -21/+11In Iraq all the people know is "It's the damn Americans who invaded us!". Ask them who Bush is and most will answer "Who is Bush?".

    The truth is they resent Americans, kids throw rocks at anything that looks like an invader.

    Don't forget that Iraq know the process of elections so well that it is sure all these kids and people are deliberately planning to make things worse right now to make Democrats win... right...

    If you look at how may deaths there are in Iraq what do the numbers say? Just as I thought.

    • brstilson, on 10/12/2007, -4/+16Actually, a lot of Iraqis know very well who Bush is.
    • migbike, on 10/12/2007, -10/+1nevermind.
    • JonForTheWin, on 10/12/2007, -10/+6brstilson

      They most certainly do. Most popular toilet-paper brand in Iraq!
    • slickriven, on 10/12/2007, -2/+10It is interesting when one person makes a comment that could be complete BS and someone else jumps in to refute it and their comment could also be complete BS...

      Unless either one of you have actual facts to support your claims of Iraqi citizens/militants knowing Bush's name, why even bring it up? I hope one of you will come back and say you're a soldier and were in Iraq, b/c otherwise you must be following the media and believing it, which makes you a fool.
  • Phyltre, on 10/12/2007, -9/+11Aw shucks! First they tell us a vote for Republicans is a vote for terrorism. Now they say that the terrorists want the Democrats to win! NOW who am I going to vote for?!?!?

    Guess I'll be voting Libertarian...
    • feelingfunky, on 10/12/2007, -7/+6now that is a sound idea! If Dems are good for terrorists...and Reps are ... well they suck... then that leaves the only good choice :)
    • GenghisCon, on 10/12/2007, -5/+5the Dems are good for terrorists, the Reps ARE terrorists. That leaves us very little choice. It's a shame my state has made it nearly impossible for thirda parties to even get on the ballot.
  • bennyboy371, on 10/12/2007, -5/+16Didn't it come to light that Osama was trying to get Bush re-elected? Doesn't that alone kind of prove this guess wrong?
    • dvfreelancer, on 10/12/2007, -1/+9"A muslim terrorist bombed the world trade center in 1993, when CLINTON and a DEMOCRAT congress were in power."

      And we weren't attacked again until 2001. Using the Dick Cheney standard for success, that means Clinton was doing a great job protecting us.
    • Optimus, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3>>"A muslim terrorist bombed the world trade center in 1993, when CLINTON and a DEMOCRAT congress were in power."

      "Democratic congress" is the correct term. Republicans (including Bush) have been trying to rename the party. It's the Democratic Party, not the Democrat Party; the latter has a more negative sounding connotation, thus the attempt at changing the party's name in the public's mind.
  • brstilson, on 10/12/2007, -18/+9Yeah the terrorists just LOVED us when the democrats were in power.
    • JonForTheWin, on 10/12/2007, -8/+13Yeah they LOVED us so much that they crashed planes into buildings! How can you even BLAME bush he was governor of Texas at the time!

      . . oh wait.
    • brstilson, on 10/12/2007, -7/+6"Yeah they LOVED us so much that they crashed planes into buildings! How can you even BLAME bush he was governor of Texas at the time!

      . . oh wait."

      1. Nice, bring 9/11 into it. My point is that terrorists have attacked us when both democrats and republicans were in power.

      2. Where the ***** do you see me blaming Bush for it? Because I don't lean to the far-right I'm a 9/11 conspiracy nut? strawman anyone?

      3. A muslim terrorist bombed the world trade center in 1993, when CLINTON and a DEMOCRAT congress were in power. It's obvious you weren't born yet or else you'd remember.

      Are you joking here? I can't believe anyone can be this stupid and ignorant to the facts.
    • howea, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4Actually people seem to be talking about terrorists like it's a single organization.

      Most of the terrorists now in Iraq were just normal, deprived citizens right up until the Americans captured Saddam and deposed nearly all of the government infrastructure, that was associated with the Baath party.
  • Waiting2awake, on 10/12/2007, -7/+9 Seriously though guys/gals. Does anyone really truly think it will make a difference?

    I am generally a right wing sort of person(At least for a Canadian), but I can see a steady pattern here for all politicians regardless of the political stripe. They all lie, they all abuse their power(That we grant them) and they all abscond with the countries cash. Putting a Democrat in the white house may be the only choice available - or maybe a mass showing of support for the Libertarian(sp?) party? Have the Libertarians in the WH, the Repub's in the Senate and the Demo's in the House.

    Ofcourse, with the nature of politics's, you may end up with three thief's instead of two - but what other choice is there?

  • LustHog, on 10/12/2007, -6/+17In other news, terrorists are for same-sex marriage, no big business, and pro-choice.
  • AICWebmaster, on 10/12/2007, -8/+14The terrorists want the Republicans to win. The have been kicking the ***** out of a Republican president, his administration and his policies since the US invaded Iraq.
    After bush announced mission accomplished, they have done nothing but gain strength. They are in control in Iraq - not the Americans.
  • mrhaines, on 10/12/2007, -4/+17Yes the terrorists are blowing themselves up to give liberals a boost in a democratic election. The same terrorists that think democracy is a bunch of crap and all americans are the devils children. Yes, Donald that is why they are doing it. It continually astounds me how people like him can get elected...
  • warmonger48, on 10/12/2007, -3/+14The terrorists know the difference between Democrates and Republicans? Or care?
  • brstilson, on 10/12/2007, -6/+16It's just another classic Republican "anything that makes us look bad is a liberal Democrat conspiracy"
  • killinger777, on 10/12/2007, -31/+8hmmm, imagine your a terrorist. Who would you want to win?
    Dems want to leave iraq, reps want to kill more terrorists.... Dems win
    Dems want terrorists to release terrorists from gitmo, reps dont... Dems win
    Reps want to listen to terrorist phone calls, Dems dont.... Dems win

    Yup, terrorists surely would prefer Dems in office. I don't know if that effects insurgents or not, but given a choice I guarantee terrorists would prefer dems.
    • fredrated, on 10/12/2007, -11/+15I guarantee that you are nothing but a sack of filthy trash. I would explain why but it would be like trying to clean out a cesspool, I am just not up to it. ***** you and the whore you rode in on.
    • JonForTheWin, on 10/12/2007, -8/+9Of coarse the government-terrorist doesn't want the democrats to win. That's why we have diebold machines!
    • osirisothedead, on 10/12/2007, -8/+13And the retarded right-wing rhetoric of the year award goes to.... killinger777!
    • dkleehammer, on 10/12/2007, -5/+9I like how three people replied to this, but brought nothing to the light. Besides name calling, do you happen to have something that states otherwise; you're making the Democrats look bad by acting childish.
    • apothe, on 10/12/2007, -4/+9I agree with dkleehammer. I disagree with Killinger777 too, but it doesn't do any good unless you offer some supporting evidence. I don't think he should be dug down just because of a different point of view.

      Imaging you're a terrorist. Who would you want to win?
      Republicans coerced the country into invading Iraq, giving the terrorists a playground for training. Dems wouldn't have.
      Republicans are pro-torture, anti-habeus corpus, and against civil liberties. Although I can't say for sure, I'd be willing to bet that terrorists enjoy the idea of freedom going down the toilet.
      Republicans rule by using fear, and nothing else. They offer no vision or hope for humanity. They offer only future violence, death, and destruction in exchange for forwarding their agenda. This is the definition of terrorism.

      It's time for the citizenry to think things through. Even though the democrats are part of the problem of Imperial corporate-America, at least they aren't so violent and stupid about it.

      The terrorists want to keep republicans in office because they have the same vision of a chaotic Earth where power is freely available to those with weapons. The civilians dying all over the world because of the USA want the democrats to win.

      (Eventually, the green party would be best, but that's a little too unrealistic right now).
    • erkokite, on 10/12/2007, -3/+8hmmm, imagine your a terrorist. Who would you want to win?
      Terrorists want more American soldiers to kill, reps want to stay in Iraq, reps win.
      Terrorists want to destroy the USA, Reps want to destroy the US constitution with wiretaps, Patriot Act and the Military Commisions Act, reps win.
      Terrorists want to recruit more radicals from Iraq, reps want to stay in Iraq, reps win.
      Terrorists want us to keep wasting our time following false leads, reps want to torture everybody who looks arabic until they confess to made up crimes, reps win.
      Terrorists want to us to look bad in international standing, Reps want to defy the Geneva Conventions and the Kyoto protocol, reps win.

      Yup, terrorists surely would prefer Reps in office. I don't know if that effects insurgents or not, but given a choice I guarantee terrorists would prefer reps.
    • dkleehammer, on 10/12/2007, -4/+2"The terrorists want to keep republicans in office because they have the same vision of a chaotic Earth where power is freely available to those with weapons."

      As we've seen before one group is always more power hungry than another and wants to be the supreme power. That being said, why would a terrorists group want America to Republicans in office and fighting for freedom in other countries where we would shutdown terrorist cells in that country? Think that through a little bit more.
    • sereth, on 10/12/2007, -1/+9Killinger...every post your responses get dumber and dumber.

      I don't think they care who is in office just as long as we don't leave the middle east. Osama and the rest of the 'leaders' over there crave nothing but power. In order to have power you need to amass an army of people and the perfect lightning rod for creating plenty of god-fearing ignorant soldiers is to have an occupying army on your 'homeland'

      Two choices..we leave the middle east and Iraq falls into a civil war that soon turns into another Taliban (or another strict religious rule state) and it smolders with little worldwide growth, but leads to complacentcy and possible future 9/11 events when we let our guard down. Or you continue to fan the flames and create an active playground for these leaders to throw their toy soldiers around creating world wide recognition of their mission and just plain chaos. Both choices suck.

      To even buy into this bull crap they they support one party over the other is so ignorant.
  • Vryz, on 10/12/2007, -4/+14Yup, Al-Qaeda and the Dems are on the same side. It's so obvious -- Gay Marriage, Abortion, Atheism, Pro-Torture -- with so much in common, how could they not be best the best of friends.
  • fredrated, on 10/12/2007, -4/+9These people are nothing but murdering trash. At the end of the Nuremberg trials the Germans were declared guilty of "waging aggressive war". The sooner these war criminals are swinging at the end of a rope the better off the world will be.
  • rabiddogma, on 10/12/2007, -4/+9Everyone should listen to Rummy, he has so much credibility and is so right about everything ... *cough*
  • psyops, on 10/12/2007, -10/+2This man obviously studies history. Rumsfeld = HERO
  • tesler, on 10/12/2007, -12/+4Al Qaeda influenced the Spanish elections with the train bombing, so why not the US elections ? I guess some people on this group will lie, distort just to avoid facing the obvious truth.

    The terrorist, and the Dems (unintentional or not) seem to have the same goal- see US troops out of Iraq.
    • JonForTheWin, on 10/12/2007, -3/+7Government sponsored terrorism backfired there and it's backfiring here too.
    • TheToecutter, on 10/12/2007, -1/+10The "obvious truth" is our country is currently being led be a group of utterly corrupt morons.
    • rabiddogma, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5There is no proof that terrorism influenced the Spanish elections. That was all conjecture. Also there is no proof that terrorists favor one party or any western right wing or left wing ideology over the other. I would suspect that they fail to see the world in those terms at all. There is a lot of evidence that Bush played right into Bin Ladens hands by proving that the US is a lumbering empire-bent monolith that wants to impose its will by force on the rest of the world and gave Bin Ladens ideology a lot more credibility in the Middle East than it ever had before.
  • jkavvy, on 10/12/2007, -3/+10The Republican leadership has been a major boon for Al Qaeda and other jihadists worldwide.

    Terrorist recruiting is at an all-time high. Iraq (along with the ignored Afghanistan) have become perfect jihadist training grounds where they can pick off badly equipped American troops made to endlessly stand around in support of an ill-defined mission.

    World opinion of the United States is at an all-time low.

    One objective of Islamic extremists has always been to remove Saddam Hussein. The United States did the dirty work for them and have paved the way for Iraq to become a Sunni fundamentalist haven (or a ***** theocracy).

    Islamist groups are making major gains in the muslim countries that hold elections.

    Meanwhile the Bush regime continues to coddle up to Saudi Arabia, which finances and exports salafist extremism worldwide, while perpetuating terror on the domestic front with misinformation and exaggeration.

    All the while we are now ill-eqipped to stare down real threats to our country such as Iran and North Korea.

    An administration bent on losing the war on terror would have a hard time doing worse.
    • mikedroz, on 10/12/2007, -7/+1My point is simply that libs are blinded with hatred for Bush. Terrorists are stepping up violence prior to an election to break our will to fight and the media is involved in another Tet offensive.

      What are you talking about? Try putting something coherent together.
  • mikedroz, on 10/12/2007, -12/+4Sounds pretty legit to me. If I were a terrorist I'd be for the people against the war in Iraq. It seems obvious to me that they are trying to influence the elections. Violence is way up, they've got CNN showing snuff films of US soldiers being shot. I'm pretty sure the terrorists want Nancy and Harry because they would likely try and cut off funding for the war.
    • GenghisCon, on 10/12/2007, -2/+6and yet Osama bin Laden is essentially a spokesperson for the Republican party. I wonder if Bush is still giving him money.
    • mikedroz, on 10/12/2007, -8/+3What are you talking about? Swear you libs and your hatred for Bush blinds you. What's happened to Scoop Jackson democrats; people who actually cared about national security. It's like 9-11 never happened for you folks. I'm not saying that Bush and Rumsfeld are perfect, in fact I think they are far from it. You guys just come off like you hate Bush more than the people that attacked us.
    • sereth, on 10/12/2007, -1/+7So mike...You're saying that terrorist don't like violence, are not happy that CNN shows their 'holy' soldiers killing American infidels that have invaded their homeland? They want funding for the war cut so that we leave and they lose their access to free daily propaganda that helps ignite more religious fervor in other countries?

      Your argument makes a case for the complete opposite of what you are saying.
    • Ndiggnation, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5@ mikedroz: More liberals just hate Bush and are soft of terror. I don't see it as a purely partisan issue. If any President had done such a piss poor job at managing foreign relations as this President has done, I would be just as angry. Anyone that doesn't cheer Bush's performance is a terrorist hugging Liberal? Please.

      I consider myself somewhat left leaning, but I voted for Bush the first time around. (I disliked Gore and Lieberman more). I did not vote for Bush the second time. It's all about job approval, how well he's done, not strictly partisan politics.
    • mikedroz, on 10/12/2007, -9/+1@sereth

      My point is simply that libs are blinded with hatred for Bush. Terrorists are stepping up violence prior to an election to break our will to fight and the media is involved in another Tet offensive.

      What are you talking about? Try putting something coherent together.
    • youareretarded, on 10/12/2007, -2/+5I don't know, the terrorist actions caused the world and the US to unite but Bush's actions caused the world and the US to be divided.

      Which one has done more harm? O don't know. I guess only time will tell.
    • sereth, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1I did put something coherent together. Let me put it in 8th grade terms for you.

      "Everything you said does not support your argument"

      I was responding to your original thread where you said NOTHING about Liberal hatred for bush blinding people. Just in case you don't recall here is your original post.


      "Sounds pretty legit to me. If I were a terrorist I'd be for the people against the war in Iraq. It seems obvious to me that they are trying to influence the elections. Violence is way up, they've got CNN showing snuff films of US soldiers being shot. I'm pretty sure the terrorists want Nancy and Harry because they would likely try and cut off funding for the war. "

      Now go re-read my response and then maybe it will be more 'coherent'. Don't get all high and mighty on me , you can't even follow your own thread.
    • jkavvy, on 10/12/2007, -2/+6mikedroz: "My point is simply that libs are blinded with hatred for Bush. Terrorists are stepping up violence prior to an election to break our will to fight and the media is involved in another Tet offensive."

      We lost our will to fight when it became evident that our reason for invading a sovereign country, sacrificing thousands of our troops, and occupying them was all based on *****.

      I was a loyal Republican and Bush supporter when the war started. Now I'm angry at what Bush has done to our country. Open your eyes man.
  • GenghisCon, on 10/12/2007, -6/+15Rumsfeld is a traitor
  • mowgli2001, on 10/12/2007, -5/+5What a douche bag. I can't believe that people actually buy into that crap. Cuz sometimes it's like being catholic and listening to everything the pope says.
  • Azur2, on 10/12/2007, -7/+0Lame.
  • s14sh3r, on 10/12/2007, -7/+5Rumsfeld can bite my cack
  • rmmcclay, on 10/12/2007, -4/+7Rumsfeld? Just part of this insane Adminstration.
    It is staggering what these men have done.

    Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld. Wolfowitz, Rove...omg...
  • Intrepion, on 10/12/2007, -4/+7crap, I'm a terrorist!
  • oneiroi, on 10/12/2007, -2/+8It's all just a sign of how desperate they are. They always try to pull this card out near elections. OMG Terrorists are scared of Republicans, and want Democrats...Democrats are wusses and will go easy on terror.

    You can follow that outlook or you can follow the idea that the Republicans have been actually helping the cause of terrorism through the war as said through the government report....thus the opposite would be true...a vote for Democrats would lessen terrorism.

    I think both view points are useless. vote for who you want not be intimidation or coercion.

  • GabrielS, on 10/12/2007, -5/+4You can generalize that everything that occurs in the month leading up to elections is an attempt to influence them.

    I don't see anything wrong with Rumsfeld's comments. I do think terrorists are concerned with the result of US elections. Why wouldn't they be? If you have a party that has made repeated statements that they will cut off funding for a war they don't wish to fight and that party is elected as the new majority party, then how could the terrorists not be interested in that?

    You're going to tell me that the terrorists would oppose the US Congress cutting off funding for the war in Iraq?

    Think Progress goes beserk on just about anything the Executive branch does these days. But I can't blame them for covering these comments though.
  • GabrielS, on 10/12/2007, -3/+5"MR. HENNEN: I have a source in the Pentagon that has told me that recently there was a website of one of the terrorist groups, and I believe it might even be multiple websites, that are specifically in Arabic talking about influencing our elections in two weeks, about how the next two weeks is very crucial; the violence needs to be ramped up so as to influence the elections. Is that true?

    SEC. RUMSFELD: I have seen those reports that there are terrorist websites that say that. It would be logical, obviously. It worked in Spain. And these people are smart. They're vicious. They're determined. And they watch very carefully what's taking place in the United States. They know there's this coming up. And I wouldn't doubt it for a second."

    TP is selectively quoting the conversation.

    Skip them, go right to the source.

    Transcript: http://www.defenselink.mil/Transcripts/Transcript.aspx?TranscriptID=3766
  • Dyssolve, on 10/12/2007, -2/+7These 'New American Century' guys give republicans a BAD name.
    • GenghisCon, on 10/12/2007, -2/+6PNAC is the most dangerous terrorist organization in the world.
  • spatium, on 10/12/2007, -1/+7I blame the wright brothers for 9/11.
  • pabster, on 10/12/2007, -11/+5LMFAO at all the liberals, as usual.

    The terrorists want Dems in power, there is no question about that. They are weak on terror, weak on national security, weak on military, weak on just about everything.

    And November 7 we will send a message to these bastards.
    • dBLiSS, on 10/12/2007, -3/+6How about giving them a chance, they haven't been in power for a while, besides I don't see your current leadership doing anything.
    • sereth, on 10/12/2007, -3/+8There are plenty of questions about it. You're too busy laughing to bother reading any other posts that argue the opposite.

      So keep laughing it's doing everyone a world of good. I was amazed at your well thought out blanket shot at democrats and liberals. In fact there are many politicians both dem and republican that are not weak on war, military and national security.

      What bastards are we sending messages to and what exactly is this message? Please enlighten us.

    • Jennerer, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Did you know that Bush let al zarqawi escape 3 times because it was more politically convenient to have a terrorist boogie man in Iraq than to actually kill a terrorist leader? Just thought you'd want to know. :P
  • FlaNative, on 10/12/2007, -3/+8I was not aware Rumsfield had this type of close contact with terrorists.
    We should water-board him for critical information about the location of these terrorist leaders.

    /I volunteer to water-board him, he will confess to being behind 9-11 and also behind the 7-11 with Foley.
    • ceralor, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2Dugg only for the last line being funny.
  • haggie, on 10/12/2007, -2/+9Actually, if the goal of terrorists is to destroy America, they would be in favor of Republicans maintaining control. Look what the Republicans have done to our proud democracy in just six years...
  • soleinhabitant, on 10/12/2007, -2/+6I posted this in the comments when Bush said there was no evidence terrorist were trying to influence our elections. Worth repeating.
    ....
    Let me get this straight.

    Republicans imply last week (and now this week) that the terrorists are trying to influence elections. Saying that the terrorist are hoping that people will be fed up with the violence and vote for Democrats.

    Simultaneously, the RNCC puts out a scary commercial featuring the terrorists and their statements, hoping it will scare people into voting for the Republicans.
    (video) http://www.gop.com/MultiMedia/MediaPlayer.aspx?Id=1136

    Seems like they are trying to have it both ways.

    So, who is using terrorism to influence elections?
  • h00paj00, on 10/12/2007, -3/+3It's more like, the Terrorists want us to be fighting amongst ourselves.
  • worldgate, on 10/12/2007, -3/+7Ahahahahahhahahahahhaha the Republicans are at it again. Why dont they just say

    A vote for a democrate, is a vote for terrorism.

    • GenghisCon, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6They do. Or haven't you seen that ad they're using with bin Laden and the mushroom cloud?
  • sockrebel, on 10/12/2007, -2/+6yeah, the Democrats winning the US Elections. I'm sure that's the primary thought of the Iraqi insurgents fighting the occupation of their own country.
    /sarcasm
  • scorchedearth, on 10/12/2007, -2/+4typical american 'the world revolves around us' attitude

    sorry america, it doesn't
  • zeiben, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5"No one likes to think they’re being manipulated. "

    Rummy, when you lose in November, and you want to know why, look no further than your own words...
  • Fetching more discussions...
    Show 51 - 76 of 76 discussions
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.