What a deceitful and disingenuous piece of shit. (Rumsfeld, not the interviewer)
He got caught in a line of questioning he did not want to answer, and prevaricated and tried to weasel out of it. I hope there is a special place in hell (as Dante says, the ninth and lowest circle is reserved for traitors, and Rummy and his ilk are the worst form of traitor) for creatures like him.
Although a worldwide economic collapse and deconstruction of the "regulatory democratic governmental system" would be painful, and result in much death and violence, it would (almost) be worth it if it meant that the parasitical "leaders" (like Rummy, Bu$h 1&2, Bernanke, Geithner, 0bama, etc.) that have created so much death and chaos with their hubristic and evil campaigns of domination were stripped of their wealth and power and forced to pay for their crimes against humanity.
These vile and worthless creatures disgust me, and seeing them on TV turns my stomach.
I can't attest to his contributions during his tenure in our government, but man is this guy not good at interviewing. Asking a question is an innocent thing; the most civil course of action he should have taken was to respectfully refuse to answer. Instead he attacked the character of the person in front of him.
I would have responded to the cutting remark that no, I want the world to see how you don't respond to my questions. Do you want to continue (leaving off the sir or Mr. Secretary)? Why not just say Mr. Former Secretary?
Rumsfeld is a piece of sh!t - but that wasn't exactly the most respectful way to conduct an interview. Not that Rumsfeld deserves respect, of course, but he is ultimately under no obligation to answer questions...
Rumsfield is a bag of shit. What a fucking liar that man is.
Re: the Number of troops. To destroy Iraq's military, a small force would be needed, but to occupy the country long term, they needed a much larger force. General Eric Shinseki, who they didn't listen to, said they needed at minimum several hundred thousand, practically double what they actually put in to occupy.
The most interesting part to me is Rumsfeld's offhand remark just at the beginning: "The value they put on human life is very different from the value Americans put on it." Imperial war criminals like Rumsfeld always comfort themselves with this fiction. It makes it so much easier to stomach when you are killing them in large numbers.
What a deceitful and disingenuous piece of shit. (Rumsfeld, not the interviewer)
ReplyDeleteHe got caught in a line of questioning he did not want to answer, and prevaricated and tried to weasel out of it. I hope there is a special place in hell (as Dante says, the ninth and lowest circle is reserved for traitors, and Rummy and his ilk are the worst form of traitor) for creatures like him.
Although a worldwide economic collapse and deconstruction of the "regulatory democratic governmental system" would be painful, and result in much death and violence, it would (almost) be worth it if it meant that the parasitical "leaders" (like Rummy, Bu$h 1&2, Bernanke, Geithner, 0bama, etc.) that have created so much death and chaos with their hubristic and evil campaigns of domination were stripped of their wealth and power and forced to pay for their crimes against humanity.
These vile and worthless creatures disgust me, and seeing them on TV turns my stomach.
I can't attest to his contributions during his tenure in our government, but man is this guy not good at interviewing. Asking a question is an innocent thing; the most civil course of action he should have taken was to respectfully refuse to answer. Instead he attacked the character of the person in front of him.
ReplyDeleteI would have responded to the cutting remark that no, I want the world to see how you don't respond to my questions. Do you want to continue (leaving off the sir or Mr. Secretary)? Why not just say Mr. Former Secretary?
ReplyDeleteHe and Warren Buffett must be class mates at interview school.
ReplyDeleteRumsfeld is a piece of sh!t - but that wasn't exactly the most respectful way to conduct an interview. Not that Rumsfeld deserves respect, of course, but he is ultimately under no obligation to answer questions...
ReplyDeleteThis would make an excellent case study for a journalism class - how to maintain your composure, how to persevere, how to not grovel, ....
ReplyDeleteDo journalism students study interviews or do they just wing it?
Telling the interviewer that he's "prejorative"....wow....the irony is so rich it needs no more comment.
ReplyDeleteI'd love to be a fly on the wall during his judgement before God almighty.
Rumsfield is a bag of shit. What a fucking liar that man is.
ReplyDeleteRe: the Number of troops. To destroy Iraq's military, a small force would be needed, but to occupy the country long term, they needed a much larger force. General Eric Shinseki, who they didn't listen to, said they needed at minimum several hundred thousand, practically double what they actually put in to occupy.
Why did he consent to this interview? It's not like 60 Minutes ambush style journalism. The interviewer was clearly enjoying this.
ReplyDeleteThere should be a rogues gallery of these kinds of interviews which would testify to their lives for the present and future to judge.
ReplyDeleteThe most interesting part to me is Rumsfeld's offhand remark just at the beginning: "The value they put on human life is very different from the value Americans put on it." Imperial war criminals like Rumsfeld always comfort themselves with this fiction. It makes it so much easier to stomach when you are killing them in large numbers.
ReplyDelete