Title: Great Keith Olberman rant - Slams Rumsfeld but good :) Source:
youtube URL Source:http://utube Published:Sep 1, 2006 Author:Keith Oberman Post Date:2006-09-01 18:01:02 by Jethro Tull Keywords:None Views:807 Comments:72
I would hope that everyone would not accept the tone of this mans "dissent" and equate it with fact.
It is burdened with errors that the writers well know, making it shallow intellectually at best.
Knowingly omitting well known facts, trying to stifle others, and worst of all maligning others for doing the very same thing he is doing is rather arrogant.
Again, disregard the tone, that is his weapon, not what he has to say. Read a transcript of his rant and you will feel quite differently.
"It is burdened with errors that the writers well know, making it shallow intellectually at best."
Do you have an example of this please so we know what sort of error you speak of? His comments actually seem understated and give Rummy far more leeway then many of us here would give him.
It is hard to know what you are getting at without an example, thanks.
Do you have an example of this please so we know what sort of error you speak of?
Mike..
If you did not "catch" the errors then you were not paying attention, or you are short handed in history. May I suggest you read a transcript and find the errors yourself, it will perhaps broaden your history background which seems to be sorely lacking.
I am quite fine on history. But history is much like politics, not only is it distorted by the victor writing the history books, but everyone has an opinion about it.
I am well aware there are original historical sources and secondary historical sources as well. I merely asked you a question meant to ascertain where you are coming from in regards to your comment. I know quite a bit about the events before, after and during the Great Patriotic War/WW II. You need not worry about that.
I am well aware there are original historical sources and secondary historical sources as well. I merely asked you a question meant to ascertain where you are coming from in regards to your comment. I know quite a bit about the events before, after and during the Great Patriotic War/WW II. You need not worry about that.
Mike...
Traanslation, brief and simple...You indeed are short handed on history.
I might suggest you in particular disregard the tone and sift thru the written transcript.
By the way, the gentleman reminded me very much of the delivery of Hitler. Like Hitler the people understood nothing but were aroused by the tone of the speech. Think about it, are you in that group???
I might suggest you in particular disregard the tone and sift thru the written transcript.
that's good advice especially since i tend to miss a lot of the content in video. one thing i did notice was Olberman's referring to the US as a democracy, but i'm sure the errors you caught were much more egregious. what is the main disinfo that you're referring to, Cyni?
what is the main disinfo that you're referring to, Cyni?
A transcript of his "speech" will read totally different than what his "tone" delivered. I remember listening to Hitler during the 1930s, you did not have to understand German to gather the tone of what he was saying. His audiences were entralled. If you read William L. Shirer he tells you he was there, understood German and came away amazed that the people loved the "tone" of his delivery, knew nothing of the content.
More than once Shirer says he was appalled that people could not grasp what Hitler was saying, rather they were in a frenzy over theatrics.
Do you recall Oberman mentioning the 1930s, very briefly???? What did he leave out???
Didn't he die a few years back kinda young? He looked to be in great shape & health and I remember it took me by surprise. He was a wonderful historian. LOved his appearances on C-Span with Brian Lamb.
Didn't he die a few years back kinda young? He looked to be in great shape & health and I remember it took me by surprise. He was a wonderful historian. LOved his appearances on C-Span with Brian Lamb.
Shirer died few years ago.
He was my favorite historian.
He warned people about Hitler, no one paid attention. I cannot recall if he did or did not speak of connivance of Russia. That fails me.
That was thing I learned from his book. Pay attention to what the speaker is saying, not "how" he is saying it. Big difference and I never forgot it.
I watched Bobby Kennedy at a whistlestop campaign trip.. Afterwards I asked a very enthused lady what he had to say as she was leaving. Her answer, "I dont know what he said but he said it well"...
No, of course not! The words are strong and clear. He was flippant and sarcastic. It was a beautiful twist on Rumsfeld's failed attempt to make us all enablers to the terrorists, blind to the enormous evil war machine in the middle-east. It might have worked 4 years ago, but 4 years ago they had the support of most Americans.
When u read it, you have time to pause and consider, and perhaps detect half truth or omission. With live broadcast, he hurries u from one point to another as he does not want u to consider or think about what was said.