It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Should Karl Rove apologize for his remarkable remarks?

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 24 2005 @ 11:36 AM
link   
news.yahoo.com...



WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Democrats demanded an apology from top White House adviser Karl Rove on Thursday for saying liberals responded weakly to the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, a request quickly rejected by the White House.

The complaints were the latest aftershocks in a bitter partisan battle in Washington over U.S. foreign and domestic policy and followed a Republican-led uproar over remarks made by Illinois Democratic Sen. Dick Durbin, who compared U.S. treatment of detainees at Guantanamo Bay to that meted out by the Nazis, at Soviet gulags or by Cambodia's Pol Pot.

Senate Democratic leader Harry Reid of Nevada issued a statement saying "it is time to stop using Sept. 11 as a political wedge issue."

"Karl Rove should immediately and fully apologize for his remarks or he should resign," Reid said. "The lesson of Sept. 11 is not different for conservatives, liberals or moderates."

Speaking to the Conservative Party of New York State on Wednesday night, Rove said: "Conservatives saw the savagery of 9/11 in the attacks and prepared for war; liberals saw the savagery of the 9/11 attacks and wanted to prepare indictments and offer therapy and understanding for our attackers."

Rove cited a petition the liberal organization moveon.org circulated after 9/11 urging moderation and restraint in responding to the attacks, and Durbin's comment about the U.S. detention facility at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.

"Let me put this in fairly simple terms: Al Jazeera now broadcasts to the region the words of Sen. Durbin, certainly putting America's men and women in uniform in greater danger. No more needs to be said about the motives of liberals," Rove said.

Massachusetts Democratic Sen. John Kerry said: "Karl Rove doesn't owe me an apology...he doesn't owe Democrats an apology, He owes the country an apology."


well its not the same thing as Senator Durbin calling the men and women in uniform as a bunch of Nazis but he is insulting the Democrats as softies and believing that terrorists should go see a doctor because they need help.




[edit on 24-6-2005 by deltaboy]ed to add BB to quote

[edit on 24-6-2005 by DontTreadOnMe]




posted on Jun, 24 2005 @ 12:00 PM
link   
I heard the quote on cable TV, and it was not FOX. It seems as if Rove is reporting what some liberals actually DID after 9/11.
Why should there be an apology for pointing out the truth.

www.foxnews.com...

"It's somewhat puzzling why all these Democrats ... who responded forcefully after 9-11, who voted to support President Bush's pursuit of the war on terror, are now rallying to the defense of Moveon.org, this liberal organization who put out a petition in the days after 9-11 and said that we ought not use military force in responding to 9-11," Bartlett said on NBC on Friday. "That is who Karl Rove cited in that speech ... There is no need to apologize."

Appearing on CBS, Bartlett said that Rove was "just pointing out that MoveOn.org is a liberal organization that didn't defend or accept the way that we prosecuted the war in the days after" the Sept. 11, 2001 terror attacks on New York and Washington.


Also:
White House Stands Behind Rove Comments

ed. spelling

[edit on 24-6-2005 by DontTreadOnMe]



posted on Jun, 24 2005 @ 03:57 PM
link   

Liberals saw the savagery of the 9/11 attacks and wanted to prepare indictments and offer therapy and understanding for our attackers. Conservatives saw the savagery of 9/11 and the attacks and prepared for war. Conservatives saw what happened to us on 9/11 and said we will defeat our enemies. Liberals saw what happened to us and said we must understand our enemies.


Rove must be smoking something. I really think he owes Rumsfeld and the Joint Chiefs an apology more than anyone else. You know how those pesky white Christian Republicans hate the truth.

Doesn't "making war" involve understanding our enemies? Is Rove actually saying that we just went off to war without knowing the enemy? I mean, clearly, we had no clue about our new "friends", the Northern Alliance when they were "helping" us in Afghanistan. Or the Iraqi insurgents. Perhaps those darn liberals are on to something with all that "understanding" crap.

And Rove has the timeline all wrong, but after four years and with hundreds of enemy combatants in Gitmo, how about some indictments? Why not show the world how Democracy works and try these people publicly for their crimes? If they are criminals, shouldn't they be tried, convicted and sentenced? Or is Rove implying that the Democratic justice system--and our Constitution--doesn't work?

But even more curious, why are indictments only the domain of liberals? I thought that the halls of justice belong to all Americans. Are conservatives supposed to condone imprisonment without due process or even worse--torture? What gives, Karl?

The biggest issue is that Rove is just making things up again, so he could probably use a little therapy himself for his compulsive lying issues. Bush had the support of the entire country to go to war--liberal and conservative alike--in the days and months after 9/11. To say that liberals didn't want to go to war is just false. Even moveon.org--the organization he cited, supported the war in Afghanistan.

Liberals wanted to defeat our enemies--but we wanted to defeat the enemies that actually attacked us on 9/11. Let's not engage in revisionist history here. When the focus shifted from Al Qaeda to Iraq, that's when many people started feeling betrayed (especially with the devisive tactics used to make people believe that Saddam Hussein was involved with 9/11. When the search for Osama bin Laden was rebranded as the "War on Terror", things started looking suspicious.)

Although I really don't care if Rove apologizes, I think that Sen. Reid is right--perhaps Rove should step down. I think ole' Karl is clearly losing his mind.



posted on Jun, 24 2005 @ 04:24 PM
link   

Rove must be smoking something. I really think he owes Rumsfeld and the Joint Chiefs an apology more than anyone else. You know how those pesky white Christian Republicans hate the truth.


Ahh, thank you Howard Dean for helping to push your party even further in the biggotry department. You've done a stellar job at polarizing this country more than it already was.

To the question, should Karl Rove apologize for his unremarkable remarks? This demand is a vindictive reaction to the reaction Durbin recieved for saying our guards and our policies are similar to Nazi Germany's. Tit for tat?

What did Karl Rove say? He said Dems are soft on terror, that their reaction wouldn't work. While Bush went to war, the Dems wanted to sit down and talk and understand the minds of our enemies so we could blame ourselves for their actions.

One question. What did Karl Rove say that was false?



posted on Jun, 24 2005 @ 04:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by junglejake

Rove must be smoking something. I really think he owes Rumsfeld and the Joint Chiefs an apology more than anyone else. You know how those pesky white Christian Republicans hate the truth.


Ahh, thank you Howard Dean for helping to push your party even further in the biggotry department. You've done a stellar job at polarizing this country more than it already was.

To the question, should Karl Rove apologize for his unremarkable remarks? This demand is a vindictive reaction to the reaction Durbin recieved for saying our guards and our policies are similar to Nazi Germany's. Tit for tat?

What did Karl Rove say? He said Dems are soft on terror, that their reaction wouldn't work. While Bush went to war, the Dems wanted to sit down and talk and understand the minds of our enemies so we could blame ourselves for their actions.

One question. What did Karl Rove say that was false?


I think you are confused.

I said that Rove was recreating history after 9/11. Both liberals and conservatives wanted to go after Al Qaeda and supported the war in Afghanistan. Iraq was a different story.

And the GOP has been cornering the market on dishing out Nazi name-calling for ages. Rick Santorum calling Dems Nazis over the filibuster, the RNC video with images of Kerry, Gore, Gephart and HITLER, Grover Norquist comparing the Dems stance on the estate tax to the Holocaust... oy vey....

And Rove didn't say the Dems are soft on terror. Didn't you hear? He is talking about Liberals (lie)


Chairman Ken Mehlman said a litany of comments by Democratic elected officials and their liberal allies underscored Rove's point. "It is outrageous," he said, "that the same Democratic leaders who refused to repudiate or criticize Dick Durbin's slandering of our military are now attacking Karl Rove for stating the facts. . . . Karl didn't say the Democratic Party. He said liberals."
source


And I found the full text of Rove's speech here. If you want to accuse anyone of dividing the country, I would send your boy a letter. And as far as his full quote, see below.

Moveon.org did support the war in Afghanistan and there was overwhelming support for fighting the Taliban. He is lying about half of the country in his rant about liberals.


But perhaps the most important difference between conservatives and liberals can be found in the area of national security. Conservatives saw the savagery of 9/11 and the attacks and prepared for war; liberals saw the savagery of the 9/11 attacks and wanted to prepare indictments and offer therapy and understanding for our attackers. In the wake of 9/11, conservatives believed it was time to unleash the might and power of the United States military against the Taliban; in the wake of 9/11, liberals believed it was time to submit a petition. I am not joking. Submitting a petition is precisely what Moveon.org did. It was a petition imploring the powers that be" to "use moderation and restraint in responding to the terrorist attacks against the United States."

I don't know about you, but moderation and restraint is not what I felt as I watched the Twin Towers crumble to the earth; a side of the Pentagon destroyed; and almost 3,000 of our fellow citizens perish in flames and rubble.

Moderation and restraint is not what I felt — and moderation and restraint is not what was called for. It was a moment to summon our national will — and to brandish steel.

MoveOn.Org, Michael Moore and Howard Dean may not have agreed with this, but the American people did.

Conservatives saw what happened to us on 9/11 and said: we will defeat our enemies. Liberals saw what happened to us and said: we must understand our enemies. Conservatives see the United States as a great nation engaged in a noble cause; liberals see the United States and they see Nazi concentration camps, Soviet gulags, and the killing fields of Cambodia.


edited to shorten link

[edit on 24-6-2005 by DontTreadOnMe]



posted on Jun, 25 2005 @ 01:08 AM
link   
Number one Rove didnt say some liberals he said liberalsas in we're all a bunch of mollycoddling limp wristed panty waists who are to weak to be left unattended. Its sickening how people defend this. Its even more sickening how people compare this to Durbins statement which was blown completely out of proportion. Lets compare the statements shall we?


Dick Durbin
When you read some of the graphic descriptions of what has occurred here [at Guantanamo Bay]--I almost hesitate to put them in the [Congressional] Record, and yet they have to be added to this debate. Let me read to you what one FBI agent saw. And I quote from his report:

On a couple of occasions, I entered interview rooms to find a detainee chained hand and foot in a fetal position to the floor, with no chair, food or water. Most times they urinated or defecated on themselves, and had been left there for 18-24 hours or more. On one occasion, the air conditioning had been turned down so far and the temperature was so cold in the room, that the barefooted detainee was shaking with cold. . . . On another occasion, the [air conditioner] had been turned off, making the temperature in the unventilated room well over 100 degrees. The detainee was almost unconscious on the floor, with a pile of hair next to him. He had apparently been literally pulling his hair out throughout the night. On another occasion, not only was the temperature unbearably hot, but extremely loud rap music was being played in the room, and had been since the day before, with the detainee chained hand and foot in the fetal position on the tile floor.

If I read this to you and did not tell you that it was an FBI agent describing what Americans had done to prisoners in their control, you would most certainly believe this must have been done by Nazis, Soviets in their gulags, or some mad regime--Pol Pot or others--that had no concern for human beings. Sadly, that is not the case. This was the action of Americans in the treatment of their prisoners.



Versus



Karl Rove
But perhaps the most important difference between conservatives and liberals can be found in the area of national security. Conservatives saw the savagery of 9/11 and the attacks and prepared for war; liberals saw the savagery of the 9/11 attacks and wanted to prepare indictments and offer therapy and understanding for our attackers. In the wake of 9/11, conservatives believed it was time to unleash the might and power of the United States military against the Taliban; in the wake of 9/11, liberals believed it was time to... submit a petition. I am not joking. Submitting a petition is precisely what Moveon.org did. It was a petition imploring the "powers that be" to "use moderation and restraint in responding to the... terrorist attacks against the United States."

Conservatives saw what happened to us on 9/11 and said: we will defeat our enemies. Liberals saw what happened to us and said: we must understand our enemies. Conservatives see the United States as a great nation engaged in a noble cause; liberals see the United States and they see ... Nazi concentration camps, Soviet gulags, and the killing fields of Cambodia.


On one hand we have a man saying that keeping a man chained to the floor mired in his own filth sounds like something Nazis or some mad despot would do and not actions befitting that of America. Hard to argue with the logic behind that opinion unless of course you feel actions like that are befitting of association with America. On the other we have a man misrepresenting and outright slandering a huge segment of the American populace not to mention the opinions of the majority of the people in the city he's visiting. The city I might add that suffered the most grievous casualties on 911 and whos opinion on the subject might maybe have some bearing on what our policy should be in my opinion. Its one thing to compare despicable actions with other despicable actions its another thing quite entirely to insult the people of america so grievously. Let alone the very people affected by 911 (us New York liberals after all what could we possibly know about terrorism right?)

It will be a dark day if I ever meet this punk(rhymes with sass) face to face.

[edit on 25-6-2005 by boogyman]



posted on Jun, 25 2005 @ 01:53 AM
link   
He should absolutely not apologize for just saying the obvious truth!

This is just being hyped up by the liberal media to try to coverup the outrageous lies told by Dick Durban and Howard Dean.



posted on Jun, 25 2005 @ 03:26 AM
link   
It's sad that 'ol Turdblossom even gets on the news or people know his name.

Worst 'behind the scenes' man ever.

I couldn't believe American Dad just did an episode about him.







 
0

log in

join