I was wondering what topic to write about this week until I was unfortunately listening to Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld addressing the American Legion Conference. His comments so incensed me that it made up my mind very quickly as to this week's editorial. It is an editorial opinion about intimidation tactics designed to stifle free speech and opposition.

The Secretary of Defense, for those lucky enough to have missed his speech, told the audience that those opposing the Iraq War were "morally and intellectually confused" as to the best interests of America. He compared the current "war on terrorism" to the world war with Nazi Germany. The Secretary essentially implied that true Americans understood the Iraq War and fully supported the efforts there to fight terrorism. However, there are those Americans who like in WW II desire to appease the new Hitler (also known as the "terrorists") and put this country's safety and security at risk. As in WW II, America would have never defeated the Nazi Facists if we had listened to the war critics. Such Americans were then and are now "morally and intellectually confused".

Secretary Rumsfeld brought back the memory of an infamous U.S. Senator in the 1950s known as Joseph McCarthy. Senator McCarthy, in his paranoia to find and rid this country of communists, branded all dissent against his efforts as anti-American and anti-patriotic actions. His tactics were so successful that he scared all citizens of being accused of being a communist, including politicians, businessmen and ordinary citizens. Even the press became afraid to criticize Senator McCarthy. McCarthy was right and anyone who disagreed was wrong. Friend turned against friend. Those in the wrong suffered the consequences. It was a bad, very bad chapter in the history of this country. McCarthy continued his ruthless campaign against communism until one reporter, Edward R. Murrow of CBS News, had the courage to take him to task.

Edward R. Murrow put it this way: "We must not confuse dissent with disloyalty. 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 which for the moment were unpopular."

I think it may do us all good to remember that phrase "we must not confuse dissent with disloyalty". For it was not the Americans but the Nazis who stifled dissent and demanded blind obedience and unquestioned loyalty to those in power. It was the Nazis who branded all those in dissent or opposition to their policies as "morally and intellectually confused". It was a dangerous practice then and certainly not a practice to be adopted in America. For the strength of America lies in its ability to question those in power. It is the strength of America through dissent to require accountability from its leaders. Dissent requires leaders to question their actions and policies. Blind loyalty and unquestioned actions are a recipe for disaster.

Secretary Rumsfeld's comments were an insult to every American citizen, whether Republican, Democrat or Independent. His comments were intended to stifle criticism under the guise of patriotism. His comments implied that any dissent was anti-American. His comments were dangerous to the fabric of what makes America strong.

This is not a question about the Iraq War or the "war on terrorism". It is a statement of the danger of leaders who try to preclude criticism and dissent by portraying all opponents as not being patriotic and not being true Americans.

I think it is obvious that the Secretary needs to review his history books again. I don't think there are any Americans against the "war on terror". I don't think there are any Americans who are not concerned with being safe and secure for themselves and their families. And, most importantly, I don't think there are any Americans who need to be told to sit down and shut up! Americans, regardless of their opinions and differences, are not "morally and intellectually confused" over the "war on terrorism". However, Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld may be? Let's hope not!

Lets wakeup America and at least think about it!

The American Centurians
http://www.theamericancenturians.com
theamericancenturians@yahoo.com

And that is important in any long struggle or long war, where any kind of moral or intellectual confusion about who and what is
right or wrong, can weaken the ability of free societies to persevere.

I stop out of my tracks because it is just outrageous. Rummy plainy said for everyone who is against him to shut the f**k up. Free speech is the life and blood of "free societes," what a moron.
Especially in complex times like, "any long struggle or long war," free speech is needed. All craps and lies like Rummy's speech will be ignored and thrown to garbage, and the thruth and solutions will come out of any willing and brave people to use their freedom of speech.

How dare he ask the question, "is [America] the source of the world's troubles?" America put Saddam Hussein in power to fight Iran and that made Iraq be "brutalized by a cruel and dangerous dictatorship." Wasn't rummy Hussein's VIP guest at his palace?
There are so much more to say, and thanks to Keith Olbermann eloquent speech that should not be taken lightly because this sample of a free speech should show that the bush/rummy and their policies are just wrong.

In fascist regimes, corporate interests are exalted over individual ones (the bankruptcy bill; the Medicare prescription drug plan), and labor unions become ineffectual. Corporate cronyism -- raised to an art form by Suharto of Indonesia -- is rampant (Halliburton; Jack Abramoff), and the concentration of economic power is encouraged (what antitrust law?). Disdain is shown for human rights (Guantanamo; the PATRIOT Act). The news media is obsequious and servile, dominated by corporate interests (FAUX News). The military is lionized and patriotism is emphasized (9/11), as regimes adopt a belligerent foreign policy (invasion of Iraq). Public officials are above the law (‘signing statements’; governmental immunity). Elections are less-than-transparent, if not total shams (Diebold) -- and courts serve primarily to protect the regime (judges writing ad hoc law in unpublished opinions). Starting to sound familiar?

We don't face a new brand of fascism -- it looks more like the vintage one.

Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld sparked ire from Democrats by saying the world faces "a new type o...

Today's mini-posts, newest items at the top:...

His conflation of Rumsfeld with Chamberlain was weak, especially considering that Chamberlain favored appeasement of Hitler. He was begging to get trounced for that point. From there, his slinging of the "fascist" label was as predictable as it was awkward.

The Murrow quote was timely though. He should have stayed closer to that message: focusing on the value of dissent, and the fundamental American suspicion of any government that relies on belittling it to defend their position.