Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Dumbsfeld is running PR campaign to avoid getting fired. lol

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) Donate to DU
 
PerfectSage Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-30-06 02:14 PM
Original message
Dumbsfeld is running PR campaign to avoid getting fired. lol
Edited on Mon Oct-30-06 03:49 PM by newyawker99
Why hasn't this incompetent dumbshit been fired yet?

<snip>
Pentagon Buttressing Public Relations Efforts


14:30 EST Monday, October 30, 2006

WASHINGTON (AP)--The Pentagon is buttressing its public relations staff and starting an operation akin to a political campaign war room as Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld faces intensifying criticism over the Iraq war.

In a memo obtained by the Associated Press, Dorrance Smith, assistant secretary of defense for public affairs, said new teams of people will "develop messages" for the 24-hour news cycle and "correct the record."

The memo describes an operation modeled after a political campaign - such as that made famous by Bill Clinton's successful 1992 presidential race - calling for a "Rapid Response" section for quickly answering opponents' assertions.

Another branch would coordinate "surrogates." In political campaigns, surrogates are usually high-level politicians or key interest groups who speak or travel on behalf of a candidate or an issue.

The plan would focus more resources on so-called new media, such as the Internet and Web logs. It would also include new workers to book civilian and military guests on television and radio shows.

Pentagon press secretary Eric Ruff didn't provide the exact number of people to be hired, or the costs.


On the Net:

Defense Department: http://www.defenselink.mil


(END) Dow Jones Newswires
10-30-06 1429ET
Copyright (c) 2006 Dow Jones & Company, Inc.

<snip>
-------------------------------------------
EDIT: COPYRIGHT. PLEASE POST ONLY 4 OR 5
PARAGRAPHS FROM THE COPYRIGHTED NEWS SOURCE
PER DU RULES.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
C_U_L8R Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-30-06 02:21 PM
Response to Original message
1. I'd rather they buy $10,000 toilet seats
at least they work
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
acmavm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-30-06 02:22 PM
Response to Original message
2. Correct the record???? Unless the evil evil evil old bastard
can raise the dead, the record doesn't need 'corrected'.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Disturbed Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-30-06 02:26 PM
Response to Reply #2
3. Rumsfailed is a freakin' War Criminal.
He is trying to avoid being indicted for War Crimes.

Rumsfeld Shouldn't be Fired, He Should be Indicted
by Matthew Rothschild

Secretary Rumsfeld has publicly admitted that . . . he ordered an Iraqi national held in Camp Cropper, a high security detention center in Iraq, to be kept off the prisons rolls and not presented to the International Committee of the Red Cross, the report noted. The Geneva Conventions require countries to grant the Red Cross access to all detainees.

http://www.commondreams.org/views06/0418-24.htm

Recently it has been found out that even more detainees were "ghost detainees". The fact that Rumsfeld has not been charged speaks volumes. If Congress wishes to garner any respect they should move forward with Impeachment Declaration of Rumsfeld.



Further Evidence Rumsfeld Implicated in War Crimes
Please read this important post by Marty Lederman, Army Confirms: Rumsfeld Authorized Criminal Conduct.

Here's a key section, but there's more:
The Army's charges against Jordan reflect the view, undoubtedly correct, that the use of forced nudity or intimidation with dogs against detainees subject to military control constitutes cruelty and maltreatment that Article 93 makes criminal. It doesn't matter whether they are or are not "torture," as such; nor does it matter whether the armed forces should be permitted to use such interrogation techniques: As things currently stand, they are unlawful, as even the Army now acknowledges.

But then how can we account for the actions of the Secretary of Defense and his close aides?

On November 27, 2002, Pentagon General Counsel William Haynes, following discussions with Deputy Secretary Wolfowitz, General Myers, and Doug Feith, informed the Secretary of Defense that forced nudity and the use of the fear of dogs to induce stress were lawful techniques, and he recommended that they be approved for use at Guantanamo.
(The lists of techniques to which Haynes was referring can be found in this memorandum.) On December 2, 2002, Secretary Rumsfeld approved those techniques for use at Guantanamo -- and subsequently those techniques were used on detainee Mohammed al-Qahtani.

In other words, the Secretary of Defense authorized criminal conduct.

...

Today's Army charge under UCMJ Article 93 against Lt. Col. Jordan -- for conduct that the SecDef actually authorized as to some detainees -- demonstrates that Rumsfeld approved of, and encouraged, violations of the criminal law.

http://www.discourse.net/archives/2006/04/further_evide...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Sat Aug 30th 2014, 11:29 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC