Rumsfeld Shoots The Messenger
Rumsfeld Shoots The Messenger
This morning, Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld brought up the stories of ongoing abuse of detainees at Guantanamo Bay. Instead of addressing the actual charges, however, Rumsfeld attacked the media for continuing to cover the story. He said:
Two of the country’s largest newspapers, for example, have devoted more than 80 editorials combined since March of 2004 to Abu Ghraib and detainee issues, often repeating the same erroneous assertions and recycling the same stories. By comparison, precious little has been written by those editorial boards about the beheading of innocent civilians by terrorists, the thousands of bodies found in mass graves in Iraq, the allegations of rape of women and girls by U.N. workers in the Congo.
Journalist Finley Peter Dunne once famously said: “The job of the newspaper is to comfort the afflicted and afflict the comfortable.” The job of the free press is to shine a light on injustice and demand accountability from our government. Donald Rumsfeld needs to stop blaming the messenger and start rectifying the problem itself.
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
Sucks when you’re in the cross-hairs, doesn’t it Rummy?
June 1st, 2005 at 11:42 amI agree. Rumsfield is hard to like, and our policy of detaining hundreds of “alleged” terrorists for months/years is abhorrent.
Sending them to other countries to be tortured is not very nice, either.
When America started paying a bounty for info on terrorists, it was inevitable that many innocents would be picked up and interrogated.
It is a shame and makes America look pretty bad, but I’m not sure how much worse we can look in the eyes of our enemies. After centuries of exploitation and using the world as our toilet, it is going to be hard to patch things up.
June 1st, 2005 at 11:44 amB.S. Has a Freudian slip, here. America is only two centuries old. He just proved Philip Agre’s point:
http://polaris.gseis.ucla.edu/pagre/conservatism.html
What Is Conservatism and What Is Wrong with It?
Liberals in the United States have been losing political debates to conservatives for a quarter century. In order to start winning again, liberals must answer two simple questions: what is conservatism, and what is wrong with it? As it happens, the answers to these questions are also simple:
Q: What is conservatism?
June 1st, 2005 at 12:12 pmA: Conservatism is the domination of society by an aristocracy.
Q: What is wrong with conservatism?
A: Conservatism is incompatible with democracy, prosperity, and civilization in general. It is a destructive system of inequality and prejudice that is founded on deception and has no place in the modern world.
Yeah, just like he commented during the looting. Made some crack about the same guy being shown carrying the same vase about 50 times.
Wasn’t funny then either.
June 1st, 2005 at 12:38 pmRumsfeld should be tarred and feathered.
USA USA USA
June 1st, 2005 at 1:03 pmI know that a large majority of politicians (republicans, democrates, independents, etc) are similar in that they avoid answering direct questions, but this administration has perfected the artform. They divert the question, force you to look somewhere else, or berate you for not agreeing with their policies and arguments.
The problem is, they are rarely called to task for this practice. Unfortunately, they also know that the attention span of most of the population is short enough to allow them to get away with this.
June 1st, 2005 at 1:09 pmOn the contrary, the public viewed image after image of the butchery against contractors and aid workers taking place in Iraq, streaming videos and all so take it easy Rummy. So, since these people commit atrocities we shall too? I love that logic…..
June 1st, 2005 at 1:19 pmInteresting how at one time it was the media who would scrutinise and critique the government. These days it seems the government is in the biz of critiquing the media and telling them how to function. Nothing surprises me in the “up is down” Bush administration.
June 1st, 2005 at 1:37 pmBuckshot is right there were slaves in the americas for two hundred before the constitutional convention in the late 1700’s. America has a long dirty laundry list.
June 1st, 2005 at 4:23 pmBuckshot is never correct. He is always right. The first “slaves” in this country were white Europeans. Look up indentured servitude. That’s where Buckshot’s ideas would take you, but I would hope we would lock him before that happened. Why are wingers so poorly educated?
June 1st, 2005 at 5:02 pmJordan,
True story. Slaves were used in the early North (& South) American colonies for ten generations or more before America even came into existence. Then it took another 80 years to bring it to a halt. It’s no secret.
June 2nd, 2005 at 1:35 amI hold the US government to a higher standard than terrorists. I guess Rummy doesn’t.
June 2nd, 2005 at 2:04 amTen generations or more!. America always “existed”. Depending on who you speak to, it was “discovered” by the French, the Chinese, the Vikings or Columbus, but there were plenty of indigenous peoples here with rather sophisticated cultures before any od them “discovered” it. The colonies’ declaration of independence from Britain did not “bring America into existence” anymore than any “discovery” of it did. Talk about contradictions in your impeccable logic. I guess the indigenous people here had never read a libertarian treatise, or had the opportunity to purchase any of the fine line of Amway products. As I said, many sold into indentured servitude at Jamestown and other colonies were white europeans. Institutionalized slavery began in Mass. in 1641. If that is ten generations or more, pardon me. I didn’t realize ten year old girls got pregnant that often. Perhaps you know something I don’t.
http://www.liu.edu/cwis/cwp/library/aaslavry.htm
June 2nd, 2005 at 9:45 amwow! that was harsh, SJS. Rock on my brother.
Don’t forget to sign the conyers petition everyone!
Find out what http://www.dailykos.com is organizing that has to do with contacting news outlets.
“It’s not fascism when WE do it”
June 2nd, 2005 at 2:06 pmhttp://www.oldamericancentury.org
James,
One of my ancestors, who have probably been here longer than Buckshot’s or Tony’s, a rather well known Scot was sold into indentured servitude by his British captors after the battle of Dunbar. He ended up in Jamestown, regained his freedom, and really did help to build this country. He was also a rather ferocious warrior, as are all Scots, and became quite a feared indian hunter and killer. He killed his share of the indigenous population here. For that sin, I make amends and atone by volunteering in the local homeless shelter. Business has never been better. There is no room at the inn. I know the poor, very well. When I hear Buckshot’s and Tony’s bullshit, I am after scalps. It’s in my nature. They are my “indians”. I am the indian hunter. You know what happened to the indians, don’t you?
June 2nd, 2005 at 10:04 pmHa! And they are still collecting topknots.
June 2nd, 2005 at 10:23 pm