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.

 

Dump Rumsfeld? Yes or No

page: 1
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 5 2006 @ 08:35 AM
link   
The Democrats are finally picking an issue to push that will resonate across the political spectrum. They are very close to demanding Rumsfeld's firing. It's about time they got around to that. The fact that he is still in charge of Defense after the complete fiasco that is Iraq, is beyond belief.

I'd like to get an informal survey of ATSers on this. Do you think Rumsfeld should resign or not?

I thought he should have been fired in the run-up to the Iraq invasion.



Finally, the Democrats Pick the Correct Battle: Dump Rumsfeld.
Stephen Kaus

For a year, the Democrats have wandered around in the wilderness, falling into the trap of arguing whether troops should be removed (a) immediately, (2) by 2007 or (3) according to some determined, but undisclosed timetable. Of course, this was pointless, as the Democrats had no power to do any of these things, but it did allow the Republicans to come up with the "cut and run" meme.
Finally, the Democrats have settled on a strategy so functional, that even Rahm Emanuel sees its wisdom: call for Donald Rumsfeld to be fired. We cannot get rid of Bush/Cheney right now. Wolfowitz and Feith have left. Chalabi was only an unofficial member of the administration.
That leaves Rumsfeld.
www.huffingtonpost.com...




posted on Sep, 5 2006 @ 08:53 AM
link   
That incompetant clown should have been fired looooong ago. If that's not clear enough...yes.

His mismanagement of the supply situation was reason enough, in and of itself, no bodyarmour, or at least not enough...unamoured humvees...etc...

You can only blame the previous administration for so long before it starts to sound desperate...started sounding that way a long long time ago.

Now in his defense, he doesn't run DOD by himself, far too large a job for one man, but ultimate responsibility lies with him...so he should go, and go soon.

[edit on 5-9-2006 by seagull]



posted on Sep, 5 2006 @ 09:04 AM
link   
I can't help but wonder, what is it exactly that causes DUHbya to cling so tightly to Rummy? Is it their shared criminality? Is he afraid Rummy? Is Rummy another J. Edgar Hoover?

I do believe it is Rummy and Cheney (and their apparatus) that has been in charge from day one.


Without uncle Deadeye Dick, DUHbya would be one lost puppy.



posted on Sep, 5 2006 @ 09:20 AM
link   
No I think its simply that Mr. Bush, what ever his faults, and they are manifest; is loyal to those people who are his freinds...its probably just that simple.

However, in high politics freindship, unfortunately must take a back seat to competance...and I've not seen a great deal of it from the presidents advisors.

Loyalty to one's freinds is never a bad thing...and it's a shame that in this case it's kept him from replacing someone who badly needs replacing.

Loyalty to ones freinds...political neccessity. That is a tough, tough choice. Being President is a tough gig...but we pay him to make those tough calls. Personal likes and dislikes have no place in politics at this level.



posted on Sep, 5 2006 @ 09:30 AM
link   
IMO he should not only get fired... but also arrested, tried, and convicted of treason. Then thrown into Fed supermax facility for the rest of his criminal life.


And, take the rest of the cabal with him... Traitors to our beloved Constitution and our great nation.

alittle strong maybe but thats what I feel. I have no tolorance for those that usurp our greatest treasure and life blood of this country for their own gain. Rumfeld definately falls into this catagory..."let justice be done, though thy heavens fall"

thank you for your time,
TONE23

[edit on 9/5/2006 by TONE23]



posted on Sep, 5 2006 @ 10:22 AM
link   
TONE23, I completely agree with you.

Rumsfeld not only has failed in the position of Secretary of Defense, but he has committed high crimes in office. He should be tried for war crimes.

To say he should be fired, is the greatest of understatements. But its probably the most likely outcome.

If he is gone from his current position, at least he can't do any more damage.



posted on Sep, 5 2006 @ 10:29 AM
link   
Agreed east


While I know he will never face his true fate.. getting him out would at least stop one more war mongerer from wantonly ordering our troops to pay the ultimate sacrifice.

Of course the problem is that if he goes what is to say the next one wont be even worse?..maybe a tad pessimistic I know, but given the way things have been going I cant help but to think negatively about his successor. Of course at the end of the day..I am willing to take that risk.

[edit on 9/5/2006 by TONE23]



posted on Sep, 5 2006 @ 10:33 AM
link   
Not to be contentious here, just curious actually, but what crimes specifically would Rumsfeld be guilty of ?

If you could enlighten me, by citing specific examples and illustrating the laws that were broken, I would appreciate it.

Again, please, if the answer could be limited to specifics and not rancorous rants, I would genuinely be grateful.




[edit on 5-9-2006 by Reality Hurts]



posted on Sep, 5 2006 @ 10:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by Reality Hurts
Not to be contentious here, just curious actually, but what crimes specifically would Rumsfeld be guilty of ?

If you could enlighten me, by citing specific examples and illustrating the laws that were broken, I would appreciate it.

Again, please, if the answer could be limited to specifics and not rancorous rants, I would genuinely be grateful.


It is a long and indepth search to be sure... since, if any of the "law breaking" was clearly provable he would already be prosocuted...But that being what it is, lets try to answer as best I can.. bare with me as this may take more then just one day to really find things that are not absolute crap.

casi.org


(casi) Reuters: "U.S. lawyers warn Bush, Rumsfeld, on war crimes"


NEW YORK, Jan 24 (Reuters) - A group of U.S. law professors opposed to a possible war on Iraq
warned U.S. President George W. Bush on Friday that he and senior government officials could be
prosecuted for war crimes if military tactics violated international humanitarian law.

"Our primary concern ... is the large number of civilian casualties that may result should U.S. and
coalition forces fail to comply with international humanitarian law in using force against Iraq,"
the group, led by the New York-based Center for Constitutional Rights, said in a letter to Bush and
Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld.

The group cited the particular need for U.S. and coalition forces to abide by humanitarian law
requiring warring parties to distinguish between military and civilian areas, use only the level of
force that is militarily necessary and to use weaponry that is proportionate to what is being
targeted.

The letter, which had more than 100 signatories, said the rules had been broken in other recent wars.

source:casi.org


the Article just states that group of lawyers that wrote the letter feel it is possible to prosocute this Administration for war crimes.. particualrly in regards to humanitarian laws and practices. Does Abu Grahib ring a bell? Sure it cant be proven that Rumsfeld gave the orders to torture.. like I said if it was porven we wouldnt be debating it.

This is the tip of the iceburg to be sure... But, like I said, it may take some time to find what I really need to sufficiently answer your question.

Thank you for your time.



posted on Sep, 5 2006 @ 12:23 PM
link   
TONE23, thanks for the reply.

I'm not a fan of Rumsfeld by any stretch of the imagination, and I'm more than open to prosecution for any member of this administration for crimes, should they commit them.

I'm not a big fan however, of people yelling "Criminal!!!" without real justification. Regardless of who it is. I don't care if its Rumsfeld or some poor schmuck in Liverpool, Istanbul, or Miami.

I'd still like to have more facts about bona fide, prosecuteable, criminal behavior. All I can get, in fact.



posted on Sep, 5 2006 @ 12:41 PM
link   
Alot of the problems that I have with Rumfeld center around the Abuse of prisoners and the lack of adherence to Geneva Convention protocols.

washintonpost.com

another Article highlighting some more of the same about prisoner abuse and secret facilities.

Another thing that is far less provable is Rumsfelds links to Gilead Sciences
and the Whole Bird Flu problem. The drug Tamiflu is completely useless yet he is still helping to push this drug at the cost of taxpayers of course....But this is really a side thing for me...



posted on Sep, 5 2006 @ 01:36 PM
link   
I found an article about Rumsfeld and his prosperity concerning the Bird Flu.

cnn.money.com


Rumsfeld's growing stake in Tamiflu
Defense Secretary, ex-chairman of flu treatment rights holder, sees portfolio value growing.
October 31, 2005: 10:55 AM EST
By Nelson D. Schwartz, Fortune senior writer

NEW YORK (Fortune) - The prospect of a bird flu outbreak may be panicking people around the globe, but it's proving to be very good news for Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld and other politically connected investors in Gilead Sciences, the California biotech company that owns the rights to Tamiflu, the influenza remedy that's now the most-sought after drug in the world.

Rumsfeld served as Gilead (Research)'s chairman from 1997 until he joined the Bush administration in 2001, and he still holds a Gilead stake valued at between $5 million and $25 million, according to federal financial disclosures filed by Rumsfeld.

The forms don't reveal the exact number of shares Rumsfeld owns, but in the past six months fears of a pandemic and the ensuing scramble for Tamiflu have sent Gilead's stock from $35 to $47. That's made the Pentagon chief, already one of the wealthiest members of the Bush cabinet, at least $1 million richer.

Source: cnn.money.com


If I was a gullible enough to take Mr. Rumsfeld at his word despite his miserable track record with the war; that would be bad enough. But to expect me to believe that this guy isnt using his govt. position to up his personal financial gain by exploiting our nation with a completely useless vactination(Tamiflu.Infowars ). While making the taxpayers pay for it.



posted on Sep, 5 2006 @ 01:47 PM
link   
Yes he sould fired.
And beyond that put in front of a firing squad on
live Inter/National TV.
Imagine the ratings!



posted on Sep, 5 2006 @ 02:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by TONE23
IMO he should not only get fired... but also arrested, tried, and convicted of treason. Then thrown into Fed supermax facility for the rest of his criminal life.


And, take the rest of the cabal with him... Traitors to our beloved Constitution and our great nation.

alittle strong maybe but thats what I feel. I have no tolorance for those that usurp our greatest treasure and life blood of this country for their own gain. Rumfeld definately falls into this catagory..."let justice be done, though thy heavens fall"

thank you for your time,
TONE23



I don't think I've EVER agreed as STRONGLY with ANYONE as I do TONE.

The BIG question IS: "HOW can WE do it?"

I honestly LOVE this country, BUT I HATE what we've become. The damage that has been done throughout the rest of the world (in THEIR eyes) is irreversible. Democracy need NOT be forced down people's throats. The area of the world that we currently (illegally) occupy has been unstable for centuries and along WE come to "swat the bee's nest". Now it looks like they, in their pursuit to even the score, have the good ole' US of A in their crosshairs.

On the 'flip side', we've given up a LOT of our freedoms, AND in return we're left with the same nudnik’s who GOT us into this mess in the FIRST place (to protect us)!

QUITE a paradox I'd say!

From the immigration problem, to spewing THIER policies to other countries worldwide that may NOT be ready for democracy, to the Constitution being called 'A Goddamned piece of paper'...It's time for DRASTIC change.

Knowing MOST American's are either apathetic or too blinded by the spoon-fed media to actually SEE the TRUTH enough to ACT for change versus blogging, I am SERIOUSLY considering "opting OUT". I just need a place to call home OTHER than here.

Sh!t filters down hill, and I WON'T sit idly by while the rest of the sheeple swim in the brown deluge.

To quote a famous Neo-con: "You're either with us (me), or against us (me). I would have figured that by now the masses would have rallied to bring this regime to a SCREECHING halt. But NOTHING has happened, and therefore I stand my ground..."snoochies OUT!"... Just as soon as I find a place that the world DOESN'T hate (and WE don't meddle with)!

snooch



posted on Sep, 5 2006 @ 03:07 PM
link   
Found this

globalresearch.ca


Conflict of interest or insider trading?

The saga of Tamiflu is just the tip of a big iceberg. As we noted in an earlier article, the real point of interest is the company in California who developed Tamiflu, Gilead Sciences, listed on the NASDAQ as (GILD). As we also noted, US Secretary of Defense, Donald H. Rumsfeld, was Chairman of the Board of Gilead Sciences from 1997 until early 2001 when he became Defense Secretary. Rumsfeld had been on the board of Gilead since 1988, some thirteen years.


A as-yet-unconfirmed report is that Rumsfeld recently purchased additional stock in his former company, Gilead Sciences, worth $18 million, making him one of its largest if not the largest stock owners today. Whether that is true or not, earlier this year, when the Bird Flu scare was just heating up, according to a report in the November 14 Fortune magazine, the Defense Secretary decided not to sell his many shares in Gilead so as to ‘avoid being accused of insider trading.’ If true, that means Mr. Rumsfeld, apparently not one to shy away from turning a fast buck, has bagged an eye-popping windfall, as demand for Tamiflu worldwide explodes. Today it is the hottest drug in the world market. On October 6, the Pentagon announced it had stockpiled quantities of Tamiflu for members of the military.

Since early 2001 when Rumsfeld left the board of Gilead Sciences to become Defense Secretary, Gilead’s stock price has gone from around $7 per share to just a hair above $50 a share today. The future price direction? The stratosphere, especially since the President made it an explicit goal of the US ‘flu defense pre-emptive war’ on November 1. Gilead, which signed over the world marketing rights to Hoffmann-LaRoche, gets 10% of every dose of Tamiflu sold. Gilead is presently in a legal battle to retake 100% marketing control as well.

From $7 to $50 translates into a neat 720% profit for Mr. Rumsfeld’s Gilead stock ho

source: globalresearch.ca


I mean coincidence? or manipulation? How frickin gullible do they expect us to be?


I will continue to dig as much as I can about Mr. Rumsfeld and this is the perfect thread to undergo said task.

Thanks for your time,
tone23



posted on Sep, 5 2006 @ 09:41 PM
link   
Here a related article.


WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Democratic senators will try to present a no-confidence measure on Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld to the full Senate on Wednesday in an effort to persuade President Bush to sack the outspoken Pentagon chief, Democratic aides said.

Sen. Barbara Boxer of California was the first to move publicly on the measure, which will be attached to a defense appropriation bill, but Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid of Nevada is expected to offer the proposal.

Democrats in the House of Representatives are likely to offer a similar proposal, a senior Democratic aide said.

The Senate's Republican leadership may prevent a vote on the measure, and Rumsfeld would remain in office even if it passes the Republican-controlled Senate, which is unlikely.

link

Rumsfeld should have been fired a long time ago. Bush is so far removed from reality that he thinks that Rumsfeld is doing a good job.



posted on Sep, 6 2006 @ 05:18 AM
link   
the whole circus of clowns needs to go. regardless of what they say, I don't think we would be any worse off with Hilary as dictator, these "compassionate conservatives" have done such a great job screwing up! it's not only rumsfeild. the whole group of them seems to be there for the primary reason of raiding the coffers, and we have a out of this world deficit to show for it. and a few dead good men and women marines, sailors and army personel....
I got a feeling though that they will only go when voted out of office, and I hope that starts this november....clean up our congress this year, and the white house in 08....then we get to clean up the mess the clowns have made...maybe by 2020, we'll be back on track....maybe.
if we elect the clowns back into office, I think I'll be finding a nice home in another country....it will prove to me that american are nuts!!!!



posted on Sep, 6 2006 @ 09:02 AM
link   
TONE23, thanks again for your responses. I'll look into them. There seems to be a genuine possibility that Rumsfeld might have broken at least one major law, or set of laws, especially concerning insider trading.

In the mean time I truly hope some people will curtail condemning him, and others, until they're convicted, or at least until such time as charges are brought. I'd hate to see any person, no matter how distasteful I find them, to be labeled a criminal without real, tangible, prosecutable evidence.



posted on Sep, 6 2006 @ 10:20 AM
link   
YES
but tried through the courts first and then hung or shot





posted on Sep, 6 2006 @ 10:35 AM
link   

Originally posted by EastCoastKid
Do you think Rumsfeld should resign or not?


He executed the war very poorly.

He won't resign. There is no way he will resign. Bush won't fire him. He can't. Rummy and Cheney really run things. Bush is just the frontman.

SHOULD he resign? Good question. Should he resign for poorly executing the war? Maybe. I'd have to give that some more extensive thought and a good long look at all the decisions he's made. But there is no evidence of any criminal wrong doing so he can't be fired. He is ornery with generals, but that doesn't get you fired.

Abu Grahib? A few of our soldiers got caught making dogs bark at naked POWs. That was wrong, but it wasn't torture and I highly doubt that Rumsfield gave any orders for our guys to make dogs bark at a handful of naked POWs.

GITMO? GITMO is fine. There is NO evidence of serious problems at GITMO. Even if there was, I'd admit to it and I still honestly wouldn't care. The only serious problem with GITMO is that my tax money is supporting three 'religion appropriate' meals a day for terrorists; my tax money is clothing them; my tax money is giving them good medical care; and my tax money paid for korans for them to read all day long. THAT is the GITMO problem .. my tax money is paying for them to live better than many Americans do (ever see the poor in Appalachia or even Baltimore??!!!)

BIRD FLU? Yes, that is something to dig into. There isn't enough there to make him resign or fire him. Heck ... betchya half the politicians in DC and around the world have illegal interests in making money on that upcoming disaster! I also think that if anything big on this were uncovered then the person figuring things out wouldn't live long enough to tell. Too many 'big' people involved.

Should he resign? Maybe for poor war execution. But he won't. And there isn't anything there for anyone to push for him to be fired or put in jail.




top topics



 
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join