Posted on 03/28/2006 10:20:43 AM PST by navysealdad
I've bookmarked this site, and have been reading the enteries contained therein. Interesting stuff!
The word you seek is disingenuous.
Mark my word. Before the end of the week the Dems will be citing release of these Iraqi documents as further proof of Bush's incompetence as these unfiltered revelations could damage relations with our "allies".
Go take a nap or something.
I disagree that he's "the best" at dealing with the media. I can't think of any occasion where a significant interview or press conference he's given has resulted in a clear boost to the media-driven public opinion favoring the position(s) he promoted/defended. Note that I did not say he has a low IQ, just that he comes across as not as sharp as most of the rest of senior Bush administration officials. Put Condi and Rumsfeld up against each other in a public debate, and I can assure you the listeners will not say afterwards that Rumsfeld won. Actual intelligence and factual knowledge is very important, but in the world of politics, public perception of these things is equally important. In politics, being intelligent and well-informed won't get you elected; being perceived as being intelligent and well-informed will get you elected. And the perception of senior advisors to a candidate has the same effect. Bill Clinton won twice, remember?
Bingo! That is the way I read the question and answer.
From Washington Post:
Rumsfeld also said today he was never briefed on a U.S. military study that said Russian intelligence fed U.S. battle plans to Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein before the 2003 invasion.
The Russians have said the allegation is untrue.
"I suspect that what was in the government report characterized a document or some piece of information that existed," Rumsfeld said. "I haven't seen the specific reference [to the Russians] in the report."
Asked if he knows whether the information is true, Rumsfeld said: "No, I don't. It's something that obviously merits looking into."
Later, he suggested it was not unusual that he had not been briefed on the allegation, which was publicly disclosed last week.
You said, in your title:
Secretary of Defense Donald H. Rumsfeld did not know of documents!!
If he was never briefed about the documents than he didn't know they existed.
He did NOT say he wasn't briefed about the documents. He said he wasn't told about that specific report.
Asked if he knows whether the information is true, Rumsfeld said: "No, I don't. It's something that obviously merits looking into."
Later, he suggested it was not unusual that he had not been briefed on the allegation, which was publicly disclosed last week.
"The idea that we're supposed to know what's going to be on every single document or report that comes out of this department . . . doesn't quite appreciate the hundreds and hundreds and hundreds of reports that are put out," Rumsfeld said.
---->BRIEFED ON THE ALLEGATION<-----
Do you not understand what that means?
SEC. RUMSFELD: Bob?
Q Mr. Secretary, I'd like to ask you about the report that was issued last Friday by Joint Forces Command, in which they stated that the Russians had sent sensitive intelligence to the Iraqis, to Saddam Hussein, in the early days of the war. The report cited two captured Iraqi documents. But the authors of the report also concluded that "significantly, the regime was also receiving intelligence from the Russians." That's a direct quote. So my question to you is, if that's true, what was done to follow that up, to verify that and to get an explanation from the Russians? And if it wasn't true, why was it contained in this government report?
SEC. RUMSFELD: Well, I suspect it was -- what was in the government report characterized a document or some piece of information that existed. I haven't seen the specific reference in the report. And my understanding is that Secretary Rice has indicated that she's going to discuss that with the Russians.
Q But do you know this to be true? Have you --
SEC. RUMSFELD: No, I don't. It's something that obviously -- it merits looking into.
Q So you'd not previously been alerted to this item?
SEC. RUMSFELD: No.
Q Mr. Secretary, perhaps this is for General Pace, but -- either one of you or both of you. A possible downside to this pilgrimage would be agents coming across from Iran, not only members of their Republican Guard but also those skilled in bomb-making and others who would support the terrorists.
Does intel that you can share with us bear that out, that this was and is an increasing problem, specifically during the pilgrimage?
GEN. PACE: The intel would not verify one way or the other as far as whether or not it's an increase or decrease or how many. What I can tell you publicly is that the Iraqi government is certainly sensitive to the understanding that potentially inside those couple of million pilgrims there may be some few who are transporting or using that pilgrimage for other than going to pray. More than that I cannot tell you publicly other than to tell you that is an item of interest, anytime there's that kind of movement of people.
Q Can you expand a bit on the word "few"? I mean, are we talking a half a dozen, a dozen, two thousand?
GEN. PACE: I cannot. I do not know.
SEC. RUMSFELD: I'd like to go back to Bob's question.
There's been a good deal of discussion about the fact that the director of national intelligence is in the process of disgorging what will turn out to be millions of documents, I believe, ultimately, that were captured during the conflict. We also know that there were millions of documents destroyed, because as forces went into the buildings, they found systematic destruction of a great many documents -- burning and shredding and the like.
Given the fact that it's going to -- these things are mostly in Arabic and they're going to be put out by the government of the United States without, in many cases, having been read or translated or analyzed or checked, simply because the decision has been made that with a quick review a great amount of it is -- it's appropriate to put out a large amount of it. That being the case, there's going to be all kinds of things raised and questions raised. And needless to say, if one started trying to track down the things that exist in literally millions of documents, it would -- you wouldn't be able to do much else. It would -- you wouldn't be able to do much else. So what will happen will be that this will go out, and the important pieces will rise to the top. Some will be accurate, I'm sure; some will be inaccurate, I'm sure. Some will be rumor, some will be speculation. And people will have an opportunity to let the truth win out over time. And we'll find out what actually took place.
Q You both -- last week you were briefed twice on this report. Did anyone ever mention the Russian information to you when you were briefed on it?
GEN. PACE: Not that I recall.
Q And the two authors of the report told us --
SEC. RUMSFELD: This was weeks -- months ago that I was briefed on this. Many months.
Q The two authors of the report told us they were surprised by this information. Did it surprise either of you?
GEN. PACE: We still don't know whether or not the translation itself is a hundred percent accurate. We don't know it is -- if this is real information or disinformation. There's all kinds of pieces of this that need to be looked into.
Q They seem to believe it? The authors?
(No audible response.)
Q Mr. Secretary, did you --
Q I'm just following up on the same subject. Mr. Secretary, if you don't personally know this information about the allegations about the Russians to be true, was it appropriate to put it in a public report like this? And does the United States owe Russia an explanation for doing so?
SEC. RUMSFELD: I'm sure if anyone is owed anything, they will get it. (Scattered laughter.) But the idea that we're supposed to know what's going to be in every single document or report that comes out of this department is obviously -- it doesn't quite appreciate the hundreds and hundreds and hundreds of reports that are put out.
Q This is a subject that you've talked about many times publicly, the importance of protecting the integrity of classified information. Here in a wartime setting, another country is providing sensitive information to the enemy seems like just the kind of thing that you'd be much concerned about.
SEC. RUMSFELD: It certainly would be something that one would look into.
Q Should you have been told about it?
SEC. RUMSFELD: Oh, I'm not going to criticize somebody for not calling it to my attention previously. We'll sort through it.
Q Sir, to follow up, CENTCOM said that they are not and have no plans to investigate whether or not there was somebody, as these documents suggest, at CENTCOM leaking sensitive information that could jeopardize U.S. troops to the Russians. Isn't that a subject --
SEC. RUMSFELD: Who at CENTCOM said that?
Q The spokesperson for CENTCOM.
SEC. RUMSFELD: I don't know. I didn't see that.
Q But, I mean, that's the other part of the equation here. I mean, shouldn't we be investigating whether or not there was --
SEC. RUMSFELD: There are people in the department who have the responsibility for looking into things like that.
Q It's not being looked into, though. Do you think it should be?
SEC. RUMSFELD: If it should be, it will.
Q But do you think it should be? This is a serious question.
SEC. RUMSFELD: I'd have to go back and read it carefully and see what credence one ought to give to it and see what we may have discovered through other channels, and then make a decision.
The document is the ALLEGATION...
I am sure he knows and that the SOS will be confronting the Russians with the information [if it is A FACT] asap.
No, it is not; there is AN allegation in those thousands of pages of documents that are being translated and released.
Bush INSISTED that they be released before they were translated.
He KNEW about the documents, not what your title implies.
Now I have given you the transcripts where he CLEARLY states that; but you can keep on with it, if you feel the need.
You are RIGHT and I'm wrong, this was just a test and you passed. (" . ")
It is VERY important that WE get it right; everybody else lies but us. :-)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.