nickshepAK

Gold Star Families to Travel to Pentagon, Seek Meeting With Defense Secretary Rumsfeld Jan. 19th

1/18/2005 1:42:00 PM
----------------------------------------------------------------------
To: Assignment Desk and Daybook Editor

Contact: Ryan Fletcher, 202-641-0277, Nancy Lessin, 617-320-5301, both of Minwood Media Collective

News Advisory:

Gold Star Families from California, Pennsylvania, New Jersey and Massachusetts, whose loved ones died as a result of the war in Iraq, will meet with the press near the Pentagon before going to the Pentagon in their quest to meet with Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld.

These families, joined by Gold Star Families from Washington and Oregon, all members of Military Families Speak Out, have been writing to Ssecretar Rumsfeld since Jan. 5, 2005 requesting a meeting. To date, there has been no response from the Secretary or his office. Their letters to Secretary Rumsfeld can be viewed at http://www.mfso.org

Families will be seeking answers from Secretary Rumsfeld to questions that include:

-- Why were our loved ones sent to war in the first place, given that there was no threat to the U.S. from Iraq?

-- When they were sent, why were they not supplied with proper training, planning, armor or equipment?

-- How did our loved ones die?

-- Why are there troops in Iraq who still lack the proper training, armor and equipment; and what are the plans for immediately furnishing them with these items?

-- What are the plans for ending the war and bringing the troops home?

When: Wednesday Jan. 19 at 12 noon

Where: LBJ Memorial Grove Park, Arlington, Virginia (Next to the Pentagon)

What: Press conference with Gold Star Families prior to their going to the Pentagon; followed by report-back to the press after their meeting (or a refusal of a meeting)

The following Gold Star Families will be available for interview:

-- Cindy Sheehan of Vacaville, Calif., whose son Spc. Casey Sheehan was killed in Sadr City, Iraq on April 4, 2004.

-- Celeste Zappala of Philadelphia, Pa., whose son Sgt. Sherwood Baker was killed in Baghdad on April 26, 2004 when he was sent into Baghdad to search for weapons of mass destruction.

-- Sue Niederer of Pennington, N.J., whose son Lt. Seth Dvorin was killed near Iskandariyah, Iraq on Feb. 3, 2004.

-- Bill Mitchell of Atascadero, Calif., whose son Sgt. Michael Mitchell was killed in Sadr City, Iraq on April 4, 2004.

-- Debra Lucey of Belchertown, Mass., whose brother Corporal Jeffrey Lucey took his own life on June 22, 2004 because of what he did and saw while deployed to Iraq in spring and summer, 2003.

http://www.usnewswire.com/

dalem

What's your point?

-dale

nickshepAK

You'll see the point on the news in a couple days if he doesnt meet with these people.

Leader

To be fair this group does not represent all military families.

From MFSO.org:

Are you really surprised that Rumsfeld doesn't want meet with them?

__________________

Confed999

Partisan rhetoric.

__________________
No man is free until all men are free - John Hossack
I agree completely with this Administration’s goal of a regime change in Iraq-John Kerry
even if that enforcement is mostly at the hands of the United States, a right we retain even if the Security Council fails to act-John Kerry
He may even miscalculate and slide these weapons off to terrorist groups to invite them to be a surrogate to use them against the United States. It’s the miscalculation that poses the greatest threat-John Kerry

dalem

No, what's your point? Presumably you have thoughts on this matter, as you posted the article.

-dale

nickshepAK

Not really. Hes a busy man. But someone should meet with these families. Its the very least they could do.

nickshepAK

double post sorry...

nickshepAK

What do you mean what is my point? Have you posted articles on this board before? What was you point for posting those articles? I was looking for opinions whether he should or should not meet with these families looking to have their questions answered. They sacraficed their children, brothers, sisters, siblings, dads, aunts, uncles, etc... The least the pentagon or Donald Rumsfeld could do is answer their questions.

Leader

Not if what the families want is a media spectacle. Additionally, I'm not sure what the families want to talk about. You list some questions there, but when you look at the website, it seems they have already made up their minds.

dalem

No, I generally don't post articles, but when I do, I usually comment on why I did so. Sometimes I agree totally, partially, or not at all on familiar topics; sometimes I read something that jogs my brain and gets the "golly gee" juices rumbling, etc.

So now I know why you posted the article.

For myself, no, I don't think Rumsfeld owes these familes anything explanation-wise. I think the Bush administration has done a bad-to-poor job of communicating the reasons for the war overall, but some attention-grabbing attempt to force a meeting isn't going to clarify anything for them, especially since they seemingly already know the answers to their own questions.

Question: -- Why were our loved ones sent to war in the first place, given that there was no threat to the U.S. from Iraq?

Answer: The threat that Iraq posed has already been explained 100 times. They are clearly not going to accept it the 101st time whether it comes from Rumsfeld or anyone else.

Q: -- When they were sent, why were they not supplied with proper training, planning, armor or equipment?

A: They were supplied with as much or more of the things in question as any American soldier ever has been. Might as well get huffy that in 1941 soldiers were training with broomsticks and sent to fight with 40-year-old rifles.

Q: -- How did our loved ones die?

A: Same as in any war - hostile action, friendly fire, accidents, disease, etc.

Q: -- Why are there troops in Iraq who still lack the proper training, armor and equipment; and what are the plans for immediately furnishing them with these items?

A: The circumstances implied in the question do not exist to any significant degree.

Q: -- What are the plans for ending the war and bringing the troops home?

A: When the job is done they will come home as is judged appropriate by circumstances.

In short, this is nothing but a "Have you stopped beating your wife?" exercise designed solely to make the Bush Administration look bad, and that the average five year old can see through.

If you're buying into the kind of crap that this article promotes, then I suggest that you really really think hard about it.

-dale

nickshepAK

Gotcha, thanx for the response.

Ray

I think one should see both points of view.

That's the way to remain informed and draw one's own conclusion.

As Shylock's famous quote goes - "To bait fish withal; if it indeed if feeds nothing else, it will feed my revenge".

Don't go by the words itself in a literal sense. This statement of Shylock has real deep meanings!