EMAIL SIGN UP!
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
Cheney, Rumsfeld and the Dark Art of Propaganda
“When one lies, one should lie big, and stick to it,” wrote Joseph Goebbels, Germany’s Reich minister of propaganda, in 1941. Former Vice President Dick Cheney seems to have taken the famous Nazi’s advice in his new book, “In My Time.” Cheney remains staunch in his convictions on issues from the invasion of Iraq to the use of torture. Telling NBC News in an interview that “there are gonna be heads exploding all over Washington” as a result of the revelations in the book, Cheney’s memoir follows one by his colleague and friend Donald Rumsfeld. As each promotes his own version of history, there are people challenging and confronting them.
Rumsfeld’s book title, “Known and Unknown,” is drawn from a notorious response he gave in one of his Pentagon press briefings as secretary of defense. In Feb. 12, 2002, attempting to explain the lack of evidence linking Iraq to weapons of mass destruction, Rumsfeld said: “[T]here are known knowns; there are things we know we know. We also know there are known unknowns; that is to say we know there are some things we do not know. But there are also unknown unknowns—the ones we don’t know we don’t know.”
Former Vice President Dick Cheney at the conservative CPAC conference, where he presented former Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld with the ironically named “Defender of the Constitution Award.” (photo: Gage Skidmore)
Rumsfeld’s cryptic statement gained fame, emblematic of his disdain for reporters. It stands as a symbol of the lies and manipulations that propelled the U.S. into the disastrous invasion and occupation of Iraq.
One person convinced by Rumsfeld’s rhetoric was Jared August Hagemann.
Hagemann enlisted in the Army to serve his country, to confront the threats repeated by Defense Secretary Rumsfeld. When the U.S. Army Ranger received the call for his most recent deployment (his wife can’t recall if it was his seventh or eighth), the pressure became too much. On June 28, 2011, 25-year-old Hagemann shot himself on the Joint Base Lewis-McChord, near Seattle. The Pentagon notes that Hagemann died of a “self-inflicted” gunshot wound, but has not yet called it a suicide.
Hagemann had threatened suicide several times before. He was not alone. Five soldiers reportedly committed suicide at Fort Lewis in July. It has been estimated that more than 300,000 returning troops suffer from PTSD or depression.
Hagemann’s widow, Ashley Joppa-Hagemann, found out that Rumsfeld was doing a book signing on the base. On Friday, Aug. 26, she handed Rumsfeld a copy of the program from her late husband’s memorial service. She recounted, “I told him that I wanted him to see my husband, and so he would know—he could put a face with at least one of the soldiers that had lost their lives because of his lies from 9/11.”
I asked her about Rumsfeld’s response: “All I remember is him saying, ‘Oh, I heard about that.’ And after that, all I remember is being bombarded with security personnel and being pushed out and told not to return.” Unfortunately, it’s Staff Sgt. Hagemann who will never return to his wife and two little children.
In his NBC interview, Cheney claimed to have played a role in the January 2005 resignation of then-Secretary of State Colin Powell. Powell’s former chief of staff, Col. Lawrence Wilkerson, called the claim “utter nonsense.” More important, though, is Wilkerson’s unflinching call for accountability for those involved in leading the nation to war in Iraq—including punishment for himself. A central pillar of the invasion of Iraq was Powell’s Feb. 5, 2003, speech before the United Nations, which laid out the case of weapons of mass destruction. Wilkerson, who takes full responsibility for coordinating Powell’s address, told me: “It was probably the biggest mistake of my life. I regret it to this day. I regret not having resigned over it.”
The Center for Constitutional Rights and lawyer/blogger Glenn Greenwald are among those who have long called for criminal prosecution of Cheney, Rumsfeld and other Bush administration officials. Said Wilkerson, “I’d be willing to testify, and I’d be willing to take any punishment I’m due.”
Wilkerson says Cheney’s book is “written out of fear, fear that one day someone will ‘Pinochet’ Dick Cheney,” referring to the former Chilean dictator Augusto Pinochet, who was arrested in Britain and held for a year before being released. A Spanish judge had wanted him extradited to be tried for crimes against humanity.
As we approach the 10th anniversary of 9/11, and the casualties mount on all sides, the books by Rumsfeld and Cheney remind us once again of war’s first casualty: truth.
Denis Moynihan contributed research to this column.
Comments
Note: Disqus 2012 is best viewed on an up to date browser. Click here for information. Instructions for how to sign up to comment can be viewed here. Our Comment Policy can be viewed here. Please follow the guidelines. Note to Readers: Spam Filter May Capture Legitimate Comments...


75 Comments so far
Show AllThe only thing in need of a lie is another lie.
the only thing in need of a lay is me...
and I'm not lying...or is it laying?
deleted
It is said that "a criminal always returns to the scene of a crime." In Cheney's case, it seems he's never left. And with his new book, he even seems to be "begging" to get arrested.
Collaborator Nancy Pelosi's first statement as House Speaker-elect in November 2006 "Impeachment is off the table" assured Cheney and other Washington DC criminals that their license to steal and murder would have no expiration date.
Since then, DC politicians routinely commit crimes without even trying to cover them up, knowing that nobody will touch them.
"U.S. CODE TITLE 18 > PART I > CHAPTER 1 > § 3
§ 3. Accessory after the fact
Whoever, knowing that an offense against the United States has been committed, receives, relieves, comforts or assists the offender in order to hinder or prevent his apprehension, trial or punishment, is an accessory after the fact.
Except as otherwise expressly provided by any Act of Congress, an accessory after the fact shall be imprisoned not more than one-half the maximum term of imprisonment or (notwithstanding section 3571) fined not more than one-half the maximum fine prescribed for the punishment of the principal, or both; or if the principal is punishable by life imprisonment or death, the accessory shall be imprisoned not more than 15 years."
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/18/usc_sec_18_00000003----000-.html
His new book is bragging about the crimes he's committed. Same with Rummy and bush the lesser. Yet another example of how the conservative is a hypocrite, as I'm pretty sure you could find quotes from them or their friends who damn criminals from profiting off of their criminal memoirs.
They make me wish that there was an afterlife, with punishment for crimes committed on earth, because there's not enough time left in their miserable lives for an adequate punishment to be dispensed.
"They make me wish that there was an afterlife, with punishment for crimes.."
I join the millions who believe there is. It helps to deal with the inequities of apparent justice on THIS plane of space & time.
The thing is, there's no proof such a concept is real. That's really beside the point too. If there is a 'grande spirit' or a god, or an afterlife, it still is up to us to deal with the world that we have now. The call for a god to spank people like cheney, rummy, bush et al, strikes me as a bit juvenile. Such calls remind me of my sibling from years ago, 'Daddy (or mummy) so-and-so's mean and bad, punish them!'
Better for the crooks to get justice in the here and now, rather than rely on the big sky mummy. IMNSHO anyhow.
Chris Hedges has referred to the U.S. as a post-law, and someone in the forum amended that to post-justice society. That millions of people believe in Universal law, or the cause and effect system of karma is hardly "a god spanking cheney." That's your own JUVENILE projection.
Because human law is flawed, and because the powerful ALWAYS take liberties with those distanced from power, the scales of justice seldom balance.on the earth plane. That's why Truth doesn't begin and end with what flawed people do (or find themselves unable to do).
Only an idiot thinks that the belief in karma, or an after-life, discharges the need to act with decency and a commitment to both ideals and justice now.
Your name is new, but I sense another old and tired poster, just showing up with a re-treaded name. It is SO boring.
I presume that readers in this forum will easily note the smallness of your post, its need to put down ideas that go way beyond your scope of understanding, and its juvenile level of both discourse and analysis.
Grow up, or read some books on comparative religion.
Thanks for the personal attack Sussie, I've grown used to that from you. I used to be Saturnalia, but had an issue with my password and now have a new name. o/ again
I have read a few books on comparative religion, currently reading a book called "The God Delusion" (wanted to for a while, and found a good copy for cheep.) Have you heard of that one? Or do you need to read such a book that would have you frothing at the mouth in apoplexy?
Thanks for giving up on 'human' law, I agree that it's not perfect but it's a hell of a lot better than your alternative. "Mummy, ban him, he said something nasty to me again."
Aaronica- I will check out The God Delusion. But I am responding to interest in you in Dr Leonard Shlain- The Alphabet Versus The Goddess, and Sex,Time, and Power. And do not give up on Human Law, or Common Dreams. Both are valuable.
As this is my second name on this site, I don't think I'll be going away soon. It's still fun to post, and hopefully I won't lose the piece of paper that has my password on it again.
As far as giving up on human law, I haven't, I just recognize that there can be no justice for a crook of cheney's size. He's got a decade or so of life left. Is that enough time in a prison cell to pay for the murders done on his command? I think not. I suppose if we went for retributive 'justice' (doing unto him what he ordered done unto others) then we might get him thru one torture session before his heart popped (although I think his heart would be popped if he saw a torture instrument coming towards him long before he could feel what ...)
I will try to find "The Alphabet" vs... Thanks.
you're jumping into the middle of an old argument between two people really. Give it time, eventually you'll say something and you'll develop the same opinion of faux suzie as I and others have.
She's gonna call me a sock puppet of Joe now, if her history is anything to go by. :)
"As we approach the 10th anniversary of 9/11, and the casualties mount on all sides, the books by Rumsfeld and Cheney remind us once again of war’s first casualty: truth."
Oh yeah, that's right, Ms. Goodman, I remember all the articles you wrote and time you devoted on your show to the false flag attack that was 9/11, huh?
I remember you using your public "pulpit" to demand a new investigation into the crimes of that day, don't I?
I remember you castigating your fellow "leftist" journalists for not following your lead in your crusade for the truth, right?
Ms. Goodman, propaganda comes in MANY flavors.
Sure, there's the black as licorice vintage of the Cheneys.
But then there's the buttery vanilla propaganda of you and others "leftist" "journalists" as you buy into and bolster the official lines of these criminals.
At the end of the day we're left with a nice big steaming mass of grey crap.
Grey in that murder, theft and war crimes are somehow no longer crimes in this "complex" modern world.
Grey in that torture and incarcerating the innocent should be analyzed and not prosecuted.
Grey in that treason and false-flag attacks should not be investigated and should instead never be seriously revisited.
Bravo, Ms. Goodman, bravo.
Not to mention, polycarpe, that Amy swallowed all the MSM and govt propaganda about Libya hook line and sinker and has yet to see the error of her ways. The lady's got some work to do. Maybe that's why she always looks depressed.
Truther activists seem to be against Amy because she doesn't buy the illogical story they try to sell ... it is not only Amy who does not buy it but any good reporter with a real name who has a good reputation for truth.
You might check on your own reputation for truth before slandering Amy.
And what's your lame excuse for why she believes and repeats all the propaganda about Libya, despite the fact that independent journalist galore, not to mention Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International, have long pointed out the enormous lies used to justify that "humanitarian intervention?"
And while you're at it, maybe you can explain how every single point of support in WTC7's structure spontaneously failed at the exact same moment.
Your own grasp of truth and falsity seems pretty tenuous, Jim. Could be all that polluted Cleveland air entered your brain when you were growing up...
This article is great and your complaint about Amy is like Rumsfeld's "unknown Unknowns" excuse for war.
Your description of 9/11 is also ridiculous.
You lie about Amy, and Cleveland's air is refreshing compared to the hot air from you.
And you hide behind your fake name to do it which says much about your state of mind.
"Jimmy Glover" - Quit hiding behind your fake name, and if hot air was polluting the ecosphere, Cleveland would be uninhabitable from your exhaust. You are the fake here, and your descriptions are ridiculous. The complaints against Amy Goodman are justified- she practices the "polite reporter" so well you would think she made it up.
What do you think of Glenn Greenwald? To ethical, and too much of a fighter for your tastes, I am sure. As for your state of mind, it would be better described as a mind of the state,for the state. You are a LIAR.
Amy is more truthful and intelligent than you can ever hope to be.
Nice try, but Jim and several others, who are very "at home" in these threads stand by... to stand in as "The Adults." They are here to reinforce Official Narratives, and brand any who are smart enough NOT to, as the crazies, those least informed, or some novel derivative on the theme of persona non grata.
It's ludicrous that anyone paying attention to the spectacle of dangerous lies and collusion in high places would not, at the least, demand a GENUINE investigation. Of course that prospect has been pre-emptively done away with, along with so much evidence. And potential operatives like Erik Prince, who went on to make millions as a mercenary militia leader, with his passport for Dubet (or what was it?) is not going to be one to talk, is he?
With dossiers on all of us, along with those with titles in DC, the chances of Truth emerging now are slim to none. And that's why The Gatekeepers must be retained on this site, where otherwise, the intelligentsia might spread its devastating insights far ...and wider. That cannot be allowed.
My view of Amy is that she operates within allowable parameters. These are incredibly dangerous and conservatively-oriented times. There are also grave penalties for speaking out as is seen in cases like Bradley Manning & Julian Assange, along with several indicted for trying to spill the beans on the illegal wire taps, before they were retroactively rendered legal, and all the other Orwellian devices that have turned our ship of state into a ship navigated by malignant fools.
The whole chapter on Saudi Arabia and more is Blacked out of the commission report.
I want a "genuine investigation" but if we don't unite and call for the release of all the records first before we trash Amy and anyone who doesn't buy the package there can be no real investigation.
Jimmy- Why don't you call for Amy to "unite" and begin a genuine investigation? And quit hiding behind your fake name.
I hope you're as keen to see the files on the Israeli "high-fivers" declassified, too, Jim.
See these:
http://www.ae911truth.org/
http://patriotsquestion911.com/
ED, We have seen those posted before many times by believers and you should know it if you don't.
They are full of false speculation and they are boring.
They prove nothing except the Cults tendency to claim they know the truth based on rhetorical Questions which are based on false assumptions.
If the Truther Activists called for the release of all records without claiming to know everything already, They would get no argument from me and I am sure Amy too.
Could you explain that further? The false speculation? Their arguments and rhetorical questions haunt me because I can't disprove them. I don't see how the defining event of our time being a total farce as boring.
Jimmy - which citizens calling for justice to be delivered for the crimes emanating from and the Mass Murder committed on Sept 11th are not calling for 'the release of all records'? All people looking for closure to these crimes and traumas want full disclosure, except maybe you and your ilk. Many people would point out that the records have been released- they are full of lies, and no one needs your bullshit litmus test to validate our anger and animosity towards the 'let's not look back, we have so much to work on in the future' crowd. You claim if we would just be rational and calm and approach it your way "they would get no argument from me and I am sure Amy too.", but if you would just accept that there may be an exception to your omniscience "then you would get no argument from me and I am sure Amy too."
Hi Jim, The AE911Truth information is not speculation but forensic science.
For others reading this, don't let Jim's dehumanizing labels keep you from looking at the evidence.
More than 1500 credentialed architects and engineers and more than 12000 others, including physicists, metallurgists, chemists and people with a variety of science and other backgrounds, have signed a petition calling into question the NIST reports regarding the destruction of the WTC highrises.
9/11 was a criminal act. We must look at the evidence. The way to peace is back through 9/11. Now is the time. www.ae911truth.org
Excellent-thank you.
one must be careful when judging journalists, as journalism is not a career that is free of potential consequence...
the powerful do not like journalists, and have killed many over the years who have printed too much truth...
of course, this would logically imply that it could be fatal for journalists to, for example, question why evidence was so quickly destroyed, or investigate the interesting stock deals that preceded the event, or ask why buildings fell that were never hit by anything, or why the Bin Laden family was flown out of the country, or, etc.
it isn't logical to expect the truth from journalism, which should indicate how much value is derived from reading such...
none...
Another great report by Amy, one of the best reporters we have.
Cheney the torture dog is a walking mockery of justice.
While railing against the lies put out by the executives of Bush, Cheney, & Co. is all well and good; it is a familiar line that has been oft repeated. While said familiar line needs to be oft repeated in some other media places until the cows come home, this particular corner of cyberspace is not it. What would be great and where Amy Goodman could really help is naming names of the media consultants / shills who helped 'shape' the message put out by the douches of the Bush error. Undoubtedly, they have moved on to other positions within the advertising & / or public relations industries, and their complicity in the war crimes of these sociopaths in suits needs to haunt personally and professionally for the rest of their lives. That will only happen once the light of public knowledge is shone upon them.
NateW wrote:
"What would be great and where Amy Goodman could really help is naming names of the media consultants / shills who helped 'shape' the message put out by the douches of the Bush error."
Two shills "who helped 'shape' the message put out by the douches of the Bush era" that Amy Goodman has done commentaries on that pointed out how their reporting in the New York Times played an important role in garnering support for the invasion of Iraq are Micheal Gordon and the disgraced Judith Miller.
What it is more important to find out is who were the PR flacks that thought up the narrative that media puppets like Judith Miller parroted (and parroting is not 'shaping'). In the final analysis, figures like Miller and Michael Gordon are interchangeable and replaceable, but the true brains comes from those who create the 'narrative,' and those scum bags have remained in the shadows and out of the public eye...and they need to be know lest they sell another fiasco.
deleted
Glenn Greenwald already did A fairly good job of that in his speech at the "Fairness in Media" Convention this past summer...He exposed Newsweek and New York Times "liberal" columnists by name and deed for their corroboration. I watched it on LINK TV, where you will also find Amy Goodman...
Wilkerson's comment about "Pinocheting" Cheney is intriguing. If a Spanish prosecutor read the memoir and indicted him for war crimes (a la Pinochet), I wonder if Interpol would put out an APB for him and if he traveled to Europe, if those nations would arrest him and send him either to Spain or to the Hague.
Short answer: no
The U.S. is not Chile.
The U.S. wields so much power, in so many forms, that Spain would never allow such needed, true justice to happen.
Probably, seeing that the precedent has already been set by Henry Kissinger. Reportedly, Kissinger, whenever he travels abroad, checks with the State Department and others regarding the countries he visits to ensure that he will not be arrested for war crimes. This was first reported by Christopher Hitchens in a _Harper's_ article that he expanded into a book, _The Trial of Henry Kissinger_, which was in turn made into a documentary by Eugene Jarecki and Alex Gibney; the title was altered slightly to _The Trials of Henry Kissinger_, and the filmmakers expanded the premise with several interviewees.
The US has been commiting wars crimes since the beginning. Genocide an d land theft was first started here, then exported. How many coups have been done for corporations?
But when you have two cretins brag about it and nothing is done it is game over.
We pit Pelosi in charge so she could investigate the war crimes. She passed. Then even when it was known the war was based on lies, they kept funding it.
Then we went to Afghanistan to get BL only to let him go when cornered and for some reason the enemy is now the Taliban?
All of Congress plus the cretins should be tried for warcrimes. Including the heroes that murder innocent people.
We should punish Cheney for his crimes, but let us not forget all the other war criminals in our midst, not just from W's administration (which had a lot of them), but also Obama and many in his employ. Obama is a war criminal, but not even the liberal branch of the MSM will report on it.
Please enlighten us on Obamas war crimes, I didn't think standing around telling others to figure out what to do was illegal, or do you mean letting the lies of the republicans wars for money and not prosecuting them be his war crimes? Fox news lies, where is the honesty? And the jobs?
un-constitutional- Torture, Wars of Aggression. Or are those not war crimes? And for treason: the assault on, not the defense of the constitution. Are you paying attention, or just dazed and confused? You did take an oath to defend the constitution, right?
I am neither confused nor dazed, there is absolutely no way to compare the mass murdering for corperate income of the bush administration and the teasonous bullshit of the Joe Wilson valerie plame republican scandal, cheeney, roves, and Rumsfeld walk around bragging about their war crimes while the Roberts court is useless in less the repubs want to repress liberal votes! Obama has not killed thousands for dollars and surely is not in the same category as the rot in hell war criminals. Haliburton stocks were worth $10. A share in 2001, when your boys were elected and by the time Cheeney sold his shares they were worth $30. Two years later Thanks to G.W.'s war. Fox news lies, where are the jobs?
Constitutional
You seem to be saying that Obama is not a war criminal because he has not killed as many innocent people as Bush and Cheney did. Any intelligent, reasonable person would instantly recognize the absurdity of attempting to get Obama off the hook. Your rationale appears to be the equivalent of exonerating Obama and his administration because he is supposedly the lesser of two evils as compared to his predecessor. I suggest that that lame excuse would not fly very far with the families of those people who were unjustifiably slaughtered when the U.S. military, under the command of Barack H. Obama, dropped 500 lb. bombs and drone missiles upon the people of Afghanistan and Pakistan.
Again, Obama and others in his administration deserve to stand alongside Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Rice, Rumsfeld, et al in the dock at The Hague for the war crimes that have committed against the people of the Middle East.
Good for you, vote for some republican murderer, Obama is as much of a killer, ok, McCain wanted war with Iran, kill your grandmother for a dollar, vote republican, no social security, no Medicare, vote republican, Obama is a killer, no health care. What the fuck are you saying? Dips shits? Fox newslies, where are the jobs, burger king? you people are pathetic! Send Bush and Cheney to the hauge, along with most of fox news, Rupert, charles, David etc. Vote republican, dip fuck, vote against social security, health care, any thing that helps America.
Then explain Obamacare that forces you to pay your corporate insurance goons and explain that Catfood Commission Obama set up to rob SS to pay for all the wrong stuff. There are a ton of articles on that and some more on Obama's purposeful failure to promote green jobs while still letting the jobs related to MIC and Corporate America continue. Even Donna Smith knows that Obama and his party in Congress finished killing health care. I believe Erroll voted Nader by the way.