Reporter planted "gotcha" question for Rummy with troops

from JoeUser Forums
Generic link here: DrudgeReport.com has the following flash:
RUMSFELD SET UP; REPORTER PLANTED QUESTIONS WITH SOLIDER
Thu Dec 09 2004 11:49:38 ET

Chattanooga Times Free Press reporter Edward Lee Pitts is embedded with the 278th Regimental Combat Team, now in Kuwait preparing to enter Iraq, and is filing articles for his newspaper. Pitts claims in a purported email that he coached soldiers to ask Defense Secretary Rumsfeld questions!

From: EDWARD LEE PITTS, MILITARY AFFAIRS
Sent: Wednesday, December 8, 2004 4:44 PM
To: Staffers

Subject: RE: Way to go

I just had one of my best days as a journalist today. As luck would have it, our journey North was delayed just long enough see I could attend a visit today here by Defense Secretary Rumsfeld. I was told yesterday that only soldiers could ask questions so I brought two of them along with me as my escorts. Before hand we worked on questions to ask Rumsfeld about the appalling lack of armor their vehicles going into combat have. While waiting for the VIP, I went and found the Sgt. in charge of the microphone for the question and answer session and made sure he knew to get my guys out of the crowd.

So during the Q&A session, one of my guys was the second person called on. When he asked Rumsfeld why after two years here soldiers are still having to dig through trash bins to find rusted scrap metal and cracked ballistic windows for their Humvees, the place erupted in cheers so loud that Rumsfeld had to ask the guy to repeat his question. Then Rumsfeld answered something about it being "not a lack of desire or money but a logistics/physics problem." He said he recently saw about 8 of the special up-armored Humvees guarding Washington, DC, and he promised that they would no longer be used for that and that he would send them over here. Then he asked a three star general standing behind him, the commander of all ground forces here, to also answer the question. The general said it was a problem he is working on.

The great part was that after the event was over the throng of national media following Rumsfeld- The New York Times, AP, all the major networks -- swarmed to the two soldiers I brought from the unit I am embedded with. Out of the 1,000 or so troops at the event there were only a handful of guys from my unit b/c the rest were too busy prepping for our trip north. The national media asked if they were the guys with the armor problem and then stuck cameras in their faces. The NY Times reporter asked me to email him the stories I had already done on it, but I said he could search for them himself on the Internet and he better not steal any of my lines. I have been trying to get this story out for weeks- as soon as I foud out I would be on an unarmored truck- and my paper published two stories on it. But it felt good to hand it off to the national press. I believe lives are at stake with so many soldiers going across the border riding with scrap metal as protection. It may be to late for the unit I am with, but hopefully not for those who come after.

The press officer in charge of my regiment, the 278th, came up to me afterwords and asked if my story would be positive. I replied that I would write the truth. Then I pointed at the horde of national media pointing cameras and mics at the 278th guys and said he had bigger problems on his hands than the Chattanooga Times Free Press. This is what this job is all about - people need to know. The solider who asked the question said he felt good b/c he took his complaints to the top. When he got back to his unit most of the guys patted him on the back but a few of the officers were upset b/c they thought it would make them look bad. From what I understand this is all over the news back home.

Thanks,

Lee

EDWARD LEE PITTS FILED STORY ABOUT THE TROOPS BEFORE THE POW-WOW WITH RUMSFELD


... along with a link to the original materials

Link here: http://www.greene.xtn.net/index.php?table=news&template=news.view.subscriber&newsid=117612


Not that the question wasn't valid and shouldn't have been answered, but the fact that LIBERAL reporters have to yet again stoop to helping to make news just shows yet again to what levels these people will stoop in order to influence the news and work on their agenda.

Limbaugh and Drudge are both (of course) all over this part of the story now. It seems that this reporter has probably just done more damage for his profession than the potential help he was aiming to provide to the soldiers he was embedded with.

(And btw, a large reason why this story was being done was apparently because the reporter himself had concerns that the trucks he'd be riding in weren't no "up Armored" and might not be that safe).
politics
6,662 views 20 replies
Reply #1 from JoeUser Forums Top
It doesn't change the fact that it was a valid question. If it hadn't been, there would not have been cheering.
From what I heard and have seen of that Q and A session, Secretary Rumsfeld should fire whoever was prepping him for it.
They failed miserably. He looked like a knucklehead.
Reply #2 from JoeUser Forums Top

not only was it a valid question (rather than whining about whether the reporter was worried about his own safety, people should be asking why any of our troops' safety has been seriously compromised by the reckless disregard of those responsible for putting them at serious peril when the money has long been allocated but not yet spent to rectify the situation), but if youll follow the link at the bottom of what follows, youll find a press release issued by the commander of the tennessee national guard unit questioning the claim of general speer that he had no knowledge troops in iraq were being forced to use scrap materials to improvise armor for their vehicles.   (i posted it as a comment in another thread) 

what all spectrums of the press should be asking is why rumsfeld hasnt been fired.  you characterize the reporter as a liberal yet provide no basis for that conclusion. he could as easily be an outraged conservatve reporter. either way he didnt 'make' news.  the 'news' wasnt as much the question rumsfeld was asked as it is his very regrettable lack of concern for the lives and safety of troops he's sending into combat.

rumsfeld's not alone in tryin to front off the troops about the armor issue. maj. gen. gus l. hargett, adjutant general of tennessee released a statement Link dated 12/08/04 regarding questions directed to rumsfeld by spc wilson and statements made afterwards by deputy commanding general of u.s. forces in kuwait, maj. gen. gary speer.

speer claimed he was unaware that soldiers were searching landfills for scrap metal and discarded glass with which to fabricate improvised armor

. in his press release, hargett stated: I am surprised by General Speer's statement that he was not aware of the soldiers using scrap medal and used ballistic glass to up-armor the vehicles. I know that members of his staff were aware and assisted the 278th in obtaining these materials. Our own 230th Area Support Group from Dyersburg, now stationed in Kuwait also assisted in this effort.

obviously someone is nearly as fulla shit as rumsfeld

Start11 - Customize the Start Menu and Taskbar in Windows 10/11.
Reply #3 from JoeUser Forums Top
There are two situations here.

1: The question was valid, and the situation should be taken seriously.

2: The facts behind the question.

The question is one that many of us who have served have wondered for years. The answer to the question (politics aside) is the fact that government contracts are awarded based on the absolutely most stupid criteria possible.

Contracts are awarded to the LOWEST BIDDER!! Guess what, the lowest bid does not buy armor!!!

The facts behind the question.

Whether or not the question was legitimate (which I think it was), we still have yet another example of a reporter creating news instead of reporting it. The reporter was apparently not content with the idea that Sec. Rumsfeld wanted to hear questions from troops and reporters would just have to settle for merely reporting the event (how aweful!!).

So. Let's not get caught up in mixing the two. The question was right on, but the way it came about was dead wrong. Let's also not forget that (to his credit) Sec. Rumsfeld was willing to take questions from the troops, and even with the "gotcha" question praised those who spoke their minds, even in dissent.
Reply #4 from JoeUser Forums Top

If a contract calls for armored Humvees, than you can bet that the humvees better have armor.  And if someone forgot to tell the contractor that they were supposed to have armor on the humvees, well that's just as bad.


There's also a difference, by the by, between assisting someone in crafting a question, and telling the person what to ask.  And if the reporter was in a position to make one iota of difference on who the Sergeant called to ask questions to Rumsfeld I would be incredibly surprised.  Maybe the Sergeant is a "liberal sympathizer" and we should look into his conduct too.


Cheers

Reply #5 from JoeUser Forums Top
Well, apparently the reporter is bragging about how he brought the soldier to the meeting just to ask the question, and set it up so that the soldier would be asked.

The fact there was cheering in response to the question says a lot about the legitimacy of the question.

The fact that this "reporter" is too immature to actually do his job, is pathetic.
Reply #6 from JoeUser Forums Top
don,t matter if the question was a set up or not, just that is was asked and addressed,,,,,,,and that only america would stand for that kind of question comming from a "mere enlisted man" and that man not be shot tortured, disaplined, so again we prove this country is free and anyone can question those above us.
Reply #7 from PolMach Forums Top
Again, there are two issues (and I alluded to same in my comments in the article posting).

The question is valid, and I don't disagree with it being asked.

I do, however, have a problem with a lack of journalistic ethics on the part of the reporter.

The story I heard / have been reading is that the reporter coached the question, meaning he help instruct hte questioner on exactly what to ask and how to phrase the question, and further, that the reporter went above and beyond to make sure that the Sargeant that was distributing the microphone for questions and answers made sure it wound up in the hand of one of his planted questioners.

Face it, the reporter was *making news* and *making himself part of the story*, which is against just about every journalistic ethics standard that exist.

Reporters are supposed to report facts. If they are paid for commentary or opinion, than they could and should write the same for a column. It should not however be presented as news, and most reputable news sources do everything possible to avoid such conflicting situations.

I give credit to Rumsfeld, even though he looked bad in doing so, for taking the question and attempting to answer it. The answer wasn't a great one, and certainly wasn't what the troops would want to hear, but he was in fact honest in his answer. He could have blown smoke up everyone's collective rear-ends and just answered with a 'pat' "We know there are logistic issues, but those are being addressed even as we speak." Instead, he gave a "we may not be happy with what we have, but it's all we have and we have to get the job done" answer. To have done less (than to say we still have to get the job done) would have given rise to the possibility that we can make excuses and delay, delay, delay getting missions accomplished, and getting the insurgency in Iraq quelled. Certainly if our enemies there know that we won't come in after them because we are not prepared, then it emboldens them and gives them time to reorganize and get ready to cause trouble in new areas.
Reply #8 from JoeUser Forums Top
don,t matter if the question was a set up or not, just that is was asked and addressed


It matters greatly that the reporter circumvented an oportunity for the troops to talk with Sec. Rumsfeld. Reporters are always using the excuse "we don't get involved, we just report the outcome".

That being said, I agree with the rest of what you posted.
Reply #9 from JoeUser Forums Top

The fact that this "reporter" is too immature to actually do his job, is pathetic.

the fact the administration has no such excuse for not doing its job is even more than pathetic...ifs full-on tragic.  attempting to divert attention away from such a serious problem with an  'activist reporter' smokescreen is merely pathetic.


here's some information posted at bloomberg.com about the physics of humvee logistics about which one may say--lookin at it with as much optimism as i can muster, it ain't quite as flawed as, say, the physics of the missle defense initiative.


`Matter of Physics'


The vehicles ``have been brought from all over the world, from wherever they're not needed,'' Rumsfeld said. ``It's essentially a matter of physics, not a matter of money.''


AM General LLC of South Bend, Indiana makes the Humvee, which replaced the jeeps used by the U.S. Army in World War II. Humvee is an acronym derived from its full name, High Mobility Multipurpose Wheeled Vehicle. AM General also makes Hummer vehicles for General Motors Corp.


The vehicles cost about $180,000 each. Armor Holdings Inc. is the sole supplier of protective plates for the vehicle.


The vehicles ``were not designed for combat zones,'' said James Dunnigan, editor of StrategyPage.com, a defense consultant and author of more than 20 books on military affairs.


``The last time we saw this was in Vietnam,'' Dunnigan said. ``It's déjà vu all over again: retrofitted armor, improvised gun turrets, the whole bit.''


A lack of armor prompted a group of 23 members of the Army Reserve to refuse an order to deliver fuel in Iraq in October. The reservists said the order was a ``suicide mission'' because the vehicles lack metal plating. They will face a reduction in rank, extra duties and other punishments, though they won't face courts martial, according to the military.


`Growing Requirement'


In the summer of 2003 the Army had fewer than 250 so-called up- armored Humvees in Operation Iraqi Freedom, General Peter Schoomaker, Army chief of staff, said last month.


``We have now manufactured over 5,000 up-armored Humvees, chasing a growing requirement in theater for over 8,000 up-armored Humvees,'' he said.


Retrofitting the vehicles with improvised armor has contributed to suspension and engine breakdowns, said Dunnigan. They are also more difficult to drive.


``The Humvee was not designed to carry weight in those places,'' he said. ``The retrofitted Humvees don't drive the same way. You have to learn to drive all over again or you'll roll them over and that's not good in a war zone.'' Link

Reply #10 from JoeUser Forums Top

actually the reporter in question didnt do his job as well as he might have. as long as he was coaching the men with whom he's embedded, he shoulda made sure one of em asked rumsfeld why--as we approach the 2nd anniversary of the iraq invasion--there still isnt enough adequate body armor available to our troops. 

not to mention feeding them a follow-up question about the physics of improvising body armor from scrap metal and safety glass that dont make ya look like youre playin the lead role in a local desert dinner theatre production of 'the man of la mancha'.

Reply #11 from PolMach Forums Top
I think it's time to put in my thought here. I can see how the reporter didn't do his job in the best way by basically "planting" his question in like that. But i also see his view on the armor issue. I've seen many videos of hummers over there getting blown apart by rpgs. i'm not saying armor will completely protect the troops but I think armor would save more lives then what the troops have right now.
Reply #12 from JoeUser Forums Top
My statement up top here still stands, but whether you have the armor or not, you have to do your job.
1. My roomie had no armor on his vehicle on a 200+ KM jaunt to their base. They just did it and didn't whine. The questioners unit is obviously adapting and doing their best to overcome their situation.
2. Armor doesn't just make itself, and only very specialized assignments got the very heavy Hummer M1114 that is best for this job prior to Operation Iraqi Freedom.
3. Don't throw all the blame on the present administration about funding bitches. When Clinton was in office we had to get tires out of war reserves due to no funds for parts. Budgets for projects like these are funded a number of years in advance.
4. I am inclined to believe the reporter and his paper are both glad for the hub-bub since it increases their visibi;lity, (If not their credibility).
Reply #13 from JoeUser Forums Top
You can intellectualize the question, and the answer to death (oooh, bad choice of words), but it should be intellectualized. It should be addressed. The reporter went above and beyond, so to speak. Rummy was/is a dickhead, and his answer was shameful.

Having said all that, which you all already said, I just feel really sorry for those guys over there. How utterly terrifying it must be to have to go out on a dangerous mission in inadequate and jury rigged armor, knowing that they may be blown to pieces, and knowing that the lousy equipment will be a contributing factor to their survival. To me, that's the stuff of nightmares. I certainly side with those soldiers who refused to follow orders and go out on a mission without armored vehicles a few months ago. Too bad that some others had to go in their place, and put their lives on the line. The whole situation sucks. It's just horrific.
Reply #14 from JoeUser Forums Top
Those who have not ever served are welcome to agree with the Soldiers who refused their orders. Since you don't really have an understanding of the ramifications of such a decision.
I was hoping to hear about the courts martials hearings for that mob. I say mob since they were obviously not a military unit.
Reply #15 from JoeUser Forums Top
"I don't know what the facts are but somebody's certainly going to sit down
with him and find out what he knows that they may not know, and make sure
he knows what they know that he may not know, and that's a good thing."

-- Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, referring to the soldier who asked
why some military vehicles in use in Iraq have insufficient armor.
Reply #16 from JoeUser Forums Top

Reply #12 By: hothead - 12/10/2004 9:58:21 PM
I think it's time to put in my thought here. I can see how the reporter didn't do his job in the best way by basically "planting" his question in like that. But i also see his view on the armor issue. I've seen many videos of hummers over there getting blown apart by rpgs. i'm not saying armor will completely protect the troops but I think armor would save more lives then what the troops have right now.


Go read this post about the answers Rumsfield was looking for. The reporter who prepped the soldier on the question did not do his homework.
Reply #17 from JoeUser Forums Top
An update on this issue - from The Washington Times, Nation/Politics, Inside Politics column, print edition, Tuesday, December 21, 2004, page A5.

Rest of the story
"The reporter who managed to get a National Guardsman serving in Iraq to question Sec'ty of Def. Rumsfeld ... coached the soldier using false information," NewsMax.com reports.
"In fact, by the time ... reporter Edward Lee Pitts rehearsed Spc. Wilson on what to say... the Pentagon had already up-armored 97 percent of the vehicles in Wilson's 278th Regimental Combat Team..."
"Further undermining the premise of Pitts' question, orders to up-armor the last 20 of the 278th's 830 vehicles were already in the pipeline..."
"According to the Maryville, Tenn., Daily Times -- a rival to Pitts' paper -- Army Maj. Gen. Speakes and Army Brig. Gen. Sorenson said during last week's Pentagon briefing that routine prep before proceeding to Iraq included adding protective armor plates to the last 20 vehicles of the Tennessee-based 278th's ... vehicles."
"When the question was asked, 20 vehicles remained to be up-armored..."
"We completed those 20 vehicles in the next day" he {Gen. Speakes} said. 'In other words, we completed all the armoring within 24 hours of the time question was asked,' he added."
"The ... revelations by Gen. Speakes and Gen. Sorenson gained ... exposure on FreeRepublic.com late Friday."


So, nice gotcha question planted by a reporter for an issue that wasn't in agreement with the question at all.
Reply #18 from PolMach Forums Top
Did anyone mention what the SOLDIER actually said???

Here is a cut/paste about it:

"NEW YORK In his first public account of last week’s controversy, Spc. Thomas Wilson says that he came up with the now famous “armor” question for Pentagon chief Donald Rumsfeld himself, without the help of oft-criticized reporter Edward Lee Pitts. And he adds, "If this is my 15 minutes of fame, I hope it saves a life."

The account appears in next week’s edition of Time magazine. "

Does anyone care that the actual SOLDIER said that he thought of the question himself??? Who even started the story that an embedded reporter "fed" him the question???
Reply #19 from PolMach Forums Top
There's such a thing as quoting those who quote others, and there's such thing as quoting the actual source---THE SOLDIER!!!
Reply #20 from PolMach Forums Top
Reply #19 By: Citizen mapleboard - 12/24/2004 11:05:29 AM
There's such a thing as quoting those who quote others, and there's such thing as quoting the actual source---THE SOLDIER!!!


Would you expect the soldier to actually admit that he was fed the line or not? To admit that he was coached on the question or not?

Given that the soldier was perhaps endangering his own career in asking such a question, and most certainly was endangering his chances for career advancement in asking such a question, I might give more weight to the thought that he was asking his own question, but... the reporter admits (he actually crows about it) that he fed the question, coached the soldier on what and how to ask, and then made sure that the soldier was going to have the chance to ask it.

Face it, the reporter has no ethics (much like many of his brothers and sisters in that business).