This page was last updated on May 21, 2004.

Trail of abuse/Follow the evidence up the chain of command; Editorial; Pittsburgh Post-Gazette; May 20, 2004.

The title of this editorial is misleading.  Even though all the evidence is not in, the P-G wants President Bush to fire Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld.

Below is a detailed critique of the subject editorial.

The editorial says it is unlikely that only low level soldiers were involved.  I agree, as does the Army, but I disagree that means Rumsfeld is directly responsible.

The editorial logic is tortured.  In one sentence it says a soldier would not make a decision regarding abuse, using “Sir, that decision is above my pay grade.” as an example of what “a soldier will say simply, almost as a formula.”  At the same time, apparently we are supposed to believe that same soldier cannot say, “Sir, that is an unlawful order.”  In fact, the Taguba Report tells us some soldiers did provide similar responses and at least one reported the abuse up the chain of command.  To a man, every soldier interviewed, regardless of rank, stated unequivocally they are trained to protect prisoners.  Likewise, they said they were trained how to deal with unlawful orders.

The editorial says no “captains, colonels or generals have been court-martialed.”  While true so far, this statement ignores that investigations continue and various captains, majors, colonels, and generals were relieved of command, long before the pictures made headlines.  The editorial said no one of relative rank has had their career damaged so far.  Tell that to Brigadier General Janis Karpinski, responsible for Abu Ghraib.  She too was relieved of command and her military career is effectively over at a minimum.

It is clear the P-G wants us to believe the lie that only low-ranking soldiers have been or will be punished.  In case the P-G has missed it, most prosecutions work from the bottom up as lower-level criminals “flip” on higher-ups.

The editorial says, “Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, who knew about the Abu Ghraib affair as early as January, was reportedly given a private slap on the wrist and then publicly forgiven and praised by President Bush.”  Nice try, but the “slap on the wrist” was for allowing President Bush to be blind-sided by the photos, not for the abuse.  I doubt President Bush blames Rumsfeld for the abuse.

The editorial admits Rumsfeld briefed President Bush about Abu Ghraib.  Though not mentioned in the editorial, The New Yorker magazine reported this briefing took place in January 2004, just a few days after a soldier reported the abuse.  The editorial chastises Bush for not following up, just as “he didn't follow up on the item in the Aug. 6, 2001, Presidential Daily Briefing titled ‘Bin Laden Determined to Strike in U.S.’ either.”  Apparently the P-G editorial board hopes we already forgot what the PDB really said.

In conclusion, the P-G demand for Rumsfeld’s firing has nothing to do with responsibility.  It is all about politics and a desire to damage President Bush.  According to an ABC News - Washington Post poll, most Americans see through the media and political games.  69% of those polled believed Rumsfeld should stay.

© 2004 Robert W. Cox, all rights reserved.