Monday, May 10, 2004

Wow, I've got to get used to this new editing format.
OK, my turn to post a link or two. Jonah had a column on this on Friday that is interesting in the context of asking what the media's role is in these things? He says a lot of the same thing that Scott did. Here's the column.

Now, for my other question. How do you all feel about Rumsfeld? I have really thought about this hard and long. I love Rummy, but I must admit that thoughts have been running around in my brain like track stars on this. Why he didn't inform Bush when this first started in January? Did he assume that Bush already knew and didn't "want" to know more? Did he purposely keep it from him to protect him? No, he assumed that it was an isolated incident.

Here's a column from Safire today on Rumsfeld. It's good, short, and to the point.

"In last week's apology before the Senate, Rumsfeld assumed ultimate responsibility, as J.F.K. did after the Bay of Pigs fiasco. The Pentagon chief failed to foresee and warn the president of the danger lurking in the Army's public announcement in January of its criminal investigation into prisoner abuse. He failed to put the nation's reputation ahead of the regulation prohibiting "command influence" in criminal investigations, which protects the accused in courts-martial.

The secretary testified that he was, incredibly, the last to see the humiliating photos that turned a damning army critique by Maj. Gen. Antonio Taguba into a media firestorm. Why nobody searched out and showed him those incendiary pictures immediately reveals sheer stupidity on the part of the command structure and his Pentagon staff."

That's what bothers me. We'd better see some heads roll on his staff. If we don't, my faith in Rummy will be lessened I fear.

No comments: