This morning’s lead editorial in The New York Times, “The Abu Ghraib Spin,”
begins:
The administration and its Republican allies appear to have settled on a way to
deflect attention from the torture of prisoners at Abu Ghraib: accuse Democrats and the news
media of overreacting, then pile all of the remaining responsibility onto officers in the battlefield,
far away from President Bush and his political team. That cynical approach was on display
yesterday morning in the second Abu Ghraib hearing in the Senate, a body that finally seemed to
be assuming its responsibility for overseeing the executive branch after a year of silently watching
the bungled Iraq occupation.
This morning’s lead editorial in The Washington Post, “Protecting the
System,” ends:
The sickening abuse of Iraqi prisoners will do incalculable damage to
American foreign policy no matter how the administration responds. But if President Bush and his
senior officials would acknowledge their complicity in playing fast and loose with international
law and would pledge to change course, they might begin to find a way out of the mess. Instead,
they hope to escape from this scandal without altering or even admitting the improper and illegal
policies that lie at its core. It is a vain hope, and Congress should insist on a different
response.
Both editorials tell the truth. But the Times editorial, which is stronger, tells more of the
unvarnished truth not only because it is better written but because it uses, as the French say, le
mot juste: “torture.”
Postscript: From a faithful reader who has had justifiable doubts about the Times’s
coverage of the presidential campaign (he believes it skews against John Kerry) and, in my view,
less justifiable doubts about its reporting on the Abu Ghraib scandal:
“The Times is still doing a good job on this abuse thing. I can’t quite figure out what is going
on. It doesn’t fit, somehow. I think the catch is yet to come. Anyway, your comments on reality
TV answered this, as quoted from the Times”:
At an open meeting with Pentagon civilian and military personnel, Mr.
Rumsfeld said Tuesday that abuse at Abu Ghraib was “a body blow” to America delivered by “a
few who have betrayed our values.” He said that acts of violent abuse and sexual humiliation
captured in photos and video images at Abu Ghraib “ought not to be allowed to define us either in
the eyes of the world or our own eyes, adding, “We know who we are.”
“The lies will continue, though, and we will never know the truth,” my friend continues, citing
this:
A separate Army inquiry is under way into what role military intelligence
officers played in the abuses. In afternoon testimony, senior Army intelligence officers told
senators that none of their people were implicated despite conclusions to the contrary in General
Taguba’s report.
“Nothing will come of that inquiry,” he adds. “The U.S. military has not really been under
democratic control for at least half a century.” He offers another citation referring to yesterday’s
Senate hearing on Abu Ghraib:
Mr. Cambone, [undersecretary of defense for intelligence], and other military
officials said the interrogation techniques approved for use in Iraq were straight out of the Army
manual and followed the Geneva Conventions. In that respect, he said, they differed from harsher
techniques, like sleep deprivation and forcing prisoners to disrobe entirely for interrogations, that
are authorized for use at the American prison at Guantánamo Bay, Cuba.
“And what does that bring to mind, making all those people stand there naked?” my friend
asks, and answers: “Randomly shooting prisoners from guard towers was another Nazi technique
that has been used in Iraq. … It is all coming home. The U.S.A. will be like an Argentina.
The reality has already been written and sung into existence. A house of cards will sooner or later
always fall.”
