I was able to watch most of today's hearings while I was working and I had
a few observations and questions:

1) Sen. Clinton asked a very good question: if normal procedures required
general ignorance of what happened until it worked up the chain of command,
why wasn't that true in the case of the Army chaplain who had charges
preferred for dealing with the enemy and then dropped?

2) How much worse are the rest of the pictures and the film?

3) Is there any chance that they will stay confidential?

4) Why was it constantly referred to as "only six involved" when one of the
published pictures clearly had 10 people in it?

5) Why was the fact that the pictures had made the rounds before being
shown on CBS ignored?  Rumsfeld seemed to think that the only way they
could have been leaked is that a perp. sent them to the media.  Yet, people
at the home base of the unit had at least some of the pictures for a while.

6) The denial inherent in the top brass was actually kinda sad.

7) The insistence that the problems mentioned in the Red Cross report
(leaked to the WSJ) were fixed as they came up was amazing.  The Red Cross
listed some of the actions that were pictured.  How can Rumsfeld not have
know?

Dan M.


_______________________________________________
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l

Reply via email to