A reader writes:
Actually, Taguba’s performance shows he is part of the problem, although in a mild way. He was given what appears to be an illegal order and either did not recognize it or do anything about it. That said, I can empathize with him because here is a poor guy from a disadvantaged minority who worked his way to a high level in bureaucratic system. He was rewarded by that system, while also overcoming some persecution, and he must have been very loyal to it, because he owed everything to it. The system gave him his status and identity as a successful human being – and an appreciation of this may be the reason why he was picked to do the investigation. Guys like him rarely go astray by telling inconvenient truths. (Powell’s presentation of the "justification" for attacking Iraq to Security Council of UN is a parallel case in point, I think.) Now after the fact, he is worried about the stain on his reputation. The lights eventually went on and Taguba, to his credit, did the right thing, with the exception of making an issue about confining to the investigation to make the MPs the fall guys and girls while he was still on active duty.
It looks to me like he was afraid to question "authority" until he understood he was about to be hung out to dry, and even so, the first time he only went public was AFTER he retired.
One final point, Taguba had a second chance … he could still should have come completely and forcefully clean when he testified to Congress, especially after Rummy clearly lied under oath to Congress, which is clearly a felony, under the US Criminal Code, punishable with time in the slammer as well as a fine. (Actually, Rummy did not even have to be under oath for it to be a felony to lie to Congress.) But Taguba didn’t.
There aren’t many men of the caliber of Ian Fishback, are there?
(Photo: Stephen Jaffe/Getty.)
The Dish 