It is doubtful Rumsfeld would be permitted to intervene.
Can anyone help with this?
Rumsfeld, at his heart, is a politician. Even though he is a lame-duck politician, he doesn't want to go out with a legacy of betraying the troops. And, allowing the Abu Ghraib trials AND this nonsense against Lt. Pantano is a betrayal of the troops.
I am presently in an email discussion with some (likely) PR weenie (presumably) at the Pentagon who is trying to blow smoke up my skirts with a "don't worry, be happy" approach.
I'm not buying it and have just let this individual know it. The more aware they are that the public is unhappy over the potential court-martial of Lt. Pantano, the sooner the charges will be rescinded due to "lack of evidence".
We need to flood their server on this one - overload'em and let them hear from us. Remember, the squeaky wheel gets the grease.
So, fellow FReepers, start squeaking!!!