QUESTION: You said it was unfortunate that that photograph was released. I would just argue that it was unfortunate that it wasn't released with more information.
RUMSFELD: Maybe. That's fair.
QUESTION: The lesson here ought not to be…
RUMSFELD: I mean, I'm not blaming anyone for releasing it, but…
QUESTION: … less information or withholding photographs, but simply releasing more information…
RUMSFELD: Fair enough.[1]
This picture was an ultimate visual representation that the terrorists being captured in Afghanistan were not just under our control but under our submission. In that sense, it was a visual inversion, coming years later, of Mogadishu, a message to the Islamic world that as you do to ours, so we shall do to yours (obviously this is in symbolic and not literal terms.)[2] Then, of course, there was the release of the images from the abu Ghraib prisoner abuse scandal, and in several of those photographs as well, prisoners are wearing orange jumpsuits (and if those images aren't about submission, then the word has no meaning.)
This matters because those responsible for the kidnapping and subsequent beheading of Nick Berg claimed that their action was a response to the abuse of prisoners at abu Ghraib. And the claim that the beheading was in revenge for abu Ghraib was noted by CBS, by NBC, and repeatedly by Fox and by CNN in their initial reporting. Since Berg, the association between the jumpsuit as seen on detainees held in the West and hostages held in Iraq is constantly
73
- ↑ "Donald Rumsfeld Holds Defense Department Briefing," January 22, 2002, FDCH Political Briefings, available from Lexis-Nexis Academic, web.lexis-nexis.com.libproxy.lib.unc.edu/universe/document?_m=cbee207ae9d7a6d282ccc92919330798&_docnum=5&wchp=dGLbVtz-zSkVA&_md5=124020ab09c4fee6c44075a000573e4a.
- ↑ I am indebted to Carol K. Winkler of Georgia State University for this insight.
