On the front page of this week’s Los Angeles Times’ Sunday Edition was a story about the alleged “suicide” of 44 year old Colonel Ted Westhusing while he was stationed in Iraq. Westhusing, a West Point professor as well as a leading scholar in military ethics, was involved in overseeing a private contractor the U.S. government had hired to train the new Iraqi government’s police force. He apparently met with them regularly, and for reasons that are unclear was becoming more and more frustrated with them and perhaps they with him. It was reported that the day he died he was attending one such meeting at their offices where he appeared angry. They broke for lunch and an hour later he was found dead in one of their offices with a single bullet wound to the head.
By any standard, it is a sad story. In my opinion, however, the interesting thing about the article was what seemed to me to be the none-too-subtle inuendos appearing between-the-lines that suggested to me that the Colonel’s departure from this earthly veil may have had an assist. We are told that the military’s investigation that ruled it a suicide is being questioned. A colleague is quoted as saying “He’s the last person who would commit suicide. He couldn’t have done it. He’s just too damn stubborn.” Even friends and family are continuing to struggle with the idea that this father, husband and devout Catholic could have done such a thing. And, if this were not enough, it was also reported that in the last weeks of the Colonel’s life this disciple of military ethics told members of his family via e-mail not only that he feared being alone at night, but also that he had found while in Iraq that “profits had trumped honor.” His reasons? We are told by his wife that he feared disclosing them while still in Iraq.
Certainly, these suggestions rendered the possibility of intrigue abundantly rich. At least two critical elements of most homicide investigations, motive and opportunity, are strongly presented. The Colonel simply may have known too much about the nefarious underworld of defense contractors to be allowed to return to the States alive. At minimum, at the end of the article I was left pondering whether a United States Army Colonel had been murdered -- a horror magnified by the fact that only three possible suspects are made available: our Iraqi allies, our defense contractors or our own military – yes, the very same military that investigated his death and ruled it a suicide.
Why does any of this matter? Because it is only but a part of the larger anti-Bush Administration paradigm currently taking shape both here and around the world. Regarding this paradigm , consider another example found in the same edition of the Times; the Doonesbury comic strip in which both the President and his administration are openly mocked for the perception that they have openly embraced and attempted to justify the concept of human torture. Such notions that are appearing with ever greater frequency both here and around the world are but representative of the growing animus toward the current President and his policies – an animus that is adversely affecting not only the world’s view of both our nation and us as a people, but our own.
Although I retain the opinion that our country is still the noblest and humane nation the world has ever known, I am increasingly convinced that our reputation for these traits is quickly waning. Last month our country debated whether to embrace human torture. Before that the question was whether we endorse the degradation and abuse of those we take captive, not to mention whether the wanton deprivation of even the most basic constitutional rights to our own citizens (e.g. like Jose Padilla) is acceptable. This week the debate has become whether our nation’s greed has led us to turn a blind eye toward the possibility of murder to protect our profits. In and of itself, each either is or was a tragedy. Collectively, however, these occurrences are giving momentum to the erosion of our nation’s good name. Thus, to allow them to stand unchallenged is unacceptable. They must not only be stopped, but vigorously denounced now, if we are ever to retain any future hope of leading the world, by way of example, to embrace a way of life we have found to be better for mankind.
The remedy not only should, but must, begin at the top. The administration should clearly demonstrate that they are at least mindful of the negative effects our nation’s conduct is having upon those we claim to be desirous of helping. At the get-go, torture should be abandoned and renounced as unacceptable both as a concept and a practice. Humane treatment of all human beings must either be a principle we uphold or we should not only stop demanding it be practiced by other countries (i.e. China), but should also amend our Constitution to eliminate its apparently nominal prohibition of cruel and unusual punishment. You can’t have it both ways -- nor should you.
Then perhaps that should be followed by a congressionally appointed special prosecutor to investigate the homicide of Col. Westhusing. This would be preferable to leaving people to suspect the possible conflicts of interest that most certainly could arise when the same investigation is conducted by one of the implicitly suggested suspect organizations. At minimum, even if the finding is the same as was that of the military, the unbiased investigative atmosphere would allow the suspicions that exists today to be replaced by a degree of closure for all concerned.
If the Colonel’s death accomplished just these things, perhaps the integrity and honor he sought to promote would ultimately be restored not only to the military, but also to us as a nation. At least then his death will have had a noble consequence that would allow us to honor his life, and who knows, it might even be an achievement for which Colonel Westhusing himself would have been willing to pay the ultimate sacrifice. At least, if I were a member of his family today, that would be my prayer.
© 2005 Clifford C. Nichols, Esq.
Cliff Nichols is an attorney practicing criminal defense/entertainment law in Santa Monica, California. He may be contacted regarding this editorial at either (310) 917-1083, cliff@cliffnicholslaw.com or www.cliffnicholslaw.com and you may join his blog at www.thedailystand.com