I think a consensus of opinion would hold that Judith Miller of The New York Times, intentionally or unintentionally, served the present administration's erroneous rationale for invading a country, which resulted in the deaths or maiming of tens of thousands of men, women and children, some of whom were Americans, and most of whom were innocents.
This was either by reason of being duped by Miller and the government in regard to the facts on the ground in Iraq or because they just happened to be born in a country where people shoot first and ask questions later, as in "Kill them all, and sort it out later." ("Readers say journalists and their sources need to be aware of where a story might take them," The Daily Astorian, July 29).
I don't think Miller should get a Distinguished Service Medal, as she is either an inept reporter or a tool of someone's political propaganda machine. But I don't think it would serve the interests of society just to lock her up and throw the key away either.
Perhaps if she went around and interviewed the parents of all the American dead and wounded for their opinions of her journalism efforts concerning weapons of mass destruction and then did the same for an equal number of Iraq parents, it would be more helpful.
She could also spend a day or so with each of the wounded, before seeing her children off to Iraq where they could function as point personnel on "sweep-and-destroy" missions. And they could give their mother exclusive publication rights on their war experiences. As a matter of fact, I think it would be a good idea if Miller was restricted to reporting on the casualties of war for the rest of her journalistic life.