As we read the Bybee memo, and whatever comes out next (for there will be much more) I note that Jay Leno has already said it all. (June 10)
According to the "New York Times", last year White House lawyers concluded that President Bush could legally order interrogators to torture and even kill people in the interest of national security - so if that's legal, what the hell are we charging Saddam Hussein with?
Indeed. What more is there to say? The Bush administration has authorized itself to do everything Saddam did. And done it. From pre-emptive war to hostage taking to rape rooms.(Well, no poison gas yet, that we know of. But Reagan looked the other way when Saddam did it.)
And it presents a real problem: the IRC has pointed out that Saddam is, quite properly, being treated as a POW. But on June 30th, the occupation ends, legal fiction or not. That means all POWs without pending "penal charges" must be released.
So. What are they going to charge Saddam with?