Original article, an editorial subtitled Barack Obama is disappointing expectations that he would at least curb the worst abuses of the Bush administration, via Socialist Worker (US):
EVERYONE EXPECTS Dick Cheney to rationalize torture by the CIA and U.S. armed forces. But Barack Obama?
It would be unfair to say that the Obama administration is the same as the Bush administration on all issues. We know it's not true, so we shouldn't go there. On the other hand, on many of the big issues, the current administration is toeing the same line as the W administration. Why?
Anger is growing among many people who voted for Obama last November over how the president has reversed himself on key issues relating to the treatment of detainees in the "war on terror"--and how the government should handle evidence of past abuses.
Ultimately, the argument will likely come down to "You don't know what we know." That's one of the nice things about state secrets. They give you cover when you need it for whatever reason.
First, Obama decided not to release photos of brutal treatment of detainees, citing the safety of U.S. troops as a rationale. Then, reversing a campaign promise to get rid of the Bush administration's military tribunal system for detainees, the administration admitted it would use "modified" military tribunals, rather than giving these prisoners access to U.S. courts.
Say what you will, if the current administration covers up what the past administration did, they should (at best) be ashamed and/or are (at worst) complicit. And yes, since Obama was Senator during a good part of the time where this was going on, he can be complicit.
Such incidents are a slap in the face to millions of people who looked to Obama and the Democrats to reverse the worst abuses of the Bush administration--including its rabid defense of the right of the U.S. government to torture prisoners and lock them away indefinitely without due process.
I'll allow you to finish the article. The editorial makes the case that we should be concerned about the direction the Obama administration seems to be headed in the overall GWOT (which, of course, isn't a term being used any more). The editorial ends with these sobering points:
So Obama orders the Guantánamo prison closed down, but keeps open the option of "rendering" prisoners to other countries. He publicly denounces torture, but protects U.S. officials who crafted torture policies from being prosecuted. He claims the mantle of civil liberties, but defends the right of the government to eavesdrop on citizens without a warrant. He travels to Egypt to further a U.S. "dialogue" with the Arab and Muslim worlds, but prevents victims of CIA kidnapping from getting their day in court.
All this is part of the logic that comes with running the world's only superpower. When it comes to the pursuit of U.S. imperial aims, human rights are expendable.
Perhaps it's time we examine what type of country we wish to be, and for Democrats of all stripes to ask what sort of Party they wish to be. Is the path the current administration taking on that the Party, or we as individuals, wish to be associated with. The answer may be the most important one we formulate over the next several months as we head toward the next election season.