Skip to main content

So says Human Rights Watch in a report released last Tuesday.

I had totally missed that bit of news. The theatrics of the debate on the debt limit ceiling and the concurrent implosion of the Murdoch media empire dominated the headlines in the traditional media as well as on the blogs.

I assume many others experienced the same. Still, a quick google search reveals that there are very few hits from the top media outlets on the term 'hrw prosecute bush', so it is no wonder if this one passed below the radar. (Curiously - well, maybe not so curious - there are plenty of hits outside western Europe and North-America.)

Anyway, here is the link to HRW's comprehensive report - Getting Away with Torture.

The report contains the following:

Getting Away with Torture

- Summary
- Recommendations
- I. Background: Official Sanction for Crimes against Detainees
- II. Torture of Detainees in US Counterterrorism Operations
- III. Individual Criminal Responsibility

- Appendix: Foreign State Proceedings Regarding US Detainee Mistreatment

- Acknowledgments and Methodology

From the summary:

This report builds on our prior work by summarizing information that has since been made public about the role played by US government officials most responsible for setting interrogation and detention policies following the September 11, 2001 attacks on the United States, and analyzes them under US and international law. Based on this evidence, Human Rights Watch believes there is sufficient basis for the US government to order a broad criminal investigation into alleged crimes committed in connection with the torture and ill-treatment of detainees, the CIA secret detention program, and the rendition of detainees to torture. Such an investigation would necessarily focus on alleged criminal conduct by the following four senior officials—former President George W. Bush, Vice President Dick Cheney, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, and CIA Director George Tenet.

Such an investigation should also include examination of the roles played by National Security Advisor Condoleezza Rice and Attorney General John Ashcroft, as well as the lawyers who crafted the legal “justifications” for torture, including Alberto Gonzales (counsel to the president and later attorney general), Jay Bybee (head of the Justice Department's Office of Legal Counsel (OLC)), John Rizzo (acting CIA general counsel), David Addington (counsel to the vice president), William J. Haynes II (Department of Defense general counsel), and John Yoo (deputy assistant attorney general in the OLC).

Much important information remains secret. For example, many internal government documents on detention and interrogation policies and practices are still classified, and unavailable to the public. According to the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), which has secured the release of thousands of documents under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), among the dozens of key documents still withheld are the presidential directive of September 2001 authorizing CIA "black sites"—or secret prisons—as well as CIA inspector general records.[3] Moreover, many documents that have ostensibly been released, including the CIA inspector general’s report and Department of Justice and Senate committee reports, contain heavily redacted sections that obscure key events and decisions.

The report is very well researched and documented and it is well worth reading the summary.

Does such a report matter given how it is practically being ignored?

If nothing else, at least this type of work impacts on the ability of the culprits to move freely. Recall what happened last February:

The failure of the US to investigate and prosecute Bush administration officials for torture was recently highlighted by criminal complaints that were to be filed with a prosecutor in Switzerland prior to a planned visit by President Bush to the country, Human Rights Watch said.

Ahead of a trip to Geneva where Bush was scheduled to address a charity gala on February 12, 2011, two individuals planned to file complaints with the Geneva Canton prosecutor against President Bush for authorizing torture and other ill-treatment. However, on February 5 the trip was cancelled amid reports there would be protests and criminal complaints filed against him.

"The threatened prosecution of President Bush in Switzerland shows that other countries will act against torture even if the US doesn't," said Kenneth Roth, executive director of Human Rights Watch. "The US government needs to demonstrate that no official, including an ex-president, is above the law by authorizing prosecutors to investigate and prosecute this serious crime. President Bush's bold and blatant admission that he ordered waterboarding is an obvious place to begin a criminal investigation."

But the real test is what the Obama administration will do with it? The safe bet is: 'Nothing'.

Only two weeks ago, the DOJ cleared all but two cases involving the CIA in torture:

Attorney General Eric Holder said the probes were the only criminal investigations to result from a wide-ranging probe into CIA conduct that had been carried out by John Durham, an assistant U.S. attorney for Connecticut. Those cases included the destruction by a CIA official of videotapes of interrogations of terrorist suspects and the handling of a variety of so-called high-value suspects, three of whom were waterboarded and at least one of whom was threatened with a drill held to his head as he was questioned.

Given this type of judicial environment, I have next to no faith that the war criminals of the Bush-administration will ever have to face justice.  

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

    •  Those cases were (not technically) closed (5+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      blue71340, ask, skrekk, Russgirl, PhilJD

      and cleared years ago by the White House...

      when Holder admitted the White House politicized the DoJ.

      [...]
      But as Holder considered launching an investigation, he immediately began to feel pushback from the White House. Behind the scenes, as Jane Mayer has reported in The New Yorker, Emanuel barked to an intermediary, "Didn't he get the memo that we're not relitigating the past?" And appearing on the Sunday-morning talk shows in April, Emanuel pressed the issue publicly, insisting that the authors of the torture memos "should not be prosecuted. This is not a time for retribution." At the White House podium, press secretary Robert Gibbs chimed in, "Those that followed the legal advice and acted in good faith on that legal advice shouldn't be prosecuted."

      To call these comments inappropriate would be to praise the White House with faint damnation. Just a few years earlier, the Bush team had ignited a national scandal when political operatives tried to influence U.S. attorneys, yet the Obama administration had gone a step further, allowing operatives to apply political pressure on the attorney general himself.
      [...]

      More and Better Democrats

      by SJerseyIndy on Sat Jul 16, 2011 at 08:03:33 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  It will never be easy (8+ / 0-)

    What did Murdoch's propaganda machinery say about the recent decision to clear the CIA (with the two exceptions noted):

    Vindicating the CIA
    Ending a disgraceful investigation.

    The education of the Obama Administration on antiterror policy has been remarkable to behold, and the latest installment is Attorney General Eric Holder's decision to pull the plug on the investigation into most CIA interrogations. The disgrace is that this probe was ever undertaken.
  •  You will never see a POTUS stand trial for any (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Gooserock, phillies, ask, SJerseyIndy

    Crime they may or may not have committed. Example being if you could not get it done during watergate you never will. The powers that be will always protect the office. You might get some underlings but never the man. Cheers

    "Gentlemen, you can't fight in here! This is the War Room." - President Merkin Muffley

    by Farkletoo on Sat Jul 16, 2011 at 07:17:28 AM PDT

  •  Do you want a Republic (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    ask, Johnny Q

    or a fascist dictatorship?

    Your call.

    The last several Attorney Generals, who seem to have made the wrong choice, would appear to have made themselves criminal co-conspirators in the offense.  An offense for which there is no statute of limitations.

    We can have change for the better.

    by phillies on Sat Jul 16, 2011 at 07:31:04 AM PDT

  •  Can't do it. (0+ / 0-)

    The heads of the GOP/DEM Senate, House, etc were supposed to be briefed and under silence so they could not talk....thus are they also up for procecution?  They had security clearances and were advised of a lot of the planning......who do you go after?  Everyone in leadership on both sides?

    Obama has not really changed anything about torture and rendition.  He seems to have kept Bush's war just rolling along, now adding Lybia.  Now the neocons want the USA to go after Iran.  

    Obama goes after whistleblowers that are trying to get out the truth.  You think his DOJ are going to prosecute his predecessor?  Good luck!

  •  Absolutely. (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Johnny Q

    The President needs to prosecute Bush, now!...Today!

    There are too many republican voters right now coming to the realization that their party is fucking them and their country.  Obama needs to stop this insanity before the indecisive questioning repubs in middle America switch sides and cast their votes for him.  We don't need that shit.

    Prosecuting Bush will galvanize the right wing talking points and keep their propagandist hold on the confused masses unsure to this day of Obama's allegiance.  Who needs 'em

    We need to keep our party pure!

    apparently due to ancient hardware and the transition to dk4 I can't recc tip jars or comments any longer so in lieu of the 'standard nod' you'll see a variety of replies until this gets fixed or becomes a mighty big fucking pain in the ass

    by oopsaDaisy on Sat Jul 16, 2011 at 09:33:28 AM PDT

  •  "Looking forward" on crimes against humanity (0+ / 0-)

    is aiding and abetting.  Those in a position to prosecute and fail to do so(as required by law and treaty) are accessories after the fact.

    You may think that. I couldn't possibly comment.-- Francis Urqhart

    by Johnny Q on Sat Jul 16, 2011 at 12:47:09 PM PDT

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site