Yes, there are dangerous men at Guantanamo, but the Bush Administration's very tactics have ensured that those men can never face trial in U.S. courts.
I'm fairly sure there really aren't any dangerous men at all in Guantanamo. Or if there are, there aren't more than a handful, and the rest are there as filler, picked up at random to pad out the numbers in Bush's grotesque gulag doll's house.
Bush and Cheney know there is no case - absolutely none at all - against most of these people. They're random you-and-mes who were in the wrong place at the wrong time - not terrorists, not masterminds, not mad and staring, just the wrong kind of brown.
They also know that if they're ever tried under due legal process, instead of some wacky-land authoritarian S&M declaration of enemy-osity, this inconvenient fact will go into the public record, and they will be so busted that not even Obama is going to be able to say 'No, let's just leave them be.'
All that is missing (as has been for the last few years) is for Congress to do it. The Fates are kind.
There has been an unfortunate history of American administrations committing crimes against humanity and walking away with barely a slap on the wrist. The truth and reconciliation committees worked in part because there was a very real threat that those involved would have been tried and convicted and lived out the rest of their lives in prison. I don't believe that anyone in the Bush regime believes that this is a realistic option when it comes to their crimes, so prosecuting a few of the end-of-level bad guys would show the rest of the gang that you mean business.
Actually prosecuting some of the bushies and putting them behind bars for a very long time would also demonstrate to the rest of the world that there are limits to the atrocities that US administrations can wreak with impunity. I should not think that I need to stress the effect this would have on the image and soft power of the US.
- Jake If you only spend 20 minutes of the rest of your life on economics, go spend them here.
they will be so busted that not even Obama is going to be able to say 'No, let's just leave them be.'
I believe standard operating procedure is to issue blanket pardons for all concerned in case being tried for treason and crimes against humanity interferes with their lucrative after-dinner speaking circuit engagements. keep to the Fen Causeway
I can see a certain wisdom in declining to start a tradition of prosecuting ex-presidents. But only some of the current partisans have any concern for further debasement of the process. Others don't seem to care, so long as they advance their agenda--undemocratic as it is. The chief accomplishment of the Clinton impeachment seems to have been to make the whole impeachment process repugnant. I have little doubt that some who brought that impeachment expected that outcome, along with providing pay-back for Watergate. They may be evil, but they are not fools. Think so at your peril.
Until and unless a substantial majority of US citizens come to appreciate that we have essentially eliminated the most potent check on abuses in government and that we essentially have a vastly weakened constitutional process, we are at risk that liberty might not long endure. I can only pray that we find the will and a way to remedy this before another conscienceless RW administration takes power, and, emboldened by the lack of consequences for Bush, et al, totally eviscerates the constitution in the name of security and seizes permanent power. As the Dutch said while fighting the Spanish: "It is not necessary to have hope in order to persevere."
If what Bush has done is not impeachable, what will be in the future? When the capital development of a country becomes a by-product of the activities of a casino, the job is likely to be ill-done. — John M. Keynes
What is once lost cannot easily be restored. As the Dutch said while fighting the Spanish: "It is not necessary to have hope in order to persevere."
A Truth and Reconciliation Commission could then be positioned as a soft compromise, well within the Overton window opened by the serious prospect of prosecution.
Keep in mind that a failed impeachment or prosecution could be spun as exoneration, even if the reasons for failure were procedural, legalistic, or simply a consequence of running out the clock. Words and ideas I offer here may be used freely and without attribution.
If what Bush has done is not impeachable, what will be in the future?
Just wait and see what the lunatic right tries to slap on Obama.
ARGeezer:
I can see a certain wisdom in declining to start a tradition of prosecuting ex-presidents.
The only thing which is protected by avoiding impeachment is America's self-serving view of itself as a meritocratic democracy. If a president is prosecuted and jailed, that mythology is torn to ribbons.
It would be traumatic in the short-term, but maturing and healthy in the longer term. The core US mythology seems to be that if you game the system with enough cunning, the law won't apply to you and you can retire rich.
A jail term would snap many people out of that fantasy, with a priceless 'Oh, shit...' moment.
It would be like the death of JFK in reverse - instead of proving that the system can be gamed, it would reinforce the fact that yes, the rules really do apply to you too.
Bush's impeachment wouldn't be done to necessarily successfully convict (there might not be time enough before the next president's inauguration) but to get all the dirty laundry out in plain view. When the capital development of a country becomes a by-product of the activities of a casino, the job is likely to be ill-done. — John M. Keynes
The Taliban members who have fought against US or Afghan forces post 2002 could also be tried by the Afghan government since from an international law point of view they're members of a violent organization fighting against a sovereign government and allied forces who are there legally. The US could also keep them as POW's without trying them beyond ascertaining that they are indeed Taliban members.
It's a little too late for any of these things. When the capital development of a country becomes a by-product of the activities of a casino, the job is likely to be ill-done. — John M. Keynes
Contra stormy, there is no rule that suspects who have been tortured can't be put on trial,
I didn't mean to imply that there was a rule, only that it's unlikely to happen.
