And on the point made by other commenters that no prosecutions opens a huge, gaping hole in the idea of rule of law in America, the Bush regime opened an amazing Pandora's Box here that has to be closed. And the only way to close it is to put the likes of Yoo, Ashcroft, Cheney and Bush on trial for the crimes they have openly admitted to committing on U.S. soil. As you said so eloquently, Glenn, there is no defense, no mitigating factor to be called upon to absolve them of their part in all this. The country is being sucked into a huge black hole due to their malfeasance and, contrary to what some might argue, the Bush presidency was at least as criminal if not more so than that of Nixon.

Let the reckoning begin. President-elect Obama, the choice is yours: walk the talk about 'real change' or shut the fuck up and let a real leader take your place. No man or woman - black, white, Hispanic, Asian or whatever the color of their skin - will create meaningful, lasting change in this country unless they lead by showing the character of their conscience and creed and "hold these truths to be self-evident; that all men are created equal (including before the law of the United States of America)."

And yes, the knowledge of where they were going and where they were headed would save lives, by getting teams info on the location, so they could seize other weapons.

Again, hopefully they would volunteer the answers, or trade them for a few hundred bucks.

-- steveindallas

or somebody, somewhere, could ask the obvious question: what if there weren't any of "our" troops in Afghanistan to be killed by exploding vaginas?

But I guess I'm just naive, huh?

@libertyaintfree

"Condem the act,fix the loop hole, promote awareness and let's move on.I believe that is Obama's intent."

I'm afraid you're right, except there's no loophole to fix. I'm afraid the best we can hope for from Obama is the appointment of a commission of inquiry, which I hope will have the authority to recommend prosecution. But the "loophole" here is the political elite's belief that the law simply doesn't apply to them if they think the law is hindering them.

Eric Holder is right. I hope that there are investigations and, if necessary, prosecutions of every sorry sonofabitch who dishonored this country by approving torture.

Saint Barack--soon to be President Obama The Divine--has been making noises that no, we don't need to investigate this stuff, that we should "move on," blah blah blah. May I earnestly request, Saint Barack, that you not interfere with our treaty obligations? Remember, it will be your responsibility to "preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution."

Need I say more?

The authoritarian personality believes that you follow the edicts of the authority without question, and those around you must do so as well.

The authority of the USA is believed to extend to cover the globe, thus everyone should just be doing what we say or they are bad people. This is what we tell them, and that is what they must do. Should they choose otherwise they are wrong and deserve any punishment that comes along with that. And they have no right to complain - big daddy laid down the law.

To the authoritarians, the Bushies are Big Daddy - Big Daddy said to waterboard those brown-skinned guys. Bush is the authority, there's no one else to report to (oops, that "God" bit, he reports to Bush too) he says what goes thus that's what must be done.

Some day, "Just War" theory will have become as quaint and obsolete as the "Code Duello".

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/amex/duel/sfeature/rulesofdueling.html

That dueling has lost general acceptance shows the possibility of progress.

Though, as Daniel Berrigan once said, we'd be better off if we still accepted dueling but no longer accepted war.

The insurance and health care companies representatives were shown on Cspan cameras handing checks to members of congress on the floor of congress while congress was in session . Were these criminal offences ? If an organization or individual gives money to the library of the spouse of a member of congress and the member then enacts laws favoring the organization or individual , can this be called a crime ? When we describe a lobby as powerful are we saying that lobby puts lots of money in areas to enhance the position of some important members of congress ? Is this legal ? If all of the above are legal acts then isn't our total government a pay-to-play place of business ?

and has its own laws against torture. Therefore, if investigations and possibly prosecutions for admitted torture do not occur, it is our own domestic rule of law, not the rule of international law, that is endangered. Since the rule of international law does not exist, it is the rule of our own law that I am most concerned with. US law states that ratified treaties are the supreme law of the land; as such the effect of enforcement of domestic law would result in enforcement of the Convention. The notion that the Convention denies all invesigatory prerogative to our authorities is novel, however, and I don't believe it has been proven here. What is the authority that has review power over the prosecution decision?

Fulfillment of domestic-originating law in this area fulfills international obligations.

Yes.

Hugh Beach (see below) makes the point even more strongly.

Just War theory was developed by Christians, but it's not a Christian theory.

http://www.union.ic.ac.uk/scc/pugwash/v1/HughBeach.pdf

Military Intervention and the Just War

Imperial College Student Pugwash, 14th October 2003

This talk addresses the question under what circumstances is it proper for one country to intervene militarily in another country, against the wishes of the government of that country, assuming that it has one.

It is an old question, given a new edge by the ending of the Cold War and the emergence of terrorism as a pervasive threat. So I shall be working from contemporary examples.

The frame of reference is the existing body of International Law on resort to force - jus ad bellum - but I shall discuss it under the headings of the Just War tradition. I make no apology for adopting this approach since the originators of Just War theory, Augustine of Hippo and Thomas Aquinas, were philosophers of the first rank and took their stance not on revelation but on Natural Law.

We start with a basic presumption against military action [...]

- - Hugh Beach