Deep Politics Forum

Rachel Maddow on Dick Cheney’s war crimes admission:

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=CCW_vLl-3vw

Strange – real journalism in the mainstream US media.

It’ll never catch on.

http://globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=11431

Cheney Throws Down Gauntlet, Defies Prosecution for War Crimes
Cheney has publicly confessed to ordering war crimes.

By Prof. Marjorie Cohn

Global Research, December 18, 2008

Quote:Dick Cheney has publicly confessed to ordering war crimes. Asked about waterboarding in an ABC News interview, Cheney replied, “I was aware of the program, certainly, and involved in helping get the process cleared.” He also said he still believes waterboarding was an appropriate method to use on terrorism suspects. CIA Director Michael Hayden confirmed that the agency waterboarded three Al Qaeda suspects in 2002 and 2003.

U.S. courts have long held that waterboarding, where water is poured into someone’s nose and mouth until he nearly drowns, constitutes torture. Our federal War Crimes Act defines torture as a war crime punishable by life imprisonment or even the death penalty if the victim dies.

Under the doctrine of command responsibility, enshrined in U.S. law, commanders all the way up the chain of command to the commander-in-chief can be held liable for war crimes if they knew or should have known their subordinates would commit them and they did nothing to stop or prevent it.

Why is Cheney so sanguine about admitting he is a war criminal? Because he’s confident that either President Bush will preemptively pardon him or President-elect Obama won’t prosecute him.

Both of those courses of action would be illegal.

First, a president cannot immunize himself or his subordinates for committing crimes that he himself authorized. On February 7, 2002, Bush signed a memo erroneously stating that the Geneva Conventions, which require humane treatment, did not apply to Al Qaeda and the Taliban. But the Supreme Court made clear that Geneva protects all prisoners. Bush also admitted that he approved of high level meetings where waterboarding was authorized by Cheney, Condoleezza Rice, John Ashcroft, Colin Powell, Donald Rumsfeld and George Tenet.

Attorney General Michael Mukasey says there’s no need for Bush to issue blanket pardons since there is no evidence that anyone developed the policies “for any reason other than to protect the security in the country and in the belief that he or she was doing something lawful.” But noble motives are not defenses to the commission of crimes.

Lt. Gen. Antonio Taguba, who investigated the Abu Ghraib scandal, said, “There is no longer any doubt as to whether the current administration has committed war crimes. The only question that remains to be answered is whether those who ordered the use of torture will be held to account.”

Second, the Constitution requires President Obama to faithfully execute the laws. That means prosecuting lawbreakers. When the United States ratified the Geneva Conventions and the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, thereby making them part of U.S. law, we agreed to prosecute those who violate their prohibitions.

The bipartisan December 11 report of the Senate Armed Services Committee concluded that “senior officials in the United States government solicited information on how to use aggressive techniques, redefined the law to create the appearance of their legality, and authorized their use against detainees.”

Lawyers who wrote the memos that purported to immunize government officials from war crimes liability include John Yoo, Jay Bybee, William Haynes, David Addington and Alberto Gonzales. There is precedent in our law for holding lawyers criminally liable for participating in a common plan to violate the law.

Committee chairman Senator Carl Levin told Rachel Maddow that you cannot legalize what’s illegal by having a lawyer write an opinion.

The committee’s report also found that “Rumsfeld’s authorization of aggressive interrogation techniques for use at Guantánamo Bay was a direct cause of detainee abuse there.” Those techniques migrated to Iraq and Afghanistan , where prisoners in U.S. custody were also tortured.

Pardons or failures to prosecute the officials who planned and authorized torture would also be immoral. Former Navy General Counsel Alberto Mora testified to the Senate Armed Services Committee in June 2008 that “there are serving U.S. flag-rank officers who maintain that the first and second identifiable causes of U.S. combat deaths in Iraq – as judged by their effectiveness in recruiting insurgent fighters into combat – are, respectively the symbols of Abu Ghraib and Guantánamo.”

During the campaign, Obama promised to promptly review actions by Bush officials to determine whether “genuine crimes” were committed. He said, “If crimes have been committed, they should be investigated,” but “I would not want my first term consumed by what was perceived on the part of the Republicans as a partisan witch hunt, because I think we’ve got too many problems we’ve got to solve.”

Two Obama advisors told the Associated Press that “there’s little-if any – chance that the incoming president’s Justice Department will go after anyone involved in authorizing or carrying out interrogations that provoked worldwide outrage.”

When he takes office, Obama should order his new attorney general to appoint an independent prosecutor to investigate and prosecute those who ordered and authorized the commission of war crimes.

Obama has promised to bring real change. This must be legal and moral change, where those at the highest levels of government are held accountable for their heinous crimes. The new president should move swiftly to set an important precedent that you can’t authorize war crimes and get away with it.

Marjorie Cohn is a professor at Thomas Jefferson School of Law and President of the National Lawyers Guild. She testified before the House Judiciary Committee’s Subcommittee on Constitution, Civil Rights and Civil Liberties in May about official liability for torture. The author of Cowboy Republic: Six Ways the Bush Gang Has Defied the Law, her articles are archived at http://www.marjoriecohn.com.

Will a Cabinet stuffed full of war criminals really prosecute fellow-crims?

Even if Cheney et al don't get prosecuted in the US (and let's face it that isn't going to happen) I should think that this admission opens him up to prosecution by the war crimes tribunal in the Hague?

And you're right Paul, honest straight reporting won't catch on in the MSM. Far too bland and uninteresting. It could work if accompanied by a picture of a page 3 girl strapped on a water-board, followed by adverts for water-sport holidays, breathing revival products and so on -- but not as a naked story. Never!

David Guyatt Wrote:Even if Cheney et al don't get prosecuted in the US (and let's face it that isn't going to happen) I should think that this admission opens him up to prosecution by the war crimes tribunal in the Hague?

And you're right Paul, honest straight reporting won't catch on in the MSM. Far too bland and uninteresting. It could work if accompanied by a picture of a page 3 girl strapped on a water-board, followed by adverts for water-sport holidays, breathing revival products and so on -- but not as a naked story. Never!

Agreed. Bush will pardon by deed - rather than by name all the criminals in his Adminstration - making prosecution very difficult in the USA - however - one would hope that in Europe there might be a chance. Even trial in abstentia would be important! Chaney yesterday also said he would be the sole determiner of which of his V.P. papers would be [as prescribed by law] made public after and which were privilaged as his roles under varous National Security hats [black ones, at that]*. I still find repugnant to the point of venal disgust that the Dems did not choose to try to impeach that crew and Obama seems willing to just let it all 'go'. Not since the Third Reich have such abuses of power and International Law been done by a major power. The Nuremburg Principles, alone, would condemn many in the current and future Administration to prosecution and perhaps pay with their lives....don't hold your breath!

*Vice President Dick Cheney is claiming he should have the sole authority to decide which of his records, if any, are handed over to the National Archives when he leaves office. The group Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington is suing Cheney to ensure his records become public. The 1978 Presidential Records Act requires the President and Vice President to transfer their records upon leaving office. In a court filing, Cheney’s lawyers say he will choose which of his records are personal and which pertain to his vice-presidential duties.

I bet the paper shredders have been running hot since the first Wednesday in Novemeber in quite a few offices in Washington.

I have lost all hope that Obama will go after these bastards for war crimes.
While I do believe that his administration will not engage in such surreal tactics, he will not have his Justice Department seek justice in these maters, which greatly troubles me. (Or as an old conspiracy pal put it in an email the other day "out with the old and in with the old". )

As for W pardoning anyone, it will be interesting to see just how that plays out. Because, by its very nature, a pardon is an admission that a crime occurred. How much lower can this nation sink? Cheney, so smugly admitting on national tv to a hanging offense!

Paul, thanks for the Rachel clip. I watch her everynight.

Dawn

Dawn Meredith Wrote:Paul, thanks for the Rachel clip. I watch her everynight.

Dawn

You're lucky to have her. You want to see the timid buffoons we have to put up with on British TV.

Paul

Paul Rigby Wrote:You're lucky to have her. You want to see the timid buffoons we have to put up with on British TV.

Paul

Ya but will she ever touch Deep political issues? When I get time I think I will find her email address and ask. But I know the answer: she is not permitted.

Dawn
And we have more than our share of buffoons on US tv. And "hate" talk radio.

They both admitted it right before the election, seemed to make quite a point of it. Why? Are they just rubbing our noses in it or is it something more strategic?

Myra Bronstein Wrote:They both admitted it right before the election, seemed to make quite a point of it. Why? Are they just rubbing our noses in it or is it something more strategic?

I still have a hunch they know they've been granted pro-active pardons (even though we don't know it). Why else would they flaunt this VERY POSSIBLY illegal [I think CLEARLY ILLEGAL] set of actions? Interesting aside that Chaney hurt his back packing papers the last day - someone like him usually has underlings do the packing - guess he trusted no one to see them!

They might get them one day like they nearly got Pinochet. I don't think international travel will be on the to do list very much. And even if the Dems are going to let them off the hook the families of the dead will not. There are going to be a lot of law suits coming their way.