The case for an international tribunal

[Jack Rabbit]

Inspired by this thread.

The Torturer's Apprentice
by Ray McGovern
TomPaine.com, Thursday September 7

Bush in jeopardy? Yes. The issue is torture, which George W. Bush authorized in a Feb. 7, 2002, memorandum in contravention both of the Geneva Accords and 18 U.S. Code 2441, the War Crimes Act that incorporates the Geneva provisions into the federal criminal code which was approved by a Republican-led Congress in 1996. Heeding the advice of Vice President Dick Cheney’s counsel, David Addington, then-White House counsel Alberto Gonzales and Assistant Attorney General Jay Bybee, the president officially opened the door to torture in that memorandum. His remarks yesterday reflect the determination of Cheney and Bush to keep that door open and accuse those who would close it of being "soft on terrorists."

Ray McGovern is right. These are violations of international law and truly heinous acts. These are war crimes, but so was the invasion of Iraq itself.

For many years, I have been advocating that Bush, Cheney, Gonzales and others should be indicted for war crimes and tried in federal court; in addition to that, if the United States is unwilling or unable to prosecute, then an international tribunal for war crimes in Iraq and crimes against humanity arising out of the war on terror should be established for that purpose.

No act of Congress can legalize torture. No act of Congress can say that waterboarding, setting dogs on detainees, stress positions, or sleep or sensory deprivation isn't covered by the Convention against Torture, to which the US is a party. No act of Congress by legalize "extraordinary rendition", which is explicitly prohibited by the convention. And no pronouncement by any tyrant can make torture an effective interrogation tool; any information obtained under such duress is naturally unreliable.

No act of Congress can make a secret tribunal a legitimate court of justice. No act of Congress can deny the ability of a defendant in a criminal case the right to call witnesses, cross examine witnesses against him, examine the evidence against him or freely consult with his attorney and call that acceptable due process. And no pronouncement by any tyrant, whether he came to power through a coup d'etat, a rigged election and judicial manipulation or even a legitimate free and fair election, will change that.

If Congress passes what Mr. Bush proposes, it will be a sign to the world that the US has turned its back on human rights and international humanitarian law. An international tribunal will be the last resort to bring the rogues of the Bush Regime to justice; the convening of such a tribunal would be an appropriate response.

[Solly Mack]

1. Excellent as always, Jack Rabbit!!!

[ixion]

2. kicked and recommended

awesome post, Jack Rabbit.

[Jack Rabbit]

3. Thank you both for the vot of confidnece

!!

[kentuck]

4. And the saddest part is that the Democratic Party cannot pursue justice...

in regards to this torture. Political reality does not permit an opposing political Party to criminalize the opposing leader of the other Party. They should. But they can't bring themselves to that degree of courage. So he will escape with all his crimes and will be rewarded handsomely for them. And the political games will continue as if nothing ever happened...unfortunately.

[Jack Rabbit]

6. I was afraid it would come to this

I'm not really surprised. The Democrats kept trying to treat Bush like just another conservative president, not realizing that he is very different.

In any case, the Democrats haven't been willing to call him on his crimes for fear of appearing "soft on terrorism" or unpatriotic for not supporting the commander-in-chief, regardless of how miserably his policies are failing, means that he and his aides won't be impeached, as they richly deserve, or called to account in any other way for their crimes.

The system is broken. Nixon's ghost must be laughing in Hell right now. We are being governed by a bunch of war criminals, and we can't do anything about it because, as you say, "Political reality does not permit an opposing political Party to criminalize the opposing leader of the other Party."

That and during the Clinton years, the Republicans, by a strategy of abuse, completely destroyed the institutions of the special prosecutor and even the constitutional process of impeachment.

It is necessary to call these people to account. It would be preferable if the US government did this to show the world that our system works; when our leaders commit war crimes and crimes against humanity, we hold them accountable. It appears that our so-called leaders are shying away from this responsibility and that the call to account will have to come from outside.

[Tom Joad]

8. Does the Democratic Party really oppose these policies even?

Aren't they busy planning the next "pre-emptive" war?

[Jack Rabbit]

11. The Democratic Party? What's that?

To start with, it's a collective noun. It is a convenient term for a group of people organized to help each other get elected.

Persumably, there's a set of principles which unites them, but in a two-party system such a statement of principles is necessarily broad and vague. That set of principles in the Democratic Party has to accomodate the DLC and progressives. If you think that's easy, just look at some of the flame wars we've had on this forum over the years. The membership of the party shifts over time. Southern Whites were solid Democrats for many years when Southern Blacks risked their lives if they even thought about voting. Now many of those Southern Whites vote Republican.

Don't think the GOP doesn't have the same problems. They do. Reagan made Chritian rightists and other "social conservatives", foreign policy imperialists and sober conservatives comfortable enough to forge a potent electoral coalition. However, the economic ideas behind it are a crock of manure and the less fanatical social conservatives (who tend to be working class Whites) start pealing away when the economy goes sour. I think even pragmatic conservatives are abandoning the GOP right now.

[Tom Joad]

13. Every US senator supported a resolution in support of Bush/Olmert

war on Lebanon. Every one. It was hotly debated here at DU, but as far as the people at the top, there is no discussion. It was a given. Not their children, after all.

[Pacifist Patriot]

5. There are indeed times I wonder who will liberate us.

Being governed and represented by these shockingly inhumane individuals is absolutely suffocating sometimes.

[Jack Rabbit]

7. We must free ourselves

The politicians won't do it for us.



Liberty Leading the People (1830) by Eugène Delacroix
From the website of the University of Southern California

[Tom Joad]

9. Yeah, you got that right.

[bobbolink]

10. It would, indeed, be preferable if the US itself would take this action.

We can see that won't happen, so I've been hoping an international court would step up.

That doesn't look likely, either.

The whole planet letting this continue bodes very ill for the future.

We, as a nation, need to be publicly shamed.

[ArmchairMeme]

12. The system is broken

The system is broken for all of us for Democrats and for Republicans. All people will have to live with the consequences the the crimes which have been committed by the so-called leaders.

The democracy once holding all people to a higher standard is now a shadow of what it once was.

It is a very sad day for all of us.

[Jack Rabbit]

14. It's partly our fault

Too many of us regarded democracy as a spectator sport. Democracy demands participation.