To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.
Former President George W. Bush
may be indicted for torture.
Far fetched? Not anymore.
In March Baltasar Garzon, a
Spanish judge, asked prosecutors to determine whether there is enough evidence
to charge six former members of the Bush administration with torturing
prisoners. Should they be indicted as
now seems likely it will be hard to argue that their superiors up to and
including the former President himself should not be indicted as well.
Former President George W. Bush
may be indicted for torture.
Far fetched? Not anymore.
In March Baltasar Garzon, a
Spanish judge, asked prosecutors to determine whether there is enough evidence
to charge six former members of the Bush administration with torturing
prisoners. Should they be indicted as
now seems likely it will be hard to argue that their superiors up to and
including the former President himself should not be indicted as well.
Imagine if that should happen and
a trial take place. It would rivet the attention of the world like no legal
action since the prosecution of German and Japanese officials after World War
II. More importantly, it would provide
credence to the concept of universal jurisdiction championed by Judge
Garzon.
Universal jurisdiction is the
principle that certain crimes are so egregious and/or such a threat to world
peace that those who commit them may be arrested and tried in any country of
the world. Torture is one of those
crimes.
Who was most responsible for the
torture during Bush's "war on terror?" Was it the functionaries who carried it out,
the members of the administration who justified it, or the Torturer in Chief
who authorized it? And if any or all of
them are left unpunished what does it say about the commitment of our nation to
the rule of law and human rights? The
world knows we can talk the talk. The
question it is asking is will we walk the walk.
Walk the walk would mean leading
the charge to bring those who violated our laws and international law by
torturing prisoners to justice. That is
what President Obama should be doing.
Instead he says "look forward not back."
We tortured native
Americans. We tortured slaves. We tortured prisoners under the Phoenix
program in Vietnam.
At the School of the Americans we taught future dictators to torture. We supported governments that torture their
opponents. Nevertheless, because in our
words if not always in our actions we also promoted human rights and the rule
of law, the Statue of Liberty was the icon of our country for more than 100
years.
George Bush changed that. Now, because he authorized the torture of
people he termed "illegal enemy combatants" the icon of our country
is a hooded prisoner with wires attached standing on a box in a prison in Iraq. Still, President Obama says, "let's
just ignore all that."
Baltasar Garzon, on the other
hand, says, "let's not."
Garzon is best known for bringing
about the arrest of the former dictator of Chile, Augusto Pinochet, under the doctrine of
universal jurisdiction. Pinochet was
apprehended in 1998 while visiting England. It was the first time the doctrine was
applied for crimes against humanity.
Now Garzon is asking the public
prosecutor in Spain
to determine if a David Addington, Jay Bybee, Douglas Feith, William Haynes,
John Yoo, and Aberto Gonzales may be charged with violating laws that prohibit
the mistreatment of prisoners by providing President Bush with the legal
rationale for ordering "harsh interrogation" techniques. "Harsh interrogation" is a
euphemism for torture.
Harsh interrogation meant being
chained for days with hands extended over the head, being denied toilet
facilities, prolonged nudity, waterboarding (a form of torture in which the
victim is suffocated to the point of dying), severe beatings, sleep
deprivation, exposure to cold temperatures, prolonged solitary confinement, and
more. That, according to a Red Cross
report, is how suspected terrorists held by the U.S.
were treated.
Yet after pictures of U.S.
army personnel torturing prisoners at the Abu Gharib prison in Iraq
surfaced on the web in 2004 the Bush administration maintained that they
depicted the actions of a few rogue soldiers.
"We do not torture," the President said in 2005 even though
his administration had long before sought and obtained legal cover from the six
former officials now being investigated by Garzon for interrogators to use
"harsh interrogation techniques" against suspected terrorists.
"Behind much of the savagery
of modern history," wrote Kenneth Roth, the executive director of Human
Rights Watch, "lies impunity.
Tyrants commit atrocities, including genocide, when they calculate they
can get away with them." If
President Obama heeds those words he will join Baltasar Garzon's effort to bring
to justice all those responsible for torturing prisoners in Bush's war against
terror.
Common Dreams is powered by optimists who believe in the power of informed and engaged citizens to ignite and enact change to make the world a better place. We're hundreds of thousands strong, but every single supporter makes the difference. Your contribution supports this bold media model—free, independent, and dedicated to reporting the facts every day. Stand with us in the fight for economic equality, social justice, human rights, and a more sustainable future. As a people-powered nonprofit news outlet, we cover the issues the corporate media never will. Join with us today! |
Former President George W. Bush
may be indicted for torture.
Far fetched? Not anymore.
In March Baltasar Garzon, a
Spanish judge, asked prosecutors to determine whether there is enough evidence
to charge six former members of the Bush administration with torturing
prisoners. Should they be indicted as
now seems likely it will be hard to argue that their superiors up to and
including the former President himself should not be indicted as well.
Imagine if that should happen and
a trial take place. It would rivet the attention of the world like no legal
action since the prosecution of German and Japanese officials after World War
II. More importantly, it would provide
credence to the concept of universal jurisdiction championed by Judge
Garzon.
Universal jurisdiction is the
principle that certain crimes are so egregious and/or such a threat to world
peace that those who commit them may be arrested and tried in any country of
the world. Torture is one of those
crimes.
Who was most responsible for the
torture during Bush's "war on terror?" Was it the functionaries who carried it out,
the members of the administration who justified it, or the Torturer in Chief
who authorized it? And if any or all of
them are left unpunished what does it say about the commitment of our nation to
the rule of law and human rights? The
world knows we can talk the talk. The
question it is asking is will we walk the walk.
Walk the walk would mean leading
the charge to bring those who violated our laws and international law by
torturing prisoners to justice. That is
what President Obama should be doing.
Instead he says "look forward not back."
We tortured native
Americans. We tortured slaves. We tortured prisoners under the Phoenix
program in Vietnam.
At the School of the Americans we taught future dictators to torture. We supported governments that torture their
opponents. Nevertheless, because in our
words if not always in our actions we also promoted human rights and the rule
of law, the Statue of Liberty was the icon of our country for more than 100
years.
George Bush changed that. Now, because he authorized the torture of
people he termed "illegal enemy combatants" the icon of our country
is a hooded prisoner with wires attached standing on a box in a prison in Iraq. Still, President Obama says, "let's
just ignore all that."
Baltasar Garzon, on the other
hand, says, "let's not."
Garzon is best known for bringing
about the arrest of the former dictator of Chile, Augusto Pinochet, under the doctrine of
universal jurisdiction. Pinochet was
apprehended in 1998 while visiting England. It was the first time the doctrine was
applied for crimes against humanity.
Now Garzon is asking the public
prosecutor in Spain
to determine if a David Addington, Jay Bybee, Douglas Feith, William Haynes,
John Yoo, and Aberto Gonzales may be charged with violating laws that prohibit
the mistreatment of prisoners by providing President Bush with the legal
rationale for ordering "harsh interrogation" techniques. "Harsh interrogation" is a
euphemism for torture.
Harsh interrogation meant being
chained for days with hands extended over the head, being denied toilet
facilities, prolonged nudity, waterboarding (a form of torture in which the
victim is suffocated to the point of dying), severe beatings, sleep
deprivation, exposure to cold temperatures, prolonged solitary confinement, and
more. That, according to a Red Cross
report, is how suspected terrorists held by the U.S.
were treated.
Yet after pictures of U.S.
army personnel torturing prisoners at the Abu Gharib prison in Iraq
surfaced on the web in 2004 the Bush administration maintained that they
depicted the actions of a few rogue soldiers.
"We do not torture," the President said in 2005 even though
his administration had long before sought and obtained legal cover from the six
former officials now being investigated by Garzon for interrogators to use
"harsh interrogation techniques" against suspected terrorists.
"Behind much of the savagery
of modern history," wrote Kenneth Roth, the executive director of Human
Rights Watch, "lies impunity.
Tyrants commit atrocities, including genocide, when they calculate they
can get away with them." If
President Obama heeds those words he will join Baltasar Garzon's effort to bring
to justice all those responsible for torturing prisoners in Bush's war against
terror.
Former President George W. Bush
may be indicted for torture.
Far fetched? Not anymore.
In March Baltasar Garzon, a
Spanish judge, asked prosecutors to determine whether there is enough evidence
to charge six former members of the Bush administration with torturing
prisoners. Should they be indicted as
now seems likely it will be hard to argue that their superiors up to and
including the former President himself should not be indicted as well.
Imagine if that should happen and
a trial take place. It would rivet the attention of the world like no legal
action since the prosecution of German and Japanese officials after World War
II. More importantly, it would provide
credence to the concept of universal jurisdiction championed by Judge
Garzon.
Universal jurisdiction is the
principle that certain crimes are so egregious and/or such a threat to world
peace that those who commit them may be arrested and tried in any country of
the world. Torture is one of those
crimes.
Who was most responsible for the
torture during Bush's "war on terror?" Was it the functionaries who carried it out,
the members of the administration who justified it, or the Torturer in Chief
who authorized it? And if any or all of
them are left unpunished what does it say about the commitment of our nation to
the rule of law and human rights? The
world knows we can talk the talk. The
question it is asking is will we walk the walk.
Walk the walk would mean leading
the charge to bring those who violated our laws and international law by
torturing prisoners to justice. That is
what President Obama should be doing.
Instead he says "look forward not back."
We tortured native
Americans. We tortured slaves. We tortured prisoners under the Phoenix
program in Vietnam.
At the School of the Americans we taught future dictators to torture. We supported governments that torture their
opponents. Nevertheless, because in our
words if not always in our actions we also promoted human rights and the rule
of law, the Statue of Liberty was the icon of our country for more than 100
years.
George Bush changed that. Now, because he authorized the torture of
people he termed "illegal enemy combatants" the icon of our country
is a hooded prisoner with wires attached standing on a box in a prison in Iraq. Still, President Obama says, "let's
just ignore all that."
Baltasar Garzon, on the other
hand, says, "let's not."
Garzon is best known for bringing
about the arrest of the former dictator of Chile, Augusto Pinochet, under the doctrine of
universal jurisdiction. Pinochet was
apprehended in 1998 while visiting England. It was the first time the doctrine was
applied for crimes against humanity.
Now Garzon is asking the public
prosecutor in Spain
to determine if a David Addington, Jay Bybee, Douglas Feith, William Haynes,
John Yoo, and Aberto Gonzales may be charged with violating laws that prohibit
the mistreatment of prisoners by providing President Bush with the legal
rationale for ordering "harsh interrogation" techniques. "Harsh interrogation" is a
euphemism for torture.
Harsh interrogation meant being
chained for days with hands extended over the head, being denied toilet
facilities, prolonged nudity, waterboarding (a form of torture in which the
victim is suffocated to the point of dying), severe beatings, sleep
deprivation, exposure to cold temperatures, prolonged solitary confinement, and
more. That, according to a Red Cross
report, is how suspected terrorists held by the U.S.
were treated.
Yet after pictures of U.S.
army personnel torturing prisoners at the Abu Gharib prison in Iraq
surfaced on the web in 2004 the Bush administration maintained that they
depicted the actions of a few rogue soldiers.
"We do not torture," the President said in 2005 even though
his administration had long before sought and obtained legal cover from the six
former officials now being investigated by Garzon for interrogators to use
"harsh interrogation techniques" against suspected terrorists.
"Behind much of the savagery
of modern history," wrote Kenneth Roth, the executive director of Human
Rights Watch, "lies impunity.
Tyrants commit atrocities, including genocide, when they calculate they
can get away with them." If
President Obama heeds those words he will join Baltasar Garzon's effort to bring
to justice all those responsible for torturing prisoners in Bush's war against
terror.