Demands for war crimes prosecutions are now growing in the mainstream

The emerging evidence of culpability among top leaders, combined with their increasingly brazen admissions, is rendering real investigations an unavoidable option

Topics: Washington, D.C.,

For obvious reasons, the most blindly loyal Bush followers of the last eight years are desperate to claim that nobody cares any longer about what happened during the Bush administration, that everyone other than the most fringe, vindictive Bush-haters is eager to put it all behind us, forget about it all and, instead, look to the harmonious, sunny future.  That’s natural.  Those who cheer on shameful and despicable acts always want to encourage everyone to forget what they did, and those who commit crimes naturally seek to dismiss demands for investigations and punishment as nothing more than distractions and vendettas pushed by those who want to wallow in the past.

Surprisingly, though, demands that Bush officials be held accountable for their war crimes are becoming more common in mainstream political discourse, not less so.  The mountain of conclusive evidence that has recently emerged directly linking top Bush officials to the worst abuses — combined with Dick Cheney’s brazen, defiant acknowledgment of his role in these crimes (which perfectly tracked Bush’s equally defiant 2005 acknowledgment of his illegal eavesdropping programs and his brazen vow to continue them) — is forcing even the reluctant among us to embrace the necessity of such accountability. 

It’s almost as though everyone’s nose is now being rubbed in all of this:  now that the culpability of our highest government officials is no longer hidden, but is increasingly all out in the open, who can still defend the notion that they should remain immune from consequences for their patent lawbreaking?  As Law Professor Jonathan Turley said several weeks ago on The Rachel Maddow Show:  “It’s the indictment of all of us if we walk away from a clear war crime.”  And this week, Turley pointed out to Keith Olbermann that “ultimately it will depend on citizens, and whether they will remain silent in the face of a crime that has been committed in plain view. . . . It is equally immoral to stand silent in the face of a war crime and do nothing.”

That recognition, finally, seems to be spreading — beyond the handful of blogs, civil liberties organizations and activists who have long been trumpeting the need for this accountability.  The New York Times Editorial Page today has a lengthy, scathing decree demanding prosecutions:  “It would be irresponsible for the nation and a new administration to ignore what has happened . . . . A prosecutor should be appointed to consider criminal charges against top officials at the Pentagon and others involved in planning the abuse.”  Today, Politico — of all places — is hosting a forum which asks:  ”Should the DOJ consider prosecuting Bush administration officials for detainee abuse as the NYT and others have urged?”  Even Chris Matthews and Chris Hitchens yesterday entertained (albeit incoherently and apologetically) the proposition that top Bush officials committed war crimes.

Perhaps most notably of all — and illustrating the importance of finally having someone like Rachel Maddow occupy such a prominent place in an establishment media venue — Democratic Sen. Carl Levin, one of the Senate’s most restrained, influential and Serious members, was prodded by Maddow last night into going about as far as someone like him could be expected to go, acknowledging the necessity of appointing a Prosecutor to investigate top Bush officials for the war crimes they committed and to determine if prosecutions are warranted:

You Might Also Like

 

 

To be sure, the political class still desperately wants to avoid meaningful investigations and prosecutions, in no small part because every key component of it — including the leaders in both parties — are implicated by so much of it.   But as more undeniable evidence emerges of just how warped and criminal and heinous the conduct of our top political leaders has been — and the more Dick Cheney and comrades resort to openly admitting what they did and proudly defending it, rather than obfuscating it behind euphemisms and secrecy claims  — the more difficult it will be to justify doing nothing meaningful.  That is why, even as the desire to forget about the Bush era intensifies with the Promise of Obama ever-more-closely on the horizon, the recognition continues to grow of the need for real accountability.

The weapons used to prevent such accountability are quite familiar and will still be potent.  Those who demand accountability will be derided as past-obsessed partisans who want to impede all the Glorious, Transcendent Gifts about to be bestowed on us by our new leaders.  The manipulative claim will be endlessly advanced that our problems are too grand and pressing to permit the luxury of living under the rule of law.  When all else fails in the stonewalling arsenal, impotent “fact-finding” commissions will be proposed to placate the demand for accountability but which will, in fact, be designed and empowered to achieve only one goal:  to render actual prosecutions impossible.

But with these new, unprecedentedly stark revelations, this facade will be increasingly difficult to maintain.  It is already the case, as the Times Editorial today notes, that “all but President Bush’s most unquestioning supporters [i.e., this] recognized the chain of unprincipled decisions that led to the abuse, torture and death in prisons run by the American military and intelligence services.”  That leaves only two choices:  (1) treat these crimes as the serious war crimes they are by having a Prosecutor investigate and, if warranted, prosecute them, or (2) openly acknowledge — to ourselves and the world — that we believe that our leaders are literally entitled to commit war crimes at will, and that we — but not the rest of the world — should be exempt from the consequences.  The clearer it becomes that those are the only two choices, the more difficult it will be to choose option (2), and either way, there is great benefit just from having that level of clarity and candor about what we are really doing.

Glenn Greenwald
Follow Glenn Greenwald on Twitter: @ggreenwald.

More Related Stories

Featured Slide Shows

  • Share on Twitter
  • Share on Facebook
  • 1 of 12
  • Close
  • Fullscreen
  • Thumbnails

    Script to Screen

    Named for the 15th-century Dutch artist known for vivid depictions of life in Hell, Detective Hieronymus “Harry” Bosch goes head to head with LA’s worst criminals. Actor Titus Welliver was handpicked by author and executive producer Michael Connelly to take Bosch from the pages to the screen.

    Script to Screen

    Michael Connelly personally selected every LA location featured in the Bosch opening sequence. After 20 years with this character, Connelly wanted to be sure the show reflected the authenticity that longtime fans have appreciated over the years.

    Script to Screen

    Actor Titus Welliver is the real deal. Having once considered becoming an NYC police officer, he was immediately drawn to this role. Much like Connelly’s own commitment to the character, Welliver is very passionate about remaining true to the source material.

    Script to Screen

    In the series, Harry Bosch lent his expertise as a cop to Hollywood for the blockbuster movie The Black Echo, based on his own life story. The poster for the film hangs proudly in his living room, high above the Hollywood Hills.

    Script to Screen

    Inspired by Michael Connelly’s books City of Bones, Echo Park, and The Concrete Blonde, the first season of Bosch introduced Amazon audiences to complex character Harry Bosch. Season 2, which features storylines from Trunk Music, The Drop and The Last Coyote premieres March 11th on Amazon Prime Video.

    Script to Screen

    As an LA crime reporter early in his career, Michael Connelly worked side by side with the LAPD. With three LA homicide detectives on staff as consultants, Bosch lives up to its promise of authenticity.

    Script to Screen

    Harry Bosch lives in the hills just above the Cahuenga Pass, the perfect spot to look out over the city he protects. Michael Connelly found this very spot in 1989, where he often returns to contemplate the city and find inspiration. Connelly also had his own home above Hollywood many years ago – in the High Tower apartments, where noir character Philip Marlowe lived in Robert Altman’s The Long Goodbye.

    Script to Screen

    To ensure they would be able to realistically capture a cop’s perspective, the Bosch cast participated in special training with the LAPD, where they were faced with hard choices in real-life scenarios.

    Script to Screen

    Michael Connelly’s inspiration for the gritty realness of Harry Bosch was often found during real testimonies while sitting in court as a reporter for the LA Times, including this defining exchange from Season 1, “How many people have you killed?” “I don’t know.”

    Script to Screen

    Michael Connelly, an avid fan himself, wrote in a broadcast of an LA Dodgers game for the opening scenes of Season 1.

    Script to Screen

    Stream Season 2 of the Amazon Original Series Bosch with Prime.

  • Recent Slide Shows

Comments

0 Comments

Comment Preview

Your name will appear as username ( settings | log out )

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href=""> <b> <em> <strong> <i> <blockquote>