Obama and Holder Must Prosecute War Crimes or Become Guilty of Them Himself

[kpete]

Obama and Holder Must Prosecute War Crimes or Become Guilty of Them Himself
Submitted by dlindorff on Tue, 2009-03-03 17:43.

By Dave Lindorff

The dithering and ducking going on in the Obama White House and the Holder Justice Department over the crimes of the Bush administration are taking on a comic aspect.

On the one hand, we have President Obama assuring us that under his administration, there will be respect for the rule of law, and on the other hand we have this one-time constitutional law professor and his attorney general declaiming that there is no need for the appointment of a prosecutor to bring charges against the people in the last administration, in the CIA, in the National Security Agency and in the Defense Department and the military who clearly have broken the law in serious and felonious ways.

What gets silly is that America is either a nation of laws…or it isn’t. It is either a place where “nobody is above the law”…or it isn’t.

There is really no middle ground here.

more:
http://www.afterdowningstreet.org/node/40392

[AndyA]

1. I think another country or the United Nations is going to push the issue enough that

Obama and Holder have no choice in the matter. There's already been talk at the UN about it, which pretty much put Obama on notice that he couldn't just ignore the past.

I think it will happen, but the events leading up to it will be interesting.

[40bama]

7. I hope so. I'm tired of the powerful and the entitled not being held accountable,

as you or I would surely be. Just like with the bailouts, there's a sliding scale on what rules apply to whom.

[leftstreet]

2. K&R

:thumbsup:

[T Wolf]

3. The question is - do we (A) take a lot of time, energy, and talent to investigate the Bushistas

or (B) just execute them all and move ahead?

Completeness would say (A) Simplicity and efficiency would say (B).

[40bama]

9. Add to choice (A) money

tho I think it'd be worth it. I am opposed to capital punishment on principle. However, "enhanced interrogation techniques" might sufffice!

[leftofthedial]

4. I fully agree with the premise.

At this point, failure to investigate and prosecute is to be an accomplice.

It would be sickening enough if Obama, like Clinton before him, chose to ignore American crimes by his predecessor, but this is different. Crimes against humanity and war crimes can not be swept under the rug of "looking forward."

If Obama does not seriously investigate the crimes of the bushgang, Obama should be impeached and brought to account by international authorities for impeding justice.

[geek tragedy]

8. I can haz Obamaz Impeechmentz? n/t

[lovuian]

5. I agree

if he lets them walk away

He is part of the New World Order

[geek tragedy]

6. What a steaming load of crap.

Failing to prosecute a war criminal does not make one a war criminal. Committing war crimes is what makes one a war criminal.

But, sure as can be, before long we'll have the anti-Obama Impeachniks to go along with their deluded cousins at Free Republic.

[elocs]

10. What "should" happen and what "will" happen are 2 entirely different things.

Always have been, always will be and just because someone writes something does not make it so.