Murder He Wrote: Why Aren't Bush, Cheney and Rumsfeld Being Prosecuted?
THE BUZZFLASH EDITOR'S BLOG
By Mark Karlin
If you're a mafia kingpin and you authorize a "hit," the feds will nail you for murder if they can prove the case.
As I have detailed in two recent BuzzFlash editor blog entries, the proof that Bush, Cheney and Rumsfeld authorized, promoted and ordered actions that led to the murder and deaths of perhaps hundreds of detainees and merely "assumed bad guys" -- not to mention rapes and other brutality -- is overwhelming. The authors of legal memos, whose writers include Bush-appointed Federal Judge Jay Bybee, should certainly be disbarred.
But that doesn't begin to address the underlying crimes that include the unnecesary and horrifying deaths of anyone that Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld -- and Condoleezza Rice -- believed was in the way of their demonic "War on Terrorism" (which for Cheney and Rumsfeld -- and others -- was really a war for natural resources).
Details abound in the public record -- as we have mentioned -- of the homicidal acts that led to the deaths and disappearances of countless of individuals the Bush Gulag apparatus deemed "suspicious." Some of the bodies have been accounted for; some of the alleged "enemies" just disappeared -- as was the case in Chile and Argentina during the infamous reign of terror in those countries.
As I noted:
It's not considered politically correct -- even among the high-profile progressive political blogs that are now quoted by the D.C. Beltway corporate media -- to accuse the Bush Administration of murder and sadism. It's "the wave" now to urge an investigation of the torture memos and potential prosecution, but the reality that torture resulted in the murders of an untold number of detainees in the Bush/Cheney/Rumsfeld Gulag is not discussed much.
That's why I wrote a BuzzFlash Editor's Blog yesterday, "The Legal Case Against Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Et Al., Is Murder One, Not Just War Crimes." Yet, as much as I agree that the torture memo authors should be tried (and Judge Bybee impeached), the MSM and progressive Internet's focus on the memos discounts and dishonors the justice that is necessary for those perhaps hundreds of detainees -- many of them, if not most of them, innocent of any actual crimes -- who were murdered as a result of torture.
That's why it's not surprising to see the multi-billion dollar corporate media machine continue to intentionally and ineptly still debate whether torture took place, as in this exchange between NBC's latest insipid enabler of the status quo on "Meet the Press" and King Abdullah II of Jordan:
DAVID GREGORY: 'Do you think the United States engaged in torture?'
KING ABDULLAH: 'Well, from what we've seen and what we've heard, ... there are enough accounts to ... show that that is the case. But there is still a major battle out there. ... [A]nd I think this is what President Obama is trying to do, is make sure that the legal system that America is known for [its] transparent to make sure that illegal activity-'
DAVID GREGORY: 'That's an important point. You actually do believe that the United States engaged in torture.'
KING ABDULLAH: 'What I see on the press ... shows that there were illegal ways of dealing with detainees.'
Some of the Bush era memos legalizing torture, just recently released by the Obama Administration, are an important corroboration of what we already knew, just as we knew that people were being murdered under the Pentagon and CIA torture guidelines distributed to commanding officers of known and secret detention sites around the world.
The evidence of criminal abuse, including rape and murder, that was authorized as a general torture and abuse policy directly from the White House on down is abundant. It only need be assembled as legally admissible proof of guilt in an American court of law or International War Crime tribunal.
As just one of literally hundreds -- perhaps thousands of examples -- a Salon article in 2004 noted a report by the indefatigable "last of his kind" investigative journalist, Seymour Hersh:
Debating about it, ummm ... Some of the worst things that happened you don't know about, okay? Videos, um, there are women there. Some of you may have read that they were passing letters out, communications out to their men. This is at Abu Ghraib ... The women were passing messages out saying 'Please come and kill me, because of what's happened' and basically what happened is that those women who were arrested with young boys, children in cases that have been recorded. The boys were sodomized with the cameras rolling. And the worst above all of that is the soundtrack of the boys shrieking that your government has. They are in total terror. It's going to come out."
"It's impossible to say to yourself how did we get there? Who are we? Who are these people that sent us there? When I did My Lai I was very troubled like anybody in his right mind would be about what happened. I ended up in something I wrote saying in the end I said that the people who did the killing were as much victims as the people they killed because of the scars they had, I can tell you some of the personal stories by some of the people who were in these units witnessed this. I can also tell you written complaints were made to the highest officers and so we're dealing with a enormous massive amount of criminal wrongdoing that was covered up at the highest command out there and higher, and we have to get to it and we will.
How much evidence has been destroyed -- the CIA "disappeared" the torture tapes -- we don't know, but clearly the shredders and "burn bags" were kept busy in the last days of the Bush Administration. Still, the Obama WH is ordering more devastating detainee abuse photos released in the near future.
But all of these are just small pieces in the very large puzzle of a massive White House orchestrated sanctioning of War Crimes, including rape and murder.
It is not unexpected that the corporate mainstream media would attempt to minimize the criminal behavior of the Bush Administration, because D.C. insiders -- the villagers -- and the corporate oligarchy protects its own.
But I am a bit mystified why the progressive blogs and most liberal and civil liberties websites are more caught up with fingering the authors of the memos than the masterminds of the War Crimes policies: Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld and Rice (not to mention Wolfowitz, Feith, etc.).
As has been pointed out by others, after WW II some Japanese tried for War Crimes were hanged for waterboarding allied prisoners.
The torture unto death, rape, sexual violations, and abuse that violated the Geneva Conventions was rampant in the Bush Gulag.
The most pressing issue of justice is not who wrote the enabling torture (murder and rape) memos -- although the attorneys should be held accountable -- but who should be tried for inititiating and promoting War Crimes.
Murder is not something to split hairs about on Sunday morning talk shows.
It belongs in a courtroom so that justice is rendered, the perpertrators jailed, and the Constitution preserved.
THE BUZZFLASH EDITOR'S BLOG
- Login or register to post comments
- Printer-friendly version
Buzz this on Buzzflash.net


Technorati Tags:
Thanks for sharing this
It ain't what you know, but WHO you know
We Got These War Crimes Because Clinton Let Iran-Contra Slide
We better not make the same dumb mistake again !
Investigate !
Prosecute !
Punish !
If we don't then the World Court at the Hague should take over.
The Question Is: Why?
Considering that Rep. Jane Harmon was likely blackmailed over her conspiracy with AIPAC, knowing what we know about Bill Clinton's extramarital activities had to have put him in a similar spot. It's the only logical explanation for the many things Clinton allowed (NAFTA, GATT, ...) that went against the grain of both the traditional Democratic positions and the needs of the nation. Deep Throat's advice still stands regarding this: follow the money. Who benefited? The same people who benefited under Bush and who continue to benefit now under Obama. Dave Lindorff opined that Obama was being blackmailed, and I can't say that isn't possible. It is - again - the only logical explanation.
As much as I would like to say that the Democrats are the answer to the problems caused by the Republicans, it's clear that the Democrats have been co-opted beyond recovery. While I hope we don't have to resort to Jefferson's extreme solution to this condition, I can see where that might become the only option - and that means this nation is finished.
jaydiamond
Seriously?
Given all of this, what was left for Clinton to do? Try to bring criminal charges against Bush or Reagan? Besides the fact that Lawrence Walsh (the Special Prosecutor) had already looked at their roles and found there was not nearly enough evidence to prosecute, do you think it would have been even possible to successfully prosecute Bush and/or Reagan based upon their inconsistent statements and the fact that they each "failed to recall" what they knew and when they knew it? Particularly after all those involved had already been pardoned, and Casey was dead?
Yes, the Tower Commission was a joke and the pardons were a cover-up by Bush I, but there is no way Reagan or Bush could have been successfully prosecuted.
Debunking the arguments used against prosecution.
Around the Bend
Our leaders have become what we revolted against in 1812
The only good thing about
Here comes the whitewashing . . . .
Bush/Cheney unmentioned crime
Bring the S.O.B.s to justice
I remember when Gerald Ford pardoned Richard Nixon, essentially absolving him of any and all Watergate wrong-doing in advance of any grand jury indictment, because, said Ford, it was time for the nation "to heal." That little act of mercy healed nothing.
I remember President Bill Clinton ignored all the blatant crimes committed by the Reagan administration in the name of stopping "communism" in Nicaragua. What did it get Clinton? A opera buffa impeachment for a blowjob in the Oval Office and Oliver North on the radio. Certainly healed me, didn't it you?
Now we have nearly irrefutable evidence that high crimes and misdemeanors, torture, were in fact committed under orders of highly placed officials in the Bush administration, Vice President Richard Cheney. Yet in the face of mounting prosecutable evidence the president dithers while Democratic Senate Majority Leader, Harry "Cap'n Milquetoast" Reid, plans strategies to delay and derail even a toothless "truth commission." To what f*cking end? So Ivy League-educated weasels, who came from "good" families and had terrific resumes before entering government service will never have to spend a day in one of the federal prison system's country club facilities. Utter nonsense!
How is letting fat-fingered John Yoo walk going to "heal" the country? Or his pal Steven Bradbury? Or Judge Jay Bybee?
If by "healing the nation" one means sending the signal to poor young black men and poor young white men and poor young Hispanic men that there is, indeed, two systems of justice in this country: one for well-connected and wealthy "whites" (Yoo, a Korean, like so many of his compatriots is accorded honorary W.A.S.P. status) who can commit heinous crimes, especially in the name of "national security," until someone on Wall Street loses a sh*tpot of money, and the other for the rest of us.
No wonder Americans are cynical about our system of justice. Johnny next door gets pulled over for his third DUI and gets sent to jail for 60 days, followed by years of probation and worthless, privatized rehab he must pay for out-of-pocket. Meanwhile Cheney, Yoo, Bradbury and Bybee wander round free to continue fomenting whatever nefarious schemes their black hearts desire.
You see the difference, in the eyes of what passes for jurisprudence in the United States these days, is that Johnny here is a drunk and a danger to himself and the community whenever he gets behind the wheel of a car. Dick Cheney, John Yoo, Steve Bradbury and Jay Bybee all are members of "good" families, went to the right schools, have great resumes and long years of "faithful" service to the country. Gee, can't we just give these poor guys a break?
Utter nonsense.
The New York Times' Frank Rich says it best in concluding his Saturday column:We don’t need another commission. We don’t need any Capitol Hill witch hunts. What we must have are fair trials that at long last uphold and reclaim our nation’s commitment to the rule of law.
More Than Torture
Murder Schmurder They Wrote
"rule of law" always favors one's "own" class
Just as we whites (speaking for myself) find it so much easier to arrest, prosecute, and punish those who are not our "own kind", and thus minorities disproportionately suffer the force of "the law", so too do our highest officials find it difficult to apply the law to their "own kind".
What we are seeing is indeed the "rule of law" as we actually practice it.
I said months ago
Childhood Training
I recall that when I was in grade-school, along with my classmates I was subjected to daily training in patriotism. We said the pledge of allegiance and we sang the national anthem along with a variety of other patriotic songs. This is how we started our school day, every day for a long part of our formative years.
Maybe it is less true today than it was in the 1950's, but this daily training built some things into the very fiber of our being and among those things was a reverence for our country and for its president. It is hard for people to turn against this kind of childhood religious training.
I think this is at the root of why we hear demands for prosecution of the lawyers who were instrumental in bringing to the point of being a country that tortures, but we still shy away from calls to punish those who are actually most guilty in this matter. How can we punish someone who was president or vice president? Can you do that?
Of course matters were different in the case of punishing Clinton for a sexual matter; maybe our reticence to punish is tempered with partisanship. In the 1950's the president was a Republican after all.
justice