NY Times Calls for Prosecution of Torture Higher-Ups

The New York Times has joined the call for a criminal investigation and prosecution of those responsible for the Bush Administration's torture policy.

[A]ny credible investigation should include former Vice President Dick Cheney; Mr. Cheney’s chief of staff, David Addington; the former C.I.A. director George Tenet; and John Yoo and Jay Bybee, the Office of Legal Counsel lawyers who drafted what became known as the torture memos. There are many more names that could be considered, including Jose Rodriguez Jr., the C.I.A. official who ordered the destruction of the videotapes; the psychologists who devised the torture regimen; and the C.I.A. employees who carried out that regimen.

The ACLU and Human Rights Watch have sent a letter to Eric Holder asking him to appoint a special prosecutor. [More...]

According to the ACLU, others joining the call:

Others who have called for a criminal investigation include Juan Mendez, the United Nations special rapporteur on torture; Ben Emmerson, the United Nation’s special rapporteur on human rights and counter-terrorism; Zeid Ra’ad Al-Hussein, the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights; and the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights. Harold Koh, a former legal advisor to the Department of State said there is “more than enough to reopen investigations at the Justice Department to see whether prosecutions are warranted.”

< R.I.P. Legendary Joe Cocker | German Journalist on His Ten Days With ISIS >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

  • Display: Sort:
    Eric Holder's not going to do anything. (5.00 / 7) (#1)
    by Anne on Mon Dec 22, 2014 at 09:35:51 PM EST
    No one's going to do anything.

    It's more than a little ironic that the NYT, which was as big a cheerleader for the Iraq war as any media outlet, and which sat on stories, and worked hand-in-glove with the Bush administration while all this was going on, has now had an epiphany that - hey, these guys committed war crimes.

    Maybe the NYTimes (none / 0) (#3)
    by KeysDan on Tue Dec 23, 2014 at 04:18:06 PM EST
    was thinking of Justice Felix Frankfurter's mea culpa in a 1949 opinion: " Wisdom too often never comes, and so one ought not to reject it merely because it comes late."  Or as Scalia used in reference to an error of his, a quote from Justice Robert Jackson: " I see no reason why I should be consciously wrong today because I was unconsciously wrong yesterday."

    I scooped the NYT! (5.00 / 2) (#2)
    by Repack Rider on Mon Dec 22, 2014 at 09:46:22 PM EST
    By ten years.

    idle talk (1.50 / 2) (#4)
    by thomas rogan on Tue Dec 23, 2014 at 10:24:05 PM EST
          Pinochet was eventually prosecuted because he committed crimes against Chilean citizens for political gain.  Of course, he was also a rightwinger (if Fidel Castro were to lose power, no court in Spain would ever indict him...)
         The waterboarders acted in secret (not to torture domestic political opponents) ostensibly to protect the country, though some found their approach misguided or worse.  They did not seek personal political gain.  They prosecuted a relatively small number of foreigners, mostly middle easterners, most of whom were somehow involved in war and/or terror.  A couple of the tortured accidentally died as a consequence of the torture.  This is not Pinochet, Fidel Castro, Assad, Saddam Hussein, Kim, or Mubarak.  
         Go ahead and let Elizabeth Warren put this in the 2016 Democratic platform if you really think this will play in Peoria.  It might actually be good to let the people decide (as opposed to waiting until after the election is over to announce major policy shifts, as in the immigration and Cuba issues).  

    If torturing logic was a crime (5.00 / 5) (#5)
    by FlJoe on Wed Dec 24, 2014 at 06:29:22 AM EST
    You would be on the 10 most wanted list.
    You managed to take to the ole "too big to jail" standard applied to the big banks and turned into "too small to care".
    Some how torture is ok if:
         Relatively few are tortured( 10,100,1000 ?)
         You do it in secret (no reality shows please)
         You don't do it for political gain
         Victim is "somehow" related to terrorism.
         and last but not least the must be foreigners
         (middle-easterners preferred).
    We are talking about America here, not Chile, not Cuba not any the rest of the counties that twist their laws to fit their politics. But you take it upon yourself to carve out exemptions to international law with some too silly too small to care arguments. Congratulations you managed to hit most of the apologist arguments in a short post (you did leave out "but it worked"). I was actually getting a chuckle out of your twisted logic until I hit the point "A couple of the tortured accidentally died as a consequence of the torture.", disgusting. Congratulations you have won the morning for depravity