The War Crimes Act of 1996, a federal statute set forth at 18 U.S.C. § 2441, makes it a federal crime for any U.S. national, whether military or civilian, to violate the Geneva Convention by engaging in murder, torture, or inhuman treatment.
18 U.S.C. § 2441 has no statute of limitations, which means that a war crimes complaint can be filed at any time.
The penalty may be life imprisonment or -- if a single prisoner dies due to torture -- death. Given that there are numerous, documented cases of prisoners being tortured to death by U.S. soldiers in both Iraq and Afghanistan (see for example this report), that means that the death penalty would be appropriate for anyone found guilty of carrying out, ordering, or sanctioning such conduct.
Yeah, But Not The Leaders Themselves!
You probably assume that this wouldn't really apply to the big boys running the country. But you'd be wrong.
We now know that torture in Iraq was ordered by top officials, notwithstanding the administration's claims that it was only "a couple of bad apples" that were responsible for Abu Ghraib. Making a potential prosecutor's job easier, U.S. Attorney General Alberto Gonzales wrote a memo in January 2002 to President Bush saying that America should opt out of the Geneva Convention because top officials have to worry about prosecutions under 18 U.S.C. § 2441. By attempting to sidestep the Geneva Convention, Gonzales created a document trail that can be used to prove that top administration officials knowingly created a policy of torturing prisoners, and that such a policy could reasonably have been expected to result in the death of some prisoners.
The U.S. did opt out of the Geneva Convention for the Afghanistan war, but we never opted out of the Geneva Convention for Iraq. Indeed, President Bush has repeatedly stated that Geneva applies in Iraq (although he has since claimed that foreign fighters captured in Iraq are not covered). Thus, there would be very little room for fancy footwork by defense lawyers in a prosecution against top officials concerning torture in Iraq.
And to the extent that claims that the U.S. has sent prisoners to other countries for the express purpose of being tortured are true, violation of the war crimes act by the highest officials of our country would be even clearer. For who else but Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld and other top officials would have the ability to authorize such flights? How could such a program be undertaken without their knowledge? And how could such a program be anything but the intentional "ordering" of torture, or at least "knowing about it" and "failing to take steps to stop it"?
Congressional Leaders
It has recently come out that the leaders of the House and Senate Intelligence Committees knew about the torture occurring in Iraq, and about videotapes of such torture. At the very least, Senators Rockefeller, Roberts, and probably Graham and Shelby -- the two highest-ranking Senators on the Senate Intelligence Committee in the 107th and 108th Congress -- would have known. At the very least, Pelosi, Harman and Goss would have known.
Remember, it is a violation of the War Crimes Act of 1996 to even know about torture or to fail to take steps to stop it. The congressional intelligence committee leadership knew about the torture and they took no steps to stop it.
George WashingtonGeorge Washington is a pen name. I am using the pen name, with the approval of the publisher, because I have received death threats due to my 9/11 research and writing. I am using a pen name to protect myself and my family.
There would never have been wars without a prior shock -and-awe government-orchestrated new Pearl Harbor. So, war criminal = 9/11 criminal, let us be frank about it. 9/11 and the wars that followed are intimately inter-connected and both had been prepared years in advance, of course. In politics there is no room for 'accidents'. Everything happens according to plans. As a rule of thumb, every US war starts with a 9/11 - or rather a Pearl Harbor- type of false flag operation as a sort of PR tactic in order to bring everyone under the flag of patriotism and to impose a full 'consent of the public opinion' upon the populace . Scare the sheeple to hell and they will consent to anything even abolition of their Constitution and of the Bill of Rights. Then blame the boogeyman who will obediently come up periodically with a new scare tape.
by
ramsheyi (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 372 comments)
on Sunday, December 16, 2007 at 2:44:43 PM
Who is responsible for prosecuting these war crimes and how do we start the process? If this country is ever going to have any self respect it is time we clean up our own mess!
Thanks for the article and references.
by
August Adams (1 articles, 0 quicklinks, 3 diaries, 10 comments)
on Monday, December 17, 2007 at 10:40:15 PM
I think everyone has a right to prosecute them. Call your lawyer and begin proceedings. When thousands upon thousands of lawyers start bringing prosecuitorial claims to the court we are going to see a lot of action going on. Then we have to consider if the Attorney General does nothing and maintains his idea torture is OK as he has stated he deserves to be put on the list too for indictment. It is our duty and obligation to do so. Stop waiting around for failed Representatives who are either being paid off such as Nancy Pelosi and her wine plantation connections to the Bush family, or Harry Reids links to the Abramoff scandal. These Democrates and I mean worthless pieces of garbage crates are part of the problem, and we better face it. They are not going to impeach Bush when they are part of his network, part of his corruption, part of his illegal immigration plans, to get rich on paying cheap labor, while the American people are forced to pay for Illegals school, medical, food stamps, and other societal services.
by
Dom Jermano (20 articles, 0 quicklinks, 40 diaries, 934 comments)
on Monday, December 17, 2007 at 11:00:08 PM
