Obama, the one who trumpeted “Change we can believe in” must act ethically here. He can mouth his reservations about prosecuting those who were defending our country after 9/11, but once Cheney convinced Bush 43 to torture 1 detainee, they were war criminals. Nothing else matters.

::::::::

The article “Spain to proceed with torture prosecution of Bush lawyers: Report” at http://rawstory.com/08/news/2009/09/08/spain-prosecution-bush-lawyers/ poses a difficult challenge to the US legal system. It looked like Holder wouldn't even initiate an investigation, instead honoring Obama's desire to "look forward." Now Holder is limiting himself to instances where interrogators overstepped the boundaries set out by Bush lawyers for enhanced interrogation techniques “EIT,” while the Spanish case challenges the legality of the entire program. What happens if the Spanish investigation looks at all the abundance of material already documented and concludes that the atrocities against the detainees were initiated by Bush 43?

Against Bush 43 in the public domain are the September 17, 2001, Executive Order that reportedly authorizes the CIA's secret detention, interrogation, and rendition program and President Bush's February 7, 2002, Order stating that the Geneva Conventions do not apply to Taliban detainees or to al-Qaeda and excusing cruel treatment in cases of "military necessity".

The buck stops there in Bush 43's office. Bush 43 in his exit interviews was glad to admit that he authorized - in his twisted reality it was he 'took credit for' - “EIT”. Rove and Cheney convinced him that in doing so the GOP would gain a few seats in the election. So, he can conceivably plead that we ignore his words, but you can't ignore written documentation.

The article states “A Spanish judge has decided to go ahead with the prosecution of six Bush administration lawyers — including former Attorney General Alberto Gonzales — who were the architects of the legal framework for President George W. Bush “enhanced interrogation” program, according to a report in the Spanish newspaper Publico.”

Speaking of Gonzales--who has the July 22, 2002 letter from John Yoo Deputy Assistant Attorney General, OLC, on the applicability of the Convention Against Torture existing, but not yet made public, waiting to be exposed to the light of day, he has been in the news lately.

The September 3, 2009 article “Gonzales ‘flip-flops' yet again on torture probe” at

http://rawstory.com/08/news/2009/09/03/gonzales-flip-flops-yet-again-on-torture-probe/

slams both Gonzales and Ridge as it states “Either former Bush officials are being pressured to backtrack, or recent flip-flops are just more evidence that they had no convictions in the first place.”

Gonzales had no convictions and seems to want you to believe he had an early onset of Alzheimer's disease as when, during the investigation of the dismissal of U.S. attorneys, he evaded answering so many times that Senator Schumer said there was no point to further questioning since Gonzales had stated "over a hundred times" that he didn't know or couldn't recall important details concerning the firings.

The Obama administration is slowly reversing course on many of Bush 43's “GWOT” policies, including “EIT” and rendition.

The article “Bush White House Sought to Soften Treaty on 'Enforced Disappearances'” at

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/09/07/AR2009090702225_pf.html

states “From 2003 to 2006, the Bush administration quietly tried to relax the draft language of a treaty meant to bar and punish "enforced disappearances" so that those overseeing the CIA's secret prison system would not be criminally prosecuted under its provisions, according to former officials and hundreds of pages of documents recently declassified by the State Department.”

Sonny 43's crew were as guilty as sin and were trying to conceal their activities.

Why? The article continues “But the documents suggest that initial U.S. support for the negotiations collided head-on with the then-undisclosed goal of seizing suspected terrorists anywhere in the world for questioning by CIA interrogators or indefinite detention by the U.S. military at foreign sites.”

How far have we deviated from the rest of the world?

The article continues “The documents also spell out how the Bush administration was "virtually alone" in objecting to a treaty provision stipulating that anyone "with a legitimate interest," such as a relative, be given an explanation and accounting of an individual's detention by the government, as well as information on the person's whereabouts and health. U.S. negotiators called that provision unacceptable in a 2004 document, saying it "could impair national security, law enforcement, or privacy interests."

With the Bush 43 crowd, everything revolves around the GWOT lie and the constant threat from our enemies and the associated need for expansion of US military and security powers to facilitate fear and war mongering, which the GOP thinks will get them extra seats in Congress. Obama is currently trying to bring the US back into the community of nations by adapting Bush 43's policies so that the President is accountable to Congress—the separation of powers, and that the US adheres to existing international treaties.

What happens to US credibility if Spain finds Bush 43 guilty? Bush 43 will just blow them off. What if Spain uncovers something new that the Holder investigation run by Durham uses against Bush 43 and is incriminating? Remember how Ken Starr got information from the Paula Jones trial to use against Clinton?

This is another test for Obama. He has failed progressives so far with his “looking forward not backward” focus on “EIT”, also with his slow process of eliminating renditions from the US' practices. If Spain finds Bush 43 guilty then Obama must have Holder widen the focus of Durham's investigation. There will be no excuses if he doesn't.

Jonathan Turley makes this point strongly in the article “Turley: Americans Who Authorized Torture Should Be Prosecuted for War Crimes”

http://www.usnews.com/articles/opinion/2009/05/18/war-crimes-must-be-prosecuted-at-home-or-abroad_print.htm

as he states “Ultimately, we all become accessories after-the-fact if we stand silent in the face of these war crimes. Bush ordered these war crimes because he believed that he was above the law, and others like Rice have claimed that, if the president orders such actions, they are by definition legal. They were both wrong. The law is clear. The only remaining question is whether we have the national character and commitment to the rule of law to hold even our leaders to account for crimes committed in our name.”

Obama is in a sticky situation. He has allowed the Bush 43 initiative of unmanned drones attacking al Queda in the Afghanistan/Pakistan area to continue even after civilian casualties have occurred-—which the GOP could claim is a war crime. He has allowed rendition to continue. GOP operatives have already stated that they would support an investigation of rendition including those done by Clinton and Obama. How much does Obama want to support future presidents investigating their predecessors?

Obama has to be concerned with the degree of hostility that the GOP has exhibited against him. The GOP just got Van Jones fired. South Carolina Republican Rep. Joe Wilson committed an extraordinary breach of decorum when he shouted "You lie" at President Barack Obama during Obama's speech to Congress, and no one was surprised. They have vilified Obama so completely that he can't give a harmless speech to students without being challenged.

The red state dolts' lives are so bereft of hope that they believe any lie, such as Obama being a Muslim, Socialist, Communist. They believe in death panels. The perfect example of how completely passive Obama has been is the “birthers” or “tenthers” showing up at town hall meetings with automatic weapons with no response from the federal government.

When he spoke with a child during his presentation to school children Obama was quoted as saying he admired Mahatma Gandhi. Well, passive resistance isn't going to get 47 million US citizens health care, nor is it going to bring Bush 43 to justice.

I can see this happening. Someone needs to explain to Obama the atrocious hatred the GOP has for him and Democrats. Someone needs to explain that the best defense is a good offense and Obama lets Durham's investigation go where the facts lead them and they end up in the “Oval Office Cabal”. Bush 43 will offer up all of his minions, but when the buck stops it is squarely in Bush 43's desk. He was “The Decider”. The lawyers for Bush 43 will stipulate that the documents do prove that Bush 43 and his crew authorized torture, but that the President in times of war has “unitary executive powers”. In 43's distorted view these powers allow the president to do anything. This is reminiscent to “Tricky Dick's assertion that “If the president does it, it's not illegal” —which Obama doesn't agree with, and is combating - even as he worries if his successor will follow his lead.

Authors Bio:
Winston Smith is an ex-Social Worker. I worked in child welfare, and in medical settings and in homeless settings. In the later our facility was geared as a permanent address for people to apply for welfare. Once they received that we could send them to facilities in which their welfare paid the bill and provided enough for a meager existence. We also referred people to vocational rehabilitation services. Many of the people who came to us were people who were clearly emotionally ill, but Reagan's slashing of the services for these people caused them to become homeless. One woman I dealt with-St. Jane, believed she was in direct communication with God, urinated freely without using the facilities and she had 47 bags of trash which were prized possessions. She got welfare and was sent to a facility were she could survive. The rule was that our facility could be used 1 time only as we had too many people who thought that the services that we provided we would lift them from the dire straights that they were in. Well, we provided our services for St. Jane around Thanksgiving. On Christmas Eve she was back with her 47 bags of trash and wanted to stay at our facility. I informed my superior of this situation, but we declined to provide services for St. Jane. She slept in front of our facility in a snowstorm. The local rag took the picture and excoriated us for what we did. The local welfare department asked her where she would like to live. St. Jane said Chicago because she liked the wind. She knew on one there. She and her 47 bags of trash of were carted onto a train for the windy city and never of again. The local welfare department was glad to get shed of her. Social welfare in the mid-1980's was geared to blame the victim. Ill people were sent home from hospitals were no one was going to help them because social welfare budgets were slashed by Reagan. Bush 41's â"thousand points of lightâ" was just another way to shaft the weakest in our society. Bush 43's faith based initiative was just another attempt to reduce social welfare services. Reagan's â"Just say Noâ" was the pinnacle of hypocrisy. No services for those who desperately needed them under the guise of tough love.

Obviously I became burnt out by too much indifference regarding our weak and weary. I couldn't look at desperate people and could not get myself to say that what I could offer them wouldn't really help themâ"”it would only get them out of my office to be another person's problem, until the local welfare department carted them away.

I had little interest in politics until the illegal Iraq War started. Growing up in the 1960's caused me to understand that the GOP used war to attract right-wing extremists to vote for them. When â"Tricky Dick'sâ" secret plan to end the Vietnam War unfolded into elongating our presence there for 8 years I knew that I would never believe a GOP war-monger again. I dislike Obama's plan to escalate our presence in Afghanistan and see it as a craven attempt to placate the GOP. Maybe he'll reduce the GOP's attacks against him, but it will at the expense of alienating his base.