Bush Regime...War Crimes

In 1996, Congress passed a little-known war crimes law (Section 2441 - War Crimes Act) that could lead to a Federal death penalty. Government officials were not exempt.

Recently, Newsweek magazine received a Jan. 25, 2002 White House memo to George W. Bush, from his legal advisor, Alberto R. Gonzales regarding International (and U.S.?) war crimes laws and concerning U.S. treatment of the Taliban and Al Qaeda.

The Bush regime attempted to get around the Geneva Conventions laws on war crimes by declaring that the people detained as alleged Taliban and Al Qaeda members (respectively) were not prisoners of war. But, as pointed out in this Newsweek article by Michael Isikoff, officials could easily get off the hook if they're counting on Bush regime loyalists at the Justice Department, should lawmakers act on Section 2441 in a move to prosecute members of the Bush regime, including Pentagon department heads and other Americans for war crimes.

Another good point made in this article was that we couldn't really predict how special prosecutors and others at the Department of Justice would handle the case, should such a move occur, especially once Bush is replaced by another man in the White House and decides to prosecute officials and those directly handling and interrogating prisoners.

Apparently, the legal loophole Bush used to avoid domestic and international war crimes prosecution for how Taliban and Al Qaeda suspects were handled was not (to the best of my knowledge) used again with regard to how Iraqis and other prisoners and civilians were/are treated in the war in Iraq. However, the Bush regime apparently tried to expand this loophole by declaring the war in Iraq as part of the regime's alleged war on terrorism, which may have something to do with the Bush regime's reasoning behind establishing a special office to gather documents and "evidence" that gave the illusion of a Saddam Hussein WMD threat, which would have violated a U.N. ban on such weapons in Iraq.

Michael Isikoff pointed out in the article that White House lawyers could have also been concerned about protecting themselves from being prosecuted, because they are "officials." Therefore, they could be tried and possibly sentenced to prison, or death for their war crimes role, if prosecuted.

Isikoff adds:

This was especially the case given that some of the language in the Geneva Conventions—such as that outlawing "outrages upon personal dignity" and "inhuman treatment" of prisoners—was "undefined."

Presently, the only prosecution efforts being made seem to typically single out the people that carried out Pentagon orders to torture prisoners in Iraq...The ones at the bottom of the power pyramid. That may change.

Carl Hulse, of the New York Times reports Senate Panal to Summon 3 Generals to Hearings (free account required to view NYT site):

The Senate Armed Services Committee, in an abrupt change of course, said on Monday that it would summon three senior military commanders to testify Wednesday about the abuse of Iraqi prisoners.

Scheduled to appear are Gen. John P. Abizaid, the top officer in the Middle East; Lt. Gen. Ricardo S. Sanchez, ground commander in Iraq; and Maj. Gen. Geoffrey D. Miller, head of detention operations in Iraq.

The panel had not intended to take up the prisoner abuse issue again until action was completed on its $422 billion military authorization bill, which is on the Senate floor. But since the committee's last hearing about prisoner abuse, on May 11, lawmakers have seen hundreds of images of the abuse and those accused have given statements saying they were following orders of intelligence officers.

Several lawmakers, including Maxine Waters and Dennis Kucinich, signed a message sent to U.S. Attorney General John Ashcroft, requesting a special counsel be assigned to investigate whether, or not, officials in the Bush regime have committed war crimes.

It's unlikely that Ashcroft will respond positively to this request. If he refuses, alternative actions will be necessary.