From the office of Sen. Russ Feingold, a suggestion that the administration is open to future prosecution. Do know that Feingold and other key members of Congress have been formally briefed on this, so he presumably is not thinking wishfully here:
"The president has stated that it is not his administration's intention to prosecute those who acted reasonably and relied in good faith upon legal advice from the Department of Justice. As I understand it, his decision does not mean that anyone who engaged in activities that the Department had not approved, those who gave improper legal advice or those who authorized the program could not be prosecuted. The details made public in these memos paint a horrifying picture and reveal how the Bush administration's lawyers and top officials were complicit in torture. The so-called enhanced interrogation program was a violation of our core principles as a nation and those responsible should be held accountable."
Those of us who believe in the rule of law can only hope that Feingold and others in and outside of Congress can bring enough pressure on the Administration to stop pretending that the perpetrators of torture should be protected.
While, given the choice, it is more important to prosecute the policy makers than the foot soldiers, they, too, are responsible under the Nuremberg Principles, the Convention Against Torture and the Geneva Conventions on War Crimes.
This nonsense about looking forward is just a way of protecting the guilty from accountability.
And, lest we forget, when Obama prevents war crimes prosecutions, he, too, is guilty of war crimes.
I am not so bothered by the various techniques...it is a dangerous world and sometimes acts must be taken.
"Those who ‘abjure’ violence can only do so because others are committing violence on their behalf"
-George Orwell
Unfortunately I think this issue will go on forever unless:
1. Obama pulls a Ford and states there will be NO prosecutions; or
2. A case goes to court and settles once and for all whether actions were legal or not.
While Feingold states that Bush administration staff were "complicit" that can only be so if they knowingly ignored the rule of law or twisted it to meet the facts as they saw them. If they gave advice based on their understanding of law and with full review it cannot be considered an act of torture, merely giving advice and opinion.