Somewhere, Hammurabi Is Crying (Milbank / WaPo)

[struggle4progress]

By Dana Milbank
Tuesday, May 19, 2009

... "Disturbing" is putting it mildly. But, then again, Zeese's proposed punishment (disbarment for violating "rules of professional conduct") is fairly tame, too. If they are really guilty of war crimes, as Zeese charges, shouldn't the punishment be a bit more severe -- like, say, subjecting them to the same questioning techniques they approved?

That would have an elegant, eye-for-an-eye quality while avoiding years of messy legal proceedings. And, after all, the Bush administration lawyers said these techniques are perfectly legal and do not cause long-term harm ...

"I think we're setting a pretty low standard," Zeese said of his proposed disbarment-for-war-crimes punishment. "We're talking here about some of the most serious crimes you can commit, war crimes that violate all levels of law, international, domestic and constitutional."

All the more reason to bring out the waterboard and the bugs.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/05/18/AR2009051802670.html

[Aragorn]

1. great title

If these guys instigated the war crimes, this is too tame. But I suspect they only gave a favorable legal opinion, on request, so disbarment is appropriate.

Now, if there's any question about what role they actually played, then yes, torture will get whatever answer one wants it to give...