Share

The Bush Six

by: Jane Mayer  |  The New Yorker

photo
Former Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, center, and Dick Cheney look on as President Bush spoke before signing the Military Commissions Act of 2006. (Photo: Kevin Lamarque / Reuters)

    About a year ago, a book came out in England that made a fascinating prediction: at some point in the future, the author wrote, six top officials in the Bush Administration would get a tap on the shoulder announcing that they were being arrested on international charges of torture.

    If the prediction seemed improbable, the background of the book's author was even more so. Philippe Sands is neither a journalist nor an American but a law professor and a certified Queen's Counsel (the kind of barrister who on occasion wears a powdered horsehair wig) who works at the same law practice as Cherie Blair. Sands's book, "Torture Team," offers a scathing critique of officials in the Bush Administration, accusing them of complicity in acts of torture. When the book appeared, some scoffed. Douglas Feith, a former Pentagon official, dismissed Sands as "a British lawyer" who "wrote an extremely dishonest book."

    Last week, Sands's accusations suddenly did not seem so outlandish. A Spanish court took the first steps toward starting a criminal investigation of the same six former Bush Administration officials he had named, weighing charges that they had enabled and abetted torture by justifying the abuse of terrorism suspects. Among those whom the court singled out was Feith, the former Under-Secretary of Defense for Policy, along with former Attorney General Alberto Gonzales; John Yoo, a former Justice Department lawyer; and David Addington, the chief of staff and the principal legal adviser to Vice-President Dick Cheney.

    In Washington the other night, over a cup of camomile tea, Sands described the behind-the-scenes role he played in spurring the Spanish court to action. He paced his hotel room, seeming by turns proud and stunned at what he had done. "This is the end of these people's professional reputations!" he said. "This is no joke. We're talking about the serious potential deprivation of liberty."

    Sands said that he had "no personal vendetta" against the Bush Administration, but he does see a link between his family history and his chosen profession. His mother and her parents were Viennese Jews who barely survived the Holocaust; his mother spent the first seven years of her life in hiding, away from her family. "It inculcated a burning sense of being aggrieved at wrongdoing, and at the failure of people to take responsibility for their actions," Sands said.

    Sands got his first chance to demonstrate his convictions professionally in 1998. He was in Paris, for the unveiling of his grandfather's gravestone, when he received a call asking him to represent Augusto Pinochet, the former Chilean dictator. He told his wife, Natalia Schiffrin, about the offer. "Philippe, if you do," Sands recalls her saying, "I will divorce you!" (She is American, and the daughter of the book publisher André Schiffrin, a founder of Students for a Democratic Society.) Sands declined the case. Instead, he signed on to represent the other side, and helped pursue Pinochet for violations of international law. The case became a turning point in international law, establishing the principle that there is no immunity even for the highest-ranking former government officials when they are accused of torture. Pinochet spent some sixteen months under house arrest. A decade later, the same Spanish judge who initiated the legal proceedings against Pinochet, Baltasar Garzón, has been assigned to the case against the Bush Administration officials.

    The current torture case began in the spring of 2004, when photographs of abused prisoners at Abu Ghraib surfaced. Sands said that he read the protestations of innocence from Bush Administration officials, who blamed a few "bad apples" for the incidents, with the eye of a barrister. He recalled, "I could spot right away that they were speaking as advocates of a cause. So I decided to find out what really happened." While keeping up his busy law practice, he travelled to America to interview the key players in what he described as "a writing project I am engaged in on international law and the war on terror." Many Bush officials, including Feith and William J. Haynes II, the former Pentagon general counsel, who was also named in the Spanish lawsuit, agreed to meet with Sands, perhaps expecting a friendly chat. "I spent two years trekking around the country, finding out that they were manifestly untruthful," Sands said. "I've got a particular bugbear about lawyers," he added. "If not for lawyers, none of these abuses would have ever occurred."

    As Sands went about his research, he conferred with human-rights experts all over Europe on his findings. Word spread that he had the makings of a high-level war-crimes case. Sands won't reveal exactly which human-rights authorities he consulted. But, in recent months, one of them was Gonzalo Boye, the Chilean-born Spanish lawyer who last week filed the criminal complaint against the Bush officials, on behalf of five former prisoners who were, they allege, tortured in the U.S. military prison at Guantánamo Bay. Boye said last week of Sands, "Let me just say that he played a very big role in my thinking. His book showed me who the targets were." Feith, reached on the phone, called Sands's book "wildly inaccurate." He said, "It's not a happy thing for the Spanish Court to think of prosecuting Americans for advice they gave to the President of the United States!"

    It is hard to predict what will happen next, but, if arrest warrants are issued, the Obama Administration may be forced either to extradite the former officials or to start its own investigation. Sands, who admires Obama, said, "I regret that I have added to his in-box when he has so much else to sort out. But I hope he does the right thing. There's not much dispute anymore: torture happened, and the law is clear-torture must be punished."

    Meanwhile, Sands reiterated a warning that he made in his book. "If I were they," he said, referring to the former officials in question, "I would think carefully before setting foot outside the United States. They are now, and forever in the future, at risk of arrest. Until this is sorted out, they are in their own legal black hole."

  

»


Comments

This is a moderated forum.  It may take a little while for comments to go live. Be civil and on-topic, don't threaten or advocate violence, please keep it under 300 words. Thanks for participating.

...About time. I guess the

...About time. I guess the Obama administration will have no choice but to prosecute - and then the World will see the mettle the US is made for.

Well Hooray for British

Well Hooray for British Counsel Phillipe Sands! It took an English law professor and Spanish Judge Baltasar Garzon to initiate a proceeding which the US Congress is bound by Constitutional law to prosecute! A good development for international law, a big demerit for our Congress! We the people had better get behind this, and convince our representatives to represent us by supporting an indictment and proceeding. The Bush criminal behaviors are a poisonous precedent which need to be fully ventilated and held to official account. Mr. Obama, we cannot truly "look ahead" until this dark chapter in our history has been exposed. It's no wonder Douglas Feith and company are squawking at this development!

If indeed the "social

If indeed the "social conservatives" in the USA are embarking on a serious culture war -- a convoluted, nay, tortured, scheme to use the constitution against itself -- criminal courts may be our best hope of defining what values this country really holds dear, bringing us back to even keel. That our President, a constitutional scholar, cannot or will not see the imminent clash between authoritarian and democratic factions as a constitutional threat is frightening. He must set aside his political cleverness for the duration and activate the domestic machinery that will investigate what we have heretofore defined as crimes. If not, those crimes will eventually become the norm, accepted and practiced. That is precisely what the authoritarian conservatives are pushing toward, legitimization of the tools of repression. If it has to be an international court that helps us out here, that's ok. But it would carry infinitely more weight for America to decide for itself what is good governance and what is not.

To those who now expect the

To those who now expect the Obama administration to prosecute - don't hold your breath! So far, the Obama administration seems to be pretty much business as usual when it comes to things like Afghanistan and the Bunk'em and Bailout Circus. To expect that they will break with tradition and take former administration officials to court in the United States is to dream folks. Setting precedents like that is not somehing any President or his staff are likely to do lightly. Right now, it's the Europeans who are after these pondscum of the Bush administration. I dare say the Obam administration will be happy to applaud from the sidelines - and off the hook, as it were.

Will Republican members of

Will Republican members of Congress honor their oaths to uphold the Constitution or will they obstruct justice? My money is on the Republicans stonewalling, shredding documents, including missing emails, and otherwise obstructing justice.

This is a wonderful

This is a wonderful development. The devil and the best laid plans applies here. They were so smug and confident that they wouldn't get prosecuted. Reminds me of the '94 election when many GOP seats were taken away by the Dems. Bush wore his best smirk while assuring his brood that it will be just fine. He was right. And in '08 Obama gets in and says we shouldn't slap they're little hands. I hope Obama isn't implicated in any of this. But I am sure he will have to explain himself to the people of the US and in the world court. Well, he's the one who called for transparency. I hope he's righteous.

Seeing that the US has

Seeing that the US has defied international law for so long and the Obama administration's reluctance to prosecute, it seems highly unlikely that the US will be "forced" to do anything. Meanwhile, this is likely to bring anti-American sentiment (even more that is) to the rest of the world. The sad fact is that the US justice system is more or less broken and there is n0 one who has the guts to fix it.

The biggest obstacle to

The biggest obstacle to congressional action IS Congress for they are every bit if not more guilty than the drafters of the torture doctrine for they KNEWwhen Kansas Senator Pat Roberts withheld the second half of the 9/11 report and they condoned this blatant act of treacherous deception! I for one implore Mr Greg "ricoact" Palast to join forces with the courts in securing full convictions of every last man and woman culpable as well as forcing Powell`s "pottery barn"analogy for all reparations onto those directly responsible BUSHCO INC aka Carlyle Group,Exxon, Enron, KBR, Haliburton, Blackwater, etc...etc...etc!

Anyone remember when Bush

Anyone remember when Bush was asked in a press conference about the "captured terrorist" and he smirked and said, "lets just say they are not a problem anymore"? It is impossible for Bush, Cheney and Rumsfeld to have not known about the torture. So why are they not being indited?

Why wasn't all the Bush

Why wasn't all the Bush administration impeached and taken down because of their numerous torture violations, etc.? Too many conservative Democrat collaborators, enough to neutralize the Congress.

Too many conservative

Too many conservative Democratic corroborators.

Aw, com'on. Bush is heading

Aw, com'on. Bush is heading to Paraguay, where they have NO extradition treaty. As for the rest, Bush could care less and Cheney will hide in the offices of Haliburton. Obama will do squat, because he intends to expand on what Bush did. As for prosecuting criminals in the higher offices of our gov't, we should start with Nixon(oops, he's dead. Maybe Kissinger? Then Reagon, oops, he's dead, too. Clinton, Elder Bush, Obama.)

As a US citizen, I am

As a US citizen, I am continually shamed that my country will not take responsibility for investigating, indicting, prosecuting and then incarcerating the people responsible for the innumerable war crimes, crimes against humanity, and many other destructive arrogant behaviors under the Bush administration. It is disgusting that the representatives of the people (Obama/congress, etc.) are unwilling to fulfill the US Constitutional laws DEMANDING prosecution of these actions. I get it, we must move forward - but these shameful, filthy, immoral, unethical, etc., etc. actions must see the light of day. They must be completely exposed and the responsible individuals must be held, to the fullest extent of the law, accountable. There is no going forward without holding the responsible one's accountable. The stench has permeated the world. If we won't, they will - if Obama is not man enough to extradite the criminals, hopefully the prosecuting governments are brave enough to escort the criminals to a location where a trial can occur. Thank you Spain! Good luck and I look forward to following the trials.

I was hoping that I would

I was hoping that I would live to see justice served. I just wish the courage had been within our own country, but the powers herein will ultimately be at least embarrassed that they failed to take action against this facist evil when they had a chance. It's known as abetting. Next up, the primary perps; dick cheney and his puppet dubya (no caps intentional for the last 6 years - like other subhumans, hitler and amin, eg).

Bring on (some more)

Bring on (some more) Evil-Doers! Hi dick&dubya

These people in power have

These people in power have only their own interests at heart. If it were otherwise, they would have jumped on board with the likes of Ron Paul, Dennis Kucinich, Mike Gravel or anyone of the others trying to bring light to the danger of the trade agreements and who have been trampled by the favoritism of an ignorant media. I stuck up for GWB during his first election. Even though I didn't vote for him, he did inherit a house of cards from the Clinton's (that's another topic for discussing corruption). But rather than actually do anything constructive with it, Bush and his dysfunctional entourage decided to rape what was left of our once fine country. I, for one, have a very hard time understanding how these people sleep at night after siphoning off our own tax dollars to build multimillion dollar detention centers while people were starving or dying after Katrina. Maybe we can house all the politicians in the detention centers. Hmmm! And now they want to twist the wording of our Bill of Rights and Constitution to support their sick version of a new world order. The only reason our country is in the state it's current in is either, greed and corruption, total ineptitude, or having no faith in either humankind or God, and I'm not even talking about religion here, just that these are truly sick people who have massaged comfortable positions for themselves at the expense of the rest of us. Well, they reap what they sow. And I'll bet that as the house comes tumbling down, each and every one of them will have nothing but excuses or be trying to reinvent themselves as being part of the new solution. The solution is that they all need their walking papers, every last one of them.

This makes sense: "The case

This makes sense: "The case became a turning point in international law, establishing the principle that there is no immunity even for the highest-ranking former government officials when they are accused of torture. " --- If only Obama would show that he believes this and would take action. We need the courts of SPAIN to show the world the dishonesty and evil of our previous administration??? THAT makes NO sense.

We are about to awake, as a

We are about to awake, as a society, to the way things really are and have been since the Warren Commission's Report. The are many people in our country who truly are above the law. It is the nightmare we refuse to face.

Guantanamo offered a LEGAL

Guantanamo offered a LEGAL LOOPHOLE to detain and coerce (or torture, if you like) non-enemy combatants to the US military and therefore the Bush Administration. They were fighting for a non-recognized enemy. Therefore the Geneva Conventions offered them no legal protections. With all the crap that the Clinton Admin pulled (Paula Corbin Jones was a state of AR Government employee at the time Clinton sexually harassed her, and he never was punished) why are you folks fixated with the issue of getting back at Bush. My theory is this- you are looking to the Republican Party to acquiesce on some unrelated issue that you have been hung up in. Is it a "off-shore tax problem" perchance?

Hey! This is international

Hey! This is international law! Congress has nothing to do with this issue! To anon 13:30, torture and extreme rendition is WRONG! Guantanamo was wrong! I want to see real justice served, for a change and the pursuit of the Bu$h Gang in the international arena will do quite nicely.

If 90+ year-old John

If 90+ year-old John Demancuk can be put on trial for being an accessory to killings during World War Two, what about Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld and Blair? More sickening double-standards!!

I'm sure we don't know

I'm sure we don't know everything. Dem or Rep it doesn't matter. Fact is: This would not even be happening if we were being about sending tractors, combines, planters and true honest help instead of troops and warships. The United States would, without a doubt, be leading the world economically, politically and socially. We might even be liked and respected by other countries as a United States of people who REALLY CARE about them their home. The dog doesn't bite the hand that feeds it.