This Sunday morning (Aug.30, 2009), many of the political pundit shows discussed the loss of Massachusetts Senator Ted Kennedy.  One show, “This Week w/ George Stephanopolis”, discussed not on the the former Senators life, but also a recently released report by Attorney General Eric Holder.  The report can best be summed up by a New York Times overview of the CIA:

On Aug. 24, it was revealed that the Justice Department’s ethics office, the Office of Personal Responsibility, had  recommended reversing the Bush administration and reopening nearly a dozen prisoner-abuse cases, potentially exposing C.I.A. employees and contractors to prosecution for brutal treatment of terrorism suspects.

The response to the report has been varied and loud.  The mere suggestion that our government had done some wrong-doing in the attempt to keep us safe is appalling and sad.  The fear that comes with the suggestion has led many to shake their heads in disbelief and denial of any possibility that the suggestion might be true.  Along with that, those who could be under investigation or have some part in the wrong doing have pointed their finger to the effectiveness in detaining terrorism suspects.

The most prominent figure to deny any wrong doing is former Vice President Dick Cheney.  Here’s an interview with Chris Matthews about the matter:

Here’s the “This Week” that had Liz Cheney, Orrin Hatch, and Sam Donaldson (to name a few).  The first video is the round table and the second video is the backroom discussion not aired on TV.

They use the term “fundamental issues” over and over.  They discuss these issues in a specified manner and look at the situation from one angle. The process by which the Bush Administration had strengthened the Executive Branch had been through legal memos written by John Yoo and then affirmed by Judge Jay Bybee.  Again, after Holder’s conclusion, Bybee came out defending his decisions (source).

The fundamental issues that are talked about here are those of a semantic nature.  The points of the Liz and Dick Cheney are easily identifiable as they define the idea of torture as a necessity.  Those who stood for the left or the Democratic Party are overtly pointing to the injustice that has been carried and allowed under the Bush Administration.  Both sides are missing the point, though.  The real fundamental issue is one that our country has gone over since its beginning: the level of power of the federal government.

Do we as citizens allow our government to make decisions in secret for the betterment of our society or country? Do we allow our country, from time to time (which has been in the past MANY times), make these judgments on their own?

In all actuality, the suspension of the acknowledgment of government roles and the bypassing of “rule of law”, IS, in fact, the real issue.  These other tidbits of information that these leaders and pundits have decided to focus on (finger pointing) do not change the effects of the previous administration’s actions.  This acceptance of this horrific act is just as disappointing and reprehensible as the act of terrorism itself.

The praise of the Bush Administration has yet to be countered with any real challenge to the policies and precedents set by Cheney or Bush.  The allowance of poor judgment, selfish desires, and the push for absolute executive power should bring the average American citizen to their knees in shame.   But these real fundamental issues have been tossed to the side in attempt to please critics among the right.  Obama’s weak stance on the prosecution of those who sought to torture possible terrorists, has limited his support on the left and stopped a real push for real justice.  The political capital that Obama has to spend, will be worthless, unless there is an understanding that there it is an acceptable reason to charge our leaders (past or present) with crimes, if there is enough evidence to do so.

If we look at other parts of the world, we can see that other countries do not have any issue with accomplishing this daunting task.  The latest victim of their own power struggles is Ehud Olmert, former Isaeli prime minister.  Olmert has been brought up on ethics and campaign finance charges. He asserts his innocence and suggests that the prosecution is on a witch hunt.  Regardless of the differences between the “innocent” and “not guilty” verdict of Olmert’s case, the real fundamental issue of this example is that the Israeli government and the people of Israel do not and will not accept corruption and lying that comes from their leaders.

Why is it that the American people and their representatives do not/refuse to do this?  The answer is simpler than thought; politics.  The step that must be taken next is the follow-through of prosecution of those who have contributed to torture.  The allowance of the powers exercised by government workers, based on political and fearful motives, is denounced in our Constitution and in a majority of the public forum.

As time goes on, the memory of failures among the last administration could possibly echo in the future with the lack of oversight in a number of areas that lack transparency.  Will we remember these problems? Or will we keep the fear of others’ contentious problems with our nation and allow ourselves to be afraid?

In remembrance of what has been done in the name of protection, here is a compilation of the events (via Keith Olberman) that had led our nation to possible torture by our own immunized (by justice) leadership.