o---well, the reason i put the link up was came from two elements in the post: first that it was wilkerson alone who raises irregularities concerning the bush administration's actions in the contexts of the "war on terror" and invasion of iraq. the frontline piece is a pretty effective demolition of the case for war and makes it pretty clear what the lines of power/influence/decision within the administration.
second, i am at this point agnostic about some aspects of this article, but wilkerson is not a new figure. he's among the former bush administration functionaries who turned against the "war on terror"/invasion of iraq shell games publicly. to wit:
CNN.com - Former aide:omgPowellomgWMD speechomg'lowest point in my life' - Aug 19, 2005
this particular document, which is at the heart of the article, comes
"(...) in support of Adel Hassan Hamad, a Sudanese man who was held at Guantánamo Bay from March 2003 until December 2007. Mr Hamad claims that he was tortured by US agents while in custody and yesterday filed a damages action against a list of American officials."
at this point all i can find about the case online are echoes of this times piece.
where these two points converge is:
i think it's disengenuous to act as though this is the first serious allegation of potentially criminal wrong-doing by the bush administration around the war in iraq.
**but**
it's possible that cimmaron simply missed the controversy. whence the frontline doc, which is a good primer.
if you know about the broader range of allegations/realities manipulated by the bush administration, this latest is still surprising (i think) but certainly not out of left field. wilkerson is easily identified for who he was (an aide to colin powell); powell's position in the iraq war fiasco is well-documented in the frontline special; the cnn link speaks to the humilitation that was powell's speech at the un...
i'm interested in seeing more of wilkerson's affadavit.
but that doesn't change the question at the source of the thread:
i think that there really should be **Some** kind of formal inquiry into/prosecution of the bush administration for the war in iraq.
i think alot of folk feel the same way.
but is there a tipping point in terms of information that would make undertaking such an inquiry more important than the maintaining of this pollyanna nothing-to-see-here-folks and we're-looking-forward posture that the obama administration has adopted?