Guest Column: Holding Our Government Accountable

Brian J. TrautmaniBerkshires
Print Story | Email Story
Obama must prosecute Bush-era officials for war crimes

Owing to the pressures of the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) and the Obama administration, this week the American public was finally granted access to Bush-era memos that revealed torture was both sanctioned and authorized by Bush officials and executed by members of the CIA.

The memos detailed how a variety of torture techniques were employed to interrogate terror suspects, to include long durations of forced nakedness, stress positions, wall standing, and exposure to cold. Other interrogation techniques included depriving prisoners of solid food, physical assault, sleep deprivation, prolonged shackling, waterboarding, cramped confinement with insects, and threats to family.

With the release of these memos, ostensibly President Obama was keeping to a campaign promise of openness and transparency. However, we also learned this week that to move the nation forward from what he considered "a dark and painful chapter in our history” (The Huffington Post, April 16, 2009), President Obama believes we should merely "reflect" on the how and why of decisions and processes that led to torture and not pursue legal action, claiming that such a move would correspond to "retribution," and therefore unhealthy and unconstructive.

This position is simply wrong and sets a dangerous precedent. Enforcing our federal and international laws is not retributive in nature, but rather it is a course of action that would hold to account those who intentionally departed from our principles and values as human beings and from our laws as a nation and global community. Any failure to at least actively investigate the alleged violations of federal law and international treaties by Bush-era officials is in effect a crime in and of itself — obstruction of justice.

Also this week, President Obama assured CIA operatives who conducted authorized torture that they would not be prosecuted because they were following orders, which were based on legal advice received from the Bush administration Department of Justice (DOJ). Mr. Obama's attorney general, Eric Holder, even offered legal help to these agents should they face legal challenges: Holder said, "It would be unfair to prosecute dedicated men and women working to protect America for conduct that was sanctioned in advance by the Justice Department" (AlterNet, April 16, 2009). This policy defends the all-too-familiar flawed logic and proverbial excuse, "I was just following orders." Legal authorization does not, and will never, justify crimes against humanity, in this case torture. The men and women who carried out torture must be prosecuted too, regardless of their justification. 

The CIA memos authorizing torture are an embarrassment to our nation. The misconduct and corrupt actions of the Bush administration must be prosecuted. Torture is never justifiable. The Obama administration must seek justice to illustrate to the world that the U.S. condemns and will not tolerate torture. No passes must be permitted when it comes to human-rights violations and war crimes. Presidents, and all political leaders, past and present, must be held accountable for violations of federal and international law. It is the obligation of our elected officials to seek justice in all cases.


Our nation held President Nixon accountable for the Watergate scandal, at least in principle, which, whether we use a moral or legal compass, does not compare in the slightest to torture, a crime against humanity and international war crime. Whether politically unpopular or whether viewed as an inopportune time given the current global economic crisis and other domestic and global issues, President Obama has a responsibility to act on behalf of justice and the people of the world by investigating and prosecuting torture. 

What are the implications for the future of the United States, especially in terms of public faith, the rule of law, and global trust and respect, if the Obama administration refuses to investigate and prosecute cases of torture? Our children and grandchildren will inquire one day as to why we did not prosecute these crimes, and we will be forced to answer them, hopefully with the truth. If the lessons of history are to be learned, political crimes, particularly war crimes, must not be overlooked, or else we risk a repeat of such behavior at some future point, perhaps in an amplified form (e.g. the rise of Nazi Germany between World War I and World War II). 

As a citizen concerned about the very real possibility of Bush officials escaping prosecution, I have contacted the Obama administration and the 111th Congress to urge them to investigate Bush-era officials. I request my fellow citizens do the same. Those who were directly and indirectly responsible for deciding that acts of torture were justifiable must not be absolved of these crimes. If not to our children and grandchildren, we at least owe it to the men and women who currently serve and those who have fought and died so that America and the world could enjoy the principles and values of freedom, human rights, and democracy.

To those who argue that torture is effective and works, hence it contributes to national security, I reply that torture is always immoral and always illegal, regardless of the rationalization behind it. And if you are not convinced by moral or legal justifications, consider the fact that torture has been proven ineffective as an intelligence-gathering tool (through interviews conducted with counterterrorism officials we have learned that torture does not work: intelligence of a high-value nature is more accurate, reliable, and is obtained with greater ease through a process of relationship building and rapport with suspects — Newsweek, 2006; Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars, 2009).

If the opinions and facts shared in this letter regarding both Bush-era crimes and the Obama administration's position on prosecution of Bush officials are of concern to you, I encourage you to join me at Berkshire Community College this Monday, April 20, at 7 p.m. for a talk by David Swanson, co-founder of After Downing Street, and workers' rights attorney Valeria A. Gheorghiu.

Brian J. Trautman is on the faculty of the Peace and World Order Studies program at Berkshire Community College and an active member of Berkshire Citizens for Peace and Justice.
If you would like to contribute information on this article, contact us at info@iberkshires.com.

Lanesborough Town Meeting to Vote Budget, Bylaws & Vehicle Purchases

By Breanna SteeleiBerkshires Staff

LANESBOROUGH, Mass. — Tuesday's annual town meeting includes a $14 million operating budget, new short-term rentals, accessory dwelling units and sign bylaws, and free cash article appropriations.

Voters will gather at Lanesborough Elementary School on June 9 at 6 p.m. to decide on 20 warrant articles.

The fiscal 2027 budget is up a little over 10 percent. Some of the main increases are the Mount Greylock Regional School District and McCann Technical School: the McCann assessment is up more than 30 percent based on factors including enrollment and the school renovation project, and Mount Greylock's is up 11 percent.

Article 11 is for the town to vote to approve from free cash the sum of $16,298.48 for the McCann Technical School roof and window replacement project so as not to impact the budget. Article 3 is  appropriate $7,586,284 for Mount Greylock Regional School assessment.

Another notable increase was in life and health insurance, showing an increase of about 26 percent.

Ambulance Director Jen Weber is planning 24-hour coverage, which means more staff and a hike in her budget. One of the articles asks the town to appropriate $234,100 to operate the Ambulance Enterprise Fund for salaries and expenses.

Many town departments are looking for new vehicles. The Fire Department is looking to replace its outdated 1996 fire engine. There are two articles related to the truck at a total of $813,366. Article 12 would transfer $225,000 from free cash into the Fire Truck Stabilization Fund; Article 13 would transfer $605,000 from the fund and authorize the borrowing of $208,366.08.

The total includes a $100,000 contingency cost to cover any additional costs if a 2026 model-year chassis cannot be secured before new emissions standards go into effect in 2027.

The board at its last meeting moved the $225,000 transfer to come before the borrowing article, changing the stabilization number. If the $225,000 is not voted on, then they will amend the next article's number on the floor, subtracting the $225,000. This shows the borrowing number significantly lower.

Article 17 asks for the transfer of $80,000 from free cash to replace a police cruiser.

Police Chief Rob Derksen's aim is to replace one vehicle every other year, meaning the oldest vehicle gets replaced about every 10 years. 

He stressed that if delayed this year, the town may have to double up in a future year to get back on schedule, and that paying later usually costs more. The article will ask for $80,000 from free cash, the vehicles used to be funded by the BHRD.

Lastly, the Highway Department is looking to replace a 2014 International dump truck that will be a total of $330,000 and will take two to three years to receive.

Money will be used from last year's approval of $250,000 from free cash for the replacement of a 2012 highway front-end loader that was underspent $49,261. Town meeting is being asked to approve  a transfer of $53,274.85 from free cash and the use of $227,464 from funds from the Sale of Town Real Estate to fund the balance.

Other free cash proposals include $1,200 to purchase software to support tracking and ongoing maintenance schedules of town-owned vehicles; $42,000 for the replacement of the Highway Department's storage shed roof, $200,000 to reduce the tax levy.

View Full Story

More Pittsfield Stories