\nbringing its ring leaders to justice? It would be nice to think so. And maybe they will be, judging
\nfrom “Who We Are,”<\/B><\/FONT><\/A> the lead
\neditorial in this morning’s New York Times about the Senate Judiciary Committee’s official
\nhearing on the prison camp at Guantanamo.<\/P>
\n
The Times has absorbed torrents of criticism, largely justified, for not taking on the regime in
\nthe rush to war and not exposing the justification for invading Iraq, namely the imminent threat of
\nSaddam Hussein’s WMD, as the Big Lie it was. But some of its editorials have been the strongest
\nvoices of opposition to the regime, and this morning’s is one.<\/P>
\n
Demanding (not for the first time) that the Guant\u00e1namo Detention Center be closed, it began
\nby praising Republican Sen. Arlen Specter, who heads the committee, for declaring “it was time
\nfor Congress to do its job and bring the American chain of prison camps under the
\nlaw.”<\/P>![](\"http:\/\/www.artsjournal.com\/herman\/images\/GulagsCARTOON.jpg\"\nwidth=400)
<\/A>
\n
<\/P>
\n
The editorial continued: <\/P>
\n
\n
While the hearing was too long in coming, its timing was useful — one day
\nafter Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, who should have been fired for bungling the Iraq war
\nand for the prison abuse scandal, offered the bizarre declaration that “no detention facility in the
\nhistory of warfare has been more transparent” than Guant\u00e1namo.<\/BLOCKQUOTE>
\n<\/P>
\nIt sliced and diced William Barr, who was attorney general for President George H. W. Bush,
\nfor “arrogantly dismiss[ing] the entire debate [over the legality of the camps] as a waste of time.
\n(“Rarely have I seen a controversy that has less substance behind it,” said Mr. Barr, who was sent
\nby the administration to dilute a panel of critics of the prison policy.) And it pointed out that<\/P>
\n
\n… the hearing only confirmed the urgency of subjecting the post-9\/11
\ndetention system to the rule of law — starting with the president’s legally dubious invention of
\n“unlawful enemy combatant.” J. Michael Wiggins, a deputy associate attorney general, said the
\nadministration believed it could hold anyone given that label “in perpetuity” without even filing
\ncharges. Excuse us, Mr. Barr, but that sounds like something of great substance, especially given
\nhow bad the administration is at telling actual villains from taxi drivers who happen to be in the
\nwrong place at the wrong time.<\/BLOCKQUOTE>
\n<\/P>
\n
![](\"http:\/\/www.artsjournal.com\/herman\/images\/conyersGOODphoto.jpg\")
<\/A>Similarly, perhaps it’s possible that historians will see a turning point