Cheney's televised embrace of torture continues to reverberate. Today blog hero Glenn Greenwald finally crossed the Rubicon and called for war crimes prosecutions:

with these new, unprecedentedly stark revelations, this facade will be increasingly difficult to maintain.  It is already the case, as the Times Editorial today notes, that "all but President Bush’s most unquestioning supporters [i.e., this] recognized the chain of unprincipled decisions that led to the abuse, torture and death in prisons run by the American military and intelligence services."  That leaves only two choices:  (1) treat these crimes as the serious war crimes they are by having a Prosecutor investigate and, if warranted, prosecute them, or (2) openly acknowledge -- to ourselves and the world -- that we believe that our leaders are literally entitled to commit war crimes at will, and that we -- but not the rest of the world -- should be exempt from the consequences.  The clearer it becomes that those are the only two choices, the more difficult it will be to choose option (2), and either way, there is great benefit just from having that level of clarity and candor about what we are really doing.

Way to go Glennzilla!

So now we must ask the rest of the Blogosphere: when it comes to war crimes, which side are you on? Do you stand for (1) prosecution or (2) tacit endorsement?

The world is watching, and I'm naming names here.