Shall we prosecute FDR for Japanese Internment?

The Obama Administration now says it is "open" to a bipartisan war crimes panel to investigate the Bush years and that while the foot soldiers in the CIA won't be punished for following orders, those who crafted legal opinions on what is, or is not, torture may be prosecuted if Attorney General Eric Holder disagrees with those legal opinions.

Only in America.

I don't expect to convince the hard-core left. But for those in middle, let me say that reasonable minds can disagree on whether waterboarding, sleep deprivation or terror-by-caterpiller constitute torture. It certainly is nothing like the treatment our soldiers are subject to by our enemies. But, two wrongs don't make a right. The Bush folks say their form of "harsh interrogation" wasn't torture. The Obama folks say it was. Seems to me that at least part of that debate ought to involve not only when "uncomfortable" questioning becomes "torture" but also what, if any, information was learned from the Bush approach.

Obama's national intelligence director supposedly told Obama that the Bush techniques produced valuable information. And, if the CIA sticks by its earlier statements that the waterboarding of one suspect foiled an imminent terrorist attack on Los Angeles shortly after 9/11, then it seems to be that the Bush folks win unless the Obama Administration can cogently explain how under their approach Americans would have been spared that ordeal.

If they can't do that, but still proceed, then who knows how far back in history the Obama administration may want to go. I suppose in the spirit of bipartisanship, the war crimes panel could dig up FDR-era Democrats, prop up their corpses in a New York courtroom, and charge them with criminally imprisoning Japanese Americans during World War II.

Hate to give 'em any ideas, though.