Harper's

On the flight to LA I switched things up a bit and picked up a copy of Harper's instead of the Economist (my usual airplane fare). It was okay: a little more literary than the sort of thing I'm used to reading. The increased creative freedom of the writers turned out to be a double-edged sword, because sometimes you'd come across a truly memorable "gag" (as Bertie would call it)--for example, noting that a gambler's eyes had the "watchful opacity" of a security camera--but other times I felt it was just providing rope for the author to hang himself with, as with the not-so-impressive "everybody making out like a bandit with his own designer neckerchief pulled over his nose". That sounds like what I imagine Adbusters is full of.

In any case, there was an interesting article by one Scott Horton that outlines the political dilemmas entailed by prosecuting Bush et al with warcrimes, and how such a process might be designed. Ultimately he recommends a "two-part solution", where an investigative commission is formed in such a way that it enjoys broad public support--and has robust fact-finding powers such as top-level security clearance and supoena power--but that does not have the power to prosecute. Instead, at the end of the investigation it would make a recommendation for a formal prosecution if the facts supported it. From there the government would be in a position to decide if it should appoint a special prosecutor to make a case in the federal courts.