“A mock execution, a threat to kill family members, simulated drownings. The Obama administration is investigating whether the CIA interrogation techniques broke the law.” (CNN)

On Monday Attorney General Eric Holder appointed special prosecutor John Durham to investigate alleged abuse of terrorist prisoners during CIA interrogations.

Although this case is being reopened, MSNBC’s David Shuster says it is set to be both preliminary and narrow.

“President Obama says he wants to keep looking forward rather than looking back, so what does a full investigation mean?” ... “Given that it’s looking like they’re going narrowly after these bad apples, what’s wrong with it?” “There may be nothing wrong with it. I’ll take the attorney general at face value.”

But Mark Mazzetti and Scott Shane of the New York Times disagree, stating:

“The decision was a significant blow to the C.I.A, and Mr. Holder said he would be criticized for undercutting the intelligence agency’s work. He said that he agreed with President Obama’s oft-expressed desire not to get mired in disputes over the policies of former President George W. Bush, but that his review of reports on the C.I.A. interrogation program left him no choice.”

MSNBC’s Morning Joe takes on the questions of the American people and asks why these cases weren’t addressed years earlier:

“I think that’s the real question here, Mark, I mean its clear that the inspector general’s report said ‘take another look at some of these cases, and consider prosecution, but Gene my question is, what was wrong with the first look? It’s not like there’s new evidence that we know of, these are old cases.”

So why reopen it now? FOX News’ Bill Sammon says that this is just a way for Obama to take the blame away from him and put it on the Bush administration:

“Well it is about embarrassing the Bush administration, no doubt about that, and when things are looking bad on the domestic front for President Obama, he tends to go there, he tends to say well, lets talk about the bush administration.”

So do you think it’s worth the effort to look at years-old cases, or should we follow the Obama administration motto and focus more on the safety of the future?