That old lie, 'Inter arma silent legit'-- and other pieces of stupidity
Interrogation Methods Rejected by Military win Bush's Support
Well now, isn't this just lovely? /sarcasm. Not surprising considering that everything the BDI has done has shown that he regards the laws, both domestic and international, as only being an obstacle to his getting and doing whatever he wants. What does it say about him that instead of trying to work within the legal frameworks set up, all he wants to do is get around them or if that doesn't work, break them outright or just ignore their existence at all? He thinks he's above the laws or as Nixon put it, if the President does it, it's legal. *snorts* Now that's a nice throwback to the days of absolute monarchy right there. I thought we got rid of that but look, he's back! King George I of America-- and after George Washington, of revered memory, refused so adamantly to be a king even though people were willing to make him one because he believed in the republican principles for which he had fought and dedicated so many years of his adult life...
And Bush claims techniques like sleep deprivation and sleep deprivations and whatever else the military/CIA has done is not torture! Exactly how he defines torture I'd love to know. In fact, I'd also love to know how Rumsfeld defines torture. They appear to have a very narrowly defined definition of it- what, is torture only something like pulling out a person's fingernails or mutilating a person by cutting off body parts one by one and anything less than that is not torture? Good God, it's sick.
It's a sad day when the man who is responsible for 'executiing the laws of the United States' is more interested in enhancing his power and trampling over any law that gets in his way. The Geneva Conventions were made and intended to be basic rules governing the treatment of all people; they can't be followed only when it's convenient! I am convinced that it's possible and necessary to follow the Geneva Conventions and still keep the country safe. And apparently it's never occurred to Rumsfeld or Bush (altho' it did to Colin Powell) that blatantly violating international laws (to which we are signatories) just gives everyone else one more (very valid) reason to hate the US and everything the US does so it'll encourage enlistment in anti-American terrorist groups, it'll drive more people into the extremist camps and all in all, it'll increase our list of enemies. Yes, that's doing one hell of a job to keep this country safer. Let's make everybody hate us even more! To quote Gollum, 'You don't have any friends. Nobody likes you.' And it's certainly becoming true of America. It's America vs the rest of the world-- now that's just a wonderful way of increasing our safety. Alienate our allies and make our enemies hate us more and encourage people to become our enemies if they weren't already... Yup, that's some smart "strategery" right there. /sarcasm.
And he's nicely telling the Court to stay out of it! Brilliant, really. Nice show of respect for a coordinate and equal branch of government, there, Jackass. Sadly, this current Supreme Court isn't about to strike down this law if it's passed (and I have no faith in this Congress to not pass it) so it's all terribly discouraging. How do you like your president, Justice Roberts, Alito and Scalia, now that he's oh-so-politely told you to keep your nose out of international law, no matter that he's breaking them willy-nilly? But, oh wait, I'm forgetting, Justice Scalia is the one who doesn't seem to believe the US should follow ANY international laws because doing so is some sort of threat to our national autonomy or some such bs.
Oh I wish people would get over thinking of this whole thing in terms of the old phrase, 'Inter arma silent legit' (In times of war, the laws are silent.) It's that mentality that led to things like the Korematsu decision and it's being used to justify almost all of Bush's rough-shod trampling over things like due process, civil liberties and international law and human rights. But for one thing, it's a cliched idea and an excuse for all sorts of abuses of power and secondly, even if it weren't cliched, it's absolutely IRRELEVANT!! This is NOT a war in the sense of that phrase. This war on terror is like the war on drugs and the war on poverty- it's never going to end, really. The only way the phrase is relevant is if it's possible to imagine a definite end to the war; it automatically implies that the condition of 'war' is temporary and finite with times of peace in between. This war on terror- it isn't the type of war to end like that. It's impossible by its very nature. There is no set single enemy and every time one person is gotten rid of, another pops up to take its place. Even if (in the rather unlikely, at this point, case that) Osama bin Laden is captured/killed, we can't just blithely declare the War on Terror won and over and go back to our ante-bellum civil liberties and such. This war doesn't and won't work like that. The London attacks proved that, if we didn't already know it. Osama bin Laden and al Qaeda don't have a monopoly on terror so defeating them won't end this war. Not to say that we can't win this war or even that we shouldn't fight it- it's like the war on drugs and poverty; we should still fight it but we have to fight it within the rule of the laws we have.
*gets off soap-box* Ok, I'll shut up now.
~*~*~
Entirely unrelated to that- and to end on a positive note by going from talking about a person I hate to a person I love--
Happy birthday, demosthenes91!!!!!
You're one of my favorite people in fandom, a brilliant artist, a wonderful writer and an all-around wonderful person whom I'm so glad I've gotten to know!!! *glomps* I hope you have a wonderful day!!!
Well now, isn't this just lovely? /sarcasm. Not surprising considering that everything the BDI has done has shown that he regards the laws, both domestic and international, as only being an obstacle to his getting and doing whatever he wants. What does it say about him that instead of trying to work within the legal frameworks set up, all he wants to do is get around them or if that doesn't work, break them outright or just ignore their existence at all? He thinks he's above the laws or as Nixon put it, if the President does it, it's legal. *snorts* Now that's a nice throwback to the days of absolute monarchy right there. I thought we got rid of that but look, he's back! King George I of America-- and after George Washington, of revered memory, refused so adamantly to be a king even though people were willing to make him one because he believed in the republican principles for which he had fought and dedicated so many years of his adult life...
And Bush claims techniques like sleep deprivation and sleep deprivations and whatever else the military/CIA has done is not torture! Exactly how he defines torture I'd love to know. In fact, I'd also love to know how Rumsfeld defines torture. They appear to have a very narrowly defined definition of it- what, is torture only something like pulling out a person's fingernails or mutilating a person by cutting off body parts one by one and anything less than that is not torture? Good God, it's sick.
It's a sad day when the man who is responsible for 'executiing the laws of the United States' is more interested in enhancing his power and trampling over any law that gets in his way. The Geneva Conventions were made and intended to be basic rules governing the treatment of all people; they can't be followed only when it's convenient! I am convinced that it's possible and necessary to follow the Geneva Conventions and still keep the country safe. And apparently it's never occurred to Rumsfeld or Bush (altho' it did to Colin Powell) that blatantly violating international laws (to which we are signatories) just gives everyone else one more (very valid) reason to hate the US and everything the US does so it'll encourage enlistment in anti-American terrorist groups, it'll drive more people into the extremist camps and all in all, it'll increase our list of enemies. Yes, that's doing one hell of a job to keep this country safer. Let's make everybody hate us even more! To quote Gollum, 'You don't have any friends. Nobody likes you.' And it's certainly becoming true of America. It's America vs the rest of the world-- now that's just a wonderful way of increasing our safety. Alienate our allies and make our enemies hate us more and encourage people to become our enemies if they weren't already... Yup, that's some smart "strategery" right there. /sarcasm.
And he's nicely telling the Court to stay out of it! Brilliant, really. Nice show of respect for a coordinate and equal branch of government, there, Jackass. Sadly, this current Supreme Court isn't about to strike down this law if it's passed (and I have no faith in this Congress to not pass it) so it's all terribly discouraging. How do you like your president, Justice Roberts, Alito and Scalia, now that he's oh-so-politely told you to keep your nose out of international law, no matter that he's breaking them willy-nilly? But, oh wait, I'm forgetting, Justice Scalia is the one who doesn't seem to believe the US should follow ANY international laws because doing so is some sort of threat to our national autonomy or some such bs.
Oh I wish people would get over thinking of this whole thing in terms of the old phrase, 'Inter arma silent legit' (In times of war, the laws are silent.) It's that mentality that led to things like the Korematsu decision and it's being used to justify almost all of Bush's rough-shod trampling over things like due process, civil liberties and international law and human rights. But for one thing, it's a cliched idea and an excuse for all sorts of abuses of power and secondly, even if it weren't cliched, it's absolutely IRRELEVANT!! This is NOT a war in the sense of that phrase. This war on terror is like the war on drugs and the war on poverty- it's never going to end, really. The only way the phrase is relevant is if it's possible to imagine a definite end to the war; it automatically implies that the condition of 'war' is temporary and finite with times of peace in between. This war on terror- it isn't the type of war to end like that. It's impossible by its very nature. There is no set single enemy and every time one person is gotten rid of, another pops up to take its place. Even if (in the rather unlikely, at this point, case that) Osama bin Laden is captured/killed, we can't just blithely declare the War on Terror won and over and go back to our ante-bellum civil liberties and such. This war doesn't and won't work like that. The London attacks proved that, if we didn't already know it. Osama bin Laden and al Qaeda don't have a monopoly on terror so defeating them won't end this war. Not to say that we can't win this war or even that we shouldn't fight it- it's like the war on drugs and poverty; we should still fight it but we have to fight it within the rule of the laws we have.
*gets off soap-box* Ok, I'll shut up now.
~*~*~
Entirely unrelated to that- and to end on a positive note by going from talking about a person I hate to a person I love--
Happy birthday, demosthenes91!!!!!
You're one of my favorite people in fandom, a brilliant artist, a wonderful writer and an all-around wonderful person whom I'm so glad I've gotten to know!!! *glomps* I hope you have a wonderful day!!!