![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
acroyearNaturally, its not pretty (and yes, Rob, its biased). However, it was written in May of this year, LONG before the events of the last 2 days were even a pipe-dream in anybody's mind. This is not "bash him now that he's the big guy" writing.
Anyways, the perspective (an editorial viewpoint, not an necessarilly an objective one) is at the St. Petersberg Times, a newspaper in Florida.
No, I don't like the guy. But then again, there hasn't been an attorney general worth liking from ANY administration since I've been alive. Reno's only good point was that she was willing to (rightfully) challenge Microsoft. And won.
not that Microsoft would have noticed or anything...
Scott Bateman has written a cartoon on Gonzales already.
My viewpoint? Well, take this set of excerpts from the current Reuters story on the press conference:
"Sound Judgement" is making us the most hated country of the 21st century(so far) for our hypocracy when it comes to human rights violations?
And to quibble over the precise wording of the Geneva Conventions to come up with some legal loophole by which we can torture alledged terrorists because they aren't "prisoners of war" (in spite of the fact that most were captured during combat operations against u.s. military forces, not in the process of carrying out or planning terrorist activities) digusts me thoroughly. The SPIRIT of the conventions is that prisoners have rights and we shouldn't be utter assholes to them.
Torture is WRONG. Period. Trying to justify it (before or after) by saying that the letter of the law means rules we agreed to (and have enforced for over 100 years) suddenly don't really apply to US in such-n-such situation, is morally corrupt. It is to my mind, the ultimate in corruption.
I'm sorry to remind this jerk, but the Constitution protects the rights of ALL PERSONS, not just Americans. Anybody in Law Enforcement (which the A.G. position is) who forgets that is due for a civil rights class action lawsuit of the worst kind...
as for any who intentionally, willfully ignore that...?
we should not fight terrorists by becoming terrorists (especially those that are only alledged to have ties to terrorists). we're supposed to be better than this by now...
People, write your Senators, current and/or incoming. Help them realize that any man who would justify torture is not somebody who should be in the highest ranking position of American Law Enforcement. Remind them of their responsibilities to their constituents and their country, and those responsibilities don't include letting the President get away with whatever the hell he wants.
(hint: remind them that torture is not a "moral value" we should be professing to believe in)
Anyways, the perspective (an editorial viewpoint, not an necessarilly an objective one) is at the St. Petersberg Times, a newspaper in Florida.
No, I don't like the guy. But then again, there hasn't been an attorney general worth liking from ANY administration since I've been alive. Reno's only good point was that she was willing to (rightfully) challenge Microsoft. And won.
not that Microsoft would have noticed or anything...
Scott Bateman has written a cartoon on Gonzales already.
My viewpoint? Well, take this set of excerpts from the current Reuters story on the press conference:
"His sharp intellect and sound judgment have helped shaped our policies in the war on terror, policies designed to protect the security of all Americans while protecting the rights of all Americans," Bush said in announcing Gonzales' nomination during a ceremony in the White House Roosevelt Room.so, we're "protecting the rights of all Americans" by basically declaring that nobody who isn't American has any rights?
Gonzales said if confirmed he would pursue policies aimed at "justice for every American."
"On this principle, there can be no compromise," he said.
"Sound Judgement" is making us the most hated country of the 21st century(so far) for our hypocracy when it comes to human rights violations?
And to quibble over the precise wording of the Geneva Conventions to come up with some legal loophole by which we can torture alledged terrorists because they aren't "prisoners of war" (in spite of the fact that most were captured during combat operations against u.s. military forces, not in the process of carrying out or planning terrorist activities) digusts me thoroughly. The SPIRIT of the conventions is that prisoners have rights and we shouldn't be utter assholes to them.
Torture is WRONG. Period. Trying to justify it (before or after) by saying that the letter of the law means rules we agreed to (and have enforced for over 100 years) suddenly don't really apply to US in such-n-such situation, is morally corrupt. It is to my mind, the ultimate in corruption.
I'm sorry to remind this jerk, but the Constitution protects the rights of ALL PERSONS, not just Americans. Anybody in Law Enforcement (which the A.G. position is) who forgets that is due for a civil rights class action lawsuit of the worst kind...
as for any who intentionally, willfully ignore that...?
we should not fight terrorists by becoming terrorists (especially those that are only alledged to have ties to terrorists). we're supposed to be better than this by now...
People, write your Senators, current and/or incoming. Help them realize that any man who would justify torture is not somebody who should be in the highest ranking position of American Law Enforcement. Remind them of their responsibilities to their constituents and their country, and those responsibilities don't include letting the President get away with whatever the hell he wants.
(hint: remind them that torture is not a "moral value" we should be professing to believe in)
