Supreme Court: Bush Administration Has Committed War Crimes
...What has been largely missed is the clear point that the Supreme Court has now declared that for the past five years, Bush and his gang of war-mongers, including Vice President Dick Cheney, Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, Secretary of State and former National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice, former Attorney General Donald Rumsfeld and current Attorney General and former White House Chief Counsel Alberto Gonzales, and many others in the administration, have been guilty of violating the Third Convention on treatment of prisoners of war. They are also, therefore, in violation of federal law, which back in 1996 adopted that convention as part of the U.S. criminal code. [Read the rest here.]
Tuesday, July 04, 2006
Yet Again... Do I Dare to Hope?
Although the federal government is desperately short of that element of humanity known as "good guys," we now at least have an extremely solid legal basis for the prosecution of the members of the Bush Administration for war crimes. Amazingly, the legal groundwork for this prosecution was laid by yet another criminal organization, the very organization that illegally installed this future war criminal as president back in December 2000: The Supreme Court of the United States. Read on:
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
It is a tough call. Do we give up some freedoms for our security or do we keep all of our freedoms and keep on existing. I don't know the answer.
No, it's a very easy call. We must give up none of our freedoms for our security. I prefer dangerous freedom to safe authoritarianism. Modern "terrorism" has been exaggerated beyond all reason by our government (and the military-industrial complex) in order to replace the now extinct threat from the Soviet Union. In reality, terrorism is but a mosquito compared to the dangers this country has faced in the past, both foreign and domestic. For decades, crime and drug violence has been far more of a threat to the average American citizen than are Middle Eastern terrorists. We have never given up any of our freedoms in the past in order to "remain safe." Why should we now?
We should give up none of our freedoms now, especially when this threat is so vague and open ended. Gene Lyons says it best right here.
This idea that by giving up personal freedoms we will end up being safer is proven false when you look at Israel and Gaza, etc. Freedoms taken away are rarely given back, especially when it's the government that benefits.
Post a Comment