Text 16833, 75 rader
Skriven 2005-12-28 17:35:04 av BOB SAKOWSKI (1:123/140)
     Kommentar till en text av ALL, EVEN THE MORONS ON THE RIGHT
Ärende: Preznit Pedophile?
==========================

Do you think that John Yoo, the guy who authored the Department of Justice
memo justifiying torture, believes that pedophilia is okay as long as the
President believes it is necessary to save the nation? That my friends, as
absurd as it sounds, is the thrust of the logic underpining the arguments
Woo and his buddies are making. Their assault on the traditional
conservative view that the power of Federal Government should be limited is
truly frightening. In the name of saving the nation they insist that
international accords against torture and inhumane treatment no longer
apply. They are also on board for holding American citizens in prison
indefinitely without a chance to confront their accusers in court. If it is
done in the name of "national security" it is okay.

It is too bad that the term "fascism" is such a hot button term, because it
is a word that appears to accurately define Yoo's views on Presidential
supremacy. I guess we are resigned to labeling him a neo-conservative
imperialist, because he believes that the President's status as the
Commander in Chief grants an inherent manifest destiny to wield unbridled
power.

Joining Yoo's war wagon are David Rivkin and Lee Casey, who write in an
op-ed in today's NY Times that the President can collect foreign
intelligence, even in the United States, without worrying himself about
pesky laws and bureaucratic hurdles.

How do they justify this? Because they believe in the myth that we live in
a "new day and age" where the threats move so fast we can't be troubled
with legal contraints. According to Rivkin and Casey,

Although the administration could have sought such warrants, it chose not
to for good reasons. The procedures under the surveillance act are
streamlined, but nevertheless involve a number of bureaucratic steps.
Furthermore, the FISA court is not a rubber stamp and may well decline to
issue warrants even when wartime necessity compels surveillance. More to
the point, the surveillance act was designed for the intricate "spy versus
spy" world of the cold war, where move and countermove could be counted in
days and hours, rather than minutes and seconds. It was not drafted to deal
with the collection of intelligence involving the enemy's military
operations in wartime, when information must be put to immediate use.

I realize that Yoo is a relative youngster and was barely able to legally
drink when the Soviet Union collapsed and does not remember the Cold War,
but what is Rivkin's excuse? Amnesia? The "neo-conservative imperialists"
live in a fantasy world where terrorism is the most deadly, horrific threat
we have ever faced. Heavens, it is far worse than anything we faced back in
the good old days of the Cold War. Yes sir, we only had thousands of
nuclear tipped missiles on a hair trigger pointed at each other. Let's not
forget the B-52s that were aloft with bombs in their bellies. Goodness
gracious, that's not the kind of threat that requires quick action or fail
safe communication system, such as a "hotline" is it?

It would help if we could put the threat of terrorism in a proper
historical perspective rather than create a fantasy land of fear. While
there is no denying that the radical Muslims would like to cause us great
harm, they do not have an air force with long range bombers nor do they
have an armada of aircraft carriers. They also do not have submarines armed
with submarine launched ballistic missiles. Their ability to attack us is
greatly constrained. Even if they get their hands on one or two nuclear
devices, they face significant obstacles delivering them. Let's not ignore
this threat, but neither should we surrender our civil rights to it just
because we're afraid.

Yet, night after night we are confronted with some thick headed TV
reporters and pundits who repeat the nonsense that because the threat is
new spying is justified. Enough already! We can accept the fact that
terrorism is a threat that must be taken seriously but it should not be
employed as an excuse to pursue any activity that is cloaked in the aura of
"security". If we use the fear of terrorism to excuse torture and permanent
imprisonment then we are only a hop-skip-and-a-jump to making sex with
children okay as long as the President believes it will keep us safe from
Osama.  ---  Larry Johnson 


--- Platinum Xpress/Win/WINServer v3.0pr5
 * Origin: Try Our Web Based QWK: DOCSPLACE.ORG (1:123/140)