Yesterday Barack Obama spoke about the Christmas Day bombing attempt by Umar Abdulmuttallab. He did something rarely seen in these days by a politician - he took responsibility. Using a phrase borrowed from Harry Truman, Obama stated that "The buck stops with me." He then went on to point out that this was a series of screw ups that culminated in a person already on watch lists being allowed to board a plane with explosives. Pettiness, infighting and human error all seemed to play a part in the act. Since Christmas Day there have been a series of events at various airports that show the generally shoddy nature of security.
But it was not just the taking of responsibility that made this speech noteworthy While stating that "We are at war," Obama also stated that we would be "no siege mentality." In a stark contrast to the previous administration Obama advocated that we not panic and be ruled by fear. In refusing to make our remaining liberties sacrificial lambs in the name of the illusion of safety, Obama has taken a step towards restoring the belief in the values on which the country was founded. It is these actions, taking steps towards restoring our democracy that the last administration so trampled that have been his most important actions since taking office.
By refusing to accept the notion that we must live as we are under siege at all times, Obama also took a step towards the ultimate defeat of al-Qaeda. Turning the country into a military police state and shredding the Constitution in the name of security is not what a strong leader would do. That is what Bush tried to do - he tried to act strong because he felt he was weak. Obama did the converse. By stating that we are going to be true to our values, Obama showed real strength and a confidence in the underpinnings of our nation. A confidence that all of those who supported the Patriot Act and advocated surrendering our liberties in the name of security did not and do not have.
In taking the occasion to further announce that Guantanamo would be closed, he demonstrated a further commitment to the rule of law. This event could have provided a perfect excuse to delay or stop the closing of Gitmo, but instead, he used it as an opportunity to reaffirm a commitment to the legal process. It should be noted that Abdulmuttallab has reportedly been providing a great deal of intelligence completely within legal confines.
This speech is being examined for what it says about security. The truth is, no matter how secure, no matter what we do, something will eventually happen. The important part of what Obama said is that it signaled a change to a view that is consistent with the purported values of our country. In refusing to undermine them, not only refusing to go further, but pulling back on the mentality that sacrifices liberty for security he has already surpassed his predecessor in understanding what it takes for a country to be great.
Let's hope Dick Cheney shuts up and goes back to an undisclosed location.
Showing posts with label Guantanamo. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Guantanamo. Show all posts
Friday, January 8, 2010
Friday, June 5, 2009
The Power of Rhetoric
Barack Obama demonstrated yesterday that rhetoric can matter. In a speech delivered at Cairo University in Egypt, he essentially re-ordered the direction of American foreign policy. Several statements can be given as evidence.
On two occasions he used the term "Palestine" in such a way as to elevate the Palestinian state to a current reality on an even footing with Israel. Use of the phrase will have greater reverberations in the Middle East than in the U.S. Further, he openly rebuked Israel for continuing to expand the settlements. This public flogging of Israel was a further sign that there is a different direction in this policy. In recognizing the plight of the Palestinians in a manner that no American president has ever done, he signalled a willingness to confront one of the major conflicts underlying all the other conflict in the Middle East.
He openly condemned torture and unequivocally stated that he would close Guantanamo by early next year. The Iraq War was referenced as a "war of choice." In all of these statements he not only refuted the Bush Doctrine, he refuted the whole approach of the Bush (mis)Administration. Obama also demonstrated a recognition that these efforts by Bush-Cheney served to further alienate the Arab and Islamic worlds.
He directly confronted stereotypes of both Islam and America as counterproductive. In so doing, he served to isolate the fanatics from the moderates, rather than driving them together. One of the major effects of the Bush-Cheney approach to Islamic radicalism has been to cause moderate Muslims, who would normally reject the extremists, to at least tacitly support them because of their anger at the actions at Abu Ghraib, Gitmo, etc. Referring to "Holocaust deniers," he made a not-so-subtle jab at Ahmadinejad in a manner as to align him with the marginalized extremists just ahead of the coming elections.
He extended a hand to Iran with a defense of its right to have nuclear power, and then drew a line concerning nuclear weapons. In a deft maneuver that recognized the difficulty of the only nation that has ever used atomic weapons telling others not to build them, he took the opportunity to advocate a nuclear free future. Idealistic rhetoric not likely to happen in the foreseeable future, yet, a necessary statement to stake out a strategy that begins by making sure no other nations join the already too large nuclear club.
The most stunning revelation made by Obama was an open admission that the United States had played a part in the overthrow of Mohammad Mosaddeq and the government of Iran. This coup directly led to the installation of the Shah of Iran, Reza Pahlavi to the Peacock Throne. The support of the U.S. for the Shah is what ultimately led to the Islamic Revolution that occurred under Ayatollah Khomeini. In acknowledging this bit of history Obama demonstrated to the Persians that the tensions of the present have a historical basis that must be addressed in a truthful and cooperative manner.
This is the speech that George Bush should have given after 9/11. Of course, it would not have been possible for him to do so. This speech required a knowledge and understanding of history, an awareness of other cultures, and a thoughtfulness that Bush did not possess. Had such an awareness of the complexities and realities of the multiple interrelated conflicts in the Middle East been elucidated at that time, where might we be now? Instead we got, "Bring it on."
On two occasions he used the term "Palestine" in such a way as to elevate the Palestinian state to a current reality on an even footing with Israel. Use of the phrase will have greater reverberations in the Middle East than in the U.S. Further, he openly rebuked Israel for continuing to expand the settlements. This public flogging of Israel was a further sign that there is a different direction in this policy. In recognizing the plight of the Palestinians in a manner that no American president has ever done, he signalled a willingness to confront one of the major conflicts underlying all the other conflict in the Middle East.
He openly condemned torture and unequivocally stated that he would close Guantanamo by early next year. The Iraq War was referenced as a "war of choice." In all of these statements he not only refuted the Bush Doctrine, he refuted the whole approach of the Bush (mis)Administration. Obama also demonstrated a recognition that these efforts by Bush-Cheney served to further alienate the Arab and Islamic worlds.
He directly confronted stereotypes of both Islam and America as counterproductive. In so doing, he served to isolate the fanatics from the moderates, rather than driving them together. One of the major effects of the Bush-Cheney approach to Islamic radicalism has been to cause moderate Muslims, who would normally reject the extremists, to at least tacitly support them because of their anger at the actions at Abu Ghraib, Gitmo, etc. Referring to "Holocaust deniers," he made a not-so-subtle jab at Ahmadinejad in a manner as to align him with the marginalized extremists just ahead of the coming elections.
He extended a hand to Iran with a defense of its right to have nuclear power, and then drew a line concerning nuclear weapons. In a deft maneuver that recognized the difficulty of the only nation that has ever used atomic weapons telling others not to build them, he took the opportunity to advocate a nuclear free future. Idealistic rhetoric not likely to happen in the foreseeable future, yet, a necessary statement to stake out a strategy that begins by making sure no other nations join the already too large nuclear club.
The most stunning revelation made by Obama was an open admission that the United States had played a part in the overthrow of Mohammad Mosaddeq and the government of Iran. This coup directly led to the installation of the Shah of Iran, Reza Pahlavi to the Peacock Throne. The support of the U.S. for the Shah is what ultimately led to the Islamic Revolution that occurred under Ayatollah Khomeini. In acknowledging this bit of history Obama demonstrated to the Persians that the tensions of the present have a historical basis that must be addressed in a truthful and cooperative manner.
This is the speech that George Bush should have given after 9/11. Of course, it would not have been possible for him to do so. This speech required a knowledge and understanding of history, an awareness of other cultures, and a thoughtfulness that Bush did not possess. Had such an awareness of the complexities and realities of the multiple interrelated conflicts in the Middle East been elucidated at that time, where might we be now? Instead we got, "Bring it on."
Tuesday, March 31, 2009
Es Verdad? Spain Steps Forward
Will there be justice at last? It is being widely reported that Spanish courts are soon to indict former Bush (mis)Administration members, Alberto Gonzalez, John Yoo, David Addington, Douglas Feith, Jay Bybee and William Haynes II for their part in the torture of persons held in U.S. custody. Gonzalo Boye, the lawyer who filed the suit, submitted a complaint on behalf of five Spanish citizens held in Guantanamo. The case is expected to be heard before Baltazar Garzon, the judge who brought the indictments against Pinochet.
There are two great questions lurking beneath the surface in all of this; why a Spanish court and why not Bush and Cheney as well?
The answer to the question of why a Spanish court is apparently because they take allegations of torture and the disregard of treaties seriously. Under international law it is the duty of the nation involved to investigate war crimes. Since it appears that there is no political will in the U.S. to follow through on these obligations, it seems that the Spanish are merely fulfilling their rightful role as a signatory of the Geneva Conventions given that the nation that should lead this prosecution is unwilling. Note that the Geneva Conventions require investigation and prosecution when credible allegations are made. Clearly, that legal hurdle has been surpassed long ago.
The second question, why not Bush and Cheney too, bears more scrutiny. Cheney has come as close to admitting and bragging about torture as it is possible. Bush has long justified any and all of his actions under the guise of his imperial presidency. Their very actions have destroyed the reputation of the country internationally and have sullied the nature of their offices. Their actions in causing an undermining of the protections of the Constitution on U.S. citizens through their wiretap and spying programs likely rise to the level of treason. Their part in the authorization of torture must be investigated if international law has any meaning.
Could it be that the Spanish courts are giving us our chance to get Bush and Cheney ourselves? Or are they bowing to political pressure in leaving them out of this. Americans who are upset by the Spanish taking these actions against members of the Bush (mis)Administration should demand that these actions be taken here. At present, the Spanish have been forced to take the lead. Will we do the right thing and take over as we should have long ago?
One more question: Why is it that right wingers who have cataleptic fits over the "rule of law," always seem to look the other way when it's their political compatriots who are breaking the law?
There are two great questions lurking beneath the surface in all of this; why a Spanish court and why not Bush and Cheney as well?
The answer to the question of why a Spanish court is apparently because they take allegations of torture and the disregard of treaties seriously. Under international law it is the duty of the nation involved to investigate war crimes. Since it appears that there is no political will in the U.S. to follow through on these obligations, it seems that the Spanish are merely fulfilling their rightful role as a signatory of the Geneva Conventions given that the nation that should lead this prosecution is unwilling. Note that the Geneva Conventions require investigation and prosecution when credible allegations are made. Clearly, that legal hurdle has been surpassed long ago.
The second question, why not Bush and Cheney too, bears more scrutiny. Cheney has come as close to admitting and bragging about torture as it is possible. Bush has long justified any and all of his actions under the guise of his imperial presidency. Their very actions have destroyed the reputation of the country internationally and have sullied the nature of their offices. Their actions in causing an undermining of the protections of the Constitution on U.S. citizens through their wiretap and spying programs likely rise to the level of treason. Their part in the authorization of torture must be investigated if international law has any meaning.
Could it be that the Spanish courts are giving us our chance to get Bush and Cheney ourselves? Or are they bowing to political pressure in leaving them out of this. Americans who are upset by the Spanish taking these actions against members of the Bush (mis)Administration should demand that these actions be taken here. At present, the Spanish have been forced to take the lead. Will we do the right thing and take over as we should have long ago?
One more question: Why is it that right wingers who have cataleptic fits over the "rule of law," always seem to look the other way when it's their political compatriots who are breaking the law?
Tuesday, February 24, 2009
Barack Botches Bagram
You either stand for human rights or you don't. After initially appearing to be on course to repair the damaged reputation of the United States as regards human rights, the Obama Administration has now blown it. Instead of following up on positive actions such as closing Guantanamo, the Department of Justice has ruled that human rights protections need not be extended to the 600 or so prisoners held in Bagram, Afghanistan.
Using rationales that are as pitiful as any offered by the Bush Administration, such as "it's a war zone," and "ongoing conflict," this sad ruling continues to perpetuate the active disregard for human rights that has damaged this country's international reputation. And for what purpose? Do we really believe that granting basic human rights to religious fanatics will damage our nation? Obama must realize that he was elected in part because people were fed up with just this sort of behavior committed in our name.
We are better than this, at least, we once were. Once a proud country that stood for human rights everywhere, we have become a fearful nation, afraid to live up to our own values.
Using rationales that are as pitiful as any offered by the Bush Administration, such as "it's a war zone," and "ongoing conflict," this sad ruling continues to perpetuate the active disregard for human rights that has damaged this country's international reputation. And for what purpose? Do we really believe that granting basic human rights to religious fanatics will damage our nation? Obama must realize that he was elected in part because people were fed up with just this sort of behavior committed in our name.
We are better than this, at least, we once were. Once a proud country that stood for human rights everywhere, we have become a fearful nation, afraid to live up to our own values.
Thursday, January 29, 2009
Change of Tone
Barack Obama appeared on the Al-Arabiya network for his first post-inaugural interview. This interview may have been the most significant action that he has taken since taking office. Coupled with his plans to close Guantanamo and prohibitions on torture, he is signaling a significant change of tone in American foreign policy.
In the interview, simply by stating that America is not an enemy of Islam, he did more to restore relations between the U.S. and the Arab world than all the cowboy diplomacy of the last eight years has accomplished. By emphasizing that he has respect for Muslims and Islam, he demonstrated an awareness and maturity long needed in the office of President. Indicating a willingness to work together he began to lay the groundwork for a meaningful resolution to a great deal of the world's conflict.
Moving beyond the simplistic notions of "evil doers" and "Islamo-fascists" that the previous administration was so found of using, (as a way of throwing gasoline on a fire), Obama demonstrated an understanding of the complexities of the Middle East. He also reversed the course of the American president being the best recruiting tool for al-Qaeda. The fanatics who need a complicit foil must be concerned.
Those who opposed the election of Obama because of his alleged Muslim ties should take note. It is his very awareness of the Islamic world, both through living in Indonesia and through actual contact with Muslims, that has enabled him to do this. His very election has challenged the underlying rationale that many of our most bitter enemies have held to justify their actions. Witness the absurd attack that Ayman al-Zawahiri recently made upon Obama where he tried to pit the words of Malcolm X against him (see Blog Post: Neither God nor Allah on their Side).
Serious discourse appears to be the new direction of foreign policy. For this and this alone I would like to applaud the change in tone that Obama has signaled. The journey of ten thousand miles starts with the first step, not the first bombing.
In the interview, simply by stating that America is not an enemy of Islam, he did more to restore relations between the U.S. and the Arab world than all the cowboy diplomacy of the last eight years has accomplished. By emphasizing that he has respect for Muslims and Islam, he demonstrated an awareness and maturity long needed in the office of President. Indicating a willingness to work together he began to lay the groundwork for a meaningful resolution to a great deal of the world's conflict.
Moving beyond the simplistic notions of "evil doers" and "Islamo-fascists" that the previous administration was so found of using, (as a way of throwing gasoline on a fire), Obama demonstrated an understanding of the complexities of the Middle East. He also reversed the course of the American president being the best recruiting tool for al-Qaeda. The fanatics who need a complicit foil must be concerned.
Those who opposed the election of Obama because of his alleged Muslim ties should take note. It is his very awareness of the Islamic world, both through living in Indonesia and through actual contact with Muslims, that has enabled him to do this. His very election has challenged the underlying rationale that many of our most bitter enemies have held to justify their actions. Witness the absurd attack that Ayman al-Zawahiri recently made upon Obama where he tried to pit the words of Malcolm X against him (see Blog Post: Neither God nor Allah on their Side).
Serious discourse appears to be the new direction of foreign policy. For this and this alone I would like to applaud the change in tone that Obama has signaled. The journey of ten thousand miles starts with the first step, not the first bombing.
Tuesday, January 27, 2009
Obama's First Week
On Inauguration Day I decided not to comment on any decisions, pronouncements or policies until at least one week had passed. I will now join the cacophony with my thoughts on the first week. Before any evaluation of decisions I would first like to note that the sheer volume of work turned out by the Obama Administration in its first week appears to be about six months worth of policy from the previous administration of George number 2. There is so much that I have resorted to a mere listing of the various actions.
The Good:
- Begin the Closing of Guantanamo. Necessary if we are to ever begin the restoration of the moral integrity of our nation and honor our treaty obligations.
- Categorically Prohibit Torture. Adherence to the Army Field Manual and International law is beginning to be restored.
- Restore Transparency to Government. After eight years of a secretive government that classified everything including the lunch menu, this is unbelievable.
- Pay Freeze for Staff. Symbolic, but at least in the right direction. Were they going to get a raise anytime soon? They just started.
- Recognition of the Depth of the Economic Crisis. Compared to the floundering of the Bush Administration which managed to blow another $350 billion in its final days by giving it to banks with no effort at accountability, even acknowledging that the problem is serious and long term was a welcome step forward.
- Advocacy for Green Infrastructure. Needs to push for even more. Solar panels on 100 million houses and building would sure stimulate the economy and provide for a greater degree of energy independence (see previous blogs and link "The Myth of Energy Independence," to see why this won't happen).
- Al- Arabiya interview that set a new tone for American foreign policy. In a complete about face of the previous administration's policy, Obama set the stage for an effort at resolution of the long standing grievances between the rest of the world and the U.S. That's right, the whole world. Bush has turned everyone against us, even putative allies. Obama already possesses greater stature on the international stage than Bush ever had.
The Bad:
- Treasury Secretary nominee Tim Geithner, who will oversee the IRS, did not pay his taxes.
- Bill Lynn, ex-lobbyist for Raytheon, nominated to number two post in the Pentagon. Violating the pledge of no lobbyist in the administration, Lynn requires an exception to the ethics rules outlined by Obama.
- Economic Compromise: his efforts to gain GOP support for the economy recovery will only be weakened by attempting to enlist their support. As a party they have no coherent philosophy and can only result to being in opposition. Mitigating this is his "I won," statement that suggests he may impose his will upon them if they continue to obfuscate.
The Ugly:
- Bush, Cheney, and the rest of the gang at the OK Corral are still walking around free. I can't tell if Obama is just trying to stay clear of the issue and let Congress do the work of investigating the Bush (mis)Administration or if he doesn't have the will to defend the Constitution. If he believes that what they did were crimes and he does anything to prevent their prosecution, he is acting as an accessory.
- Bombing of Pakistan by CIA. Allegedly he was briefed, so it would appear he gave his consent, unless, of course, the CIA is running its own war.
& We'll See:
- Iraq: So far, just talk. When do we leave?
All in all a very good start. Clearly though, this first week, especially Pakistan, shows us that change will not be immediate or complete. However, compared to his predecessor, he is inconceivably better.
I'm sure I've missed many things. As I said it was a busy week. It good to have a President who is not an embarrassment. Above all else, this makes me proud to have Obama in office. Also sad, because I realize how much George W. Bush destroyed this country. We are now proud to simply not be embarrassed.
The Good:
- Begin the Closing of Guantanamo. Necessary if we are to ever begin the restoration of the moral integrity of our nation and honor our treaty obligations.
- Categorically Prohibit Torture. Adherence to the Army Field Manual and International law is beginning to be restored.
- Restore Transparency to Government. After eight years of a secretive government that classified everything including the lunch menu, this is unbelievable.
- Pay Freeze for Staff. Symbolic, but at least in the right direction. Were they going to get a raise anytime soon? They just started.
- Recognition of the Depth of the Economic Crisis. Compared to the floundering of the Bush Administration which managed to blow another $350 billion in its final days by giving it to banks with no effort at accountability, even acknowledging that the problem is serious and long term was a welcome step forward.
- Advocacy for Green Infrastructure. Needs to push for even more. Solar panels on 100 million houses and building would sure stimulate the economy and provide for a greater degree of energy independence (see previous blogs and link "The Myth of Energy Independence," to see why this won't happen).
- Al- Arabiya interview that set a new tone for American foreign policy. In a complete about face of the previous administration's policy, Obama set the stage for an effort at resolution of the long standing grievances between the rest of the world and the U.S. That's right, the whole world. Bush has turned everyone against us, even putative allies. Obama already possesses greater stature on the international stage than Bush ever had.
The Bad:
- Treasury Secretary nominee Tim Geithner, who will oversee the IRS, did not pay his taxes.
- Bill Lynn, ex-lobbyist for Raytheon, nominated to number two post in the Pentagon. Violating the pledge of no lobbyist in the administration, Lynn requires an exception to the ethics rules outlined by Obama.
- Economic Compromise: his efforts to gain GOP support for the economy recovery will only be weakened by attempting to enlist their support. As a party they have no coherent philosophy and can only result to being in opposition. Mitigating this is his "I won," statement that suggests he may impose his will upon them if they continue to obfuscate.
The Ugly:
- Bush, Cheney, and the rest of the gang at the OK Corral are still walking around free. I can't tell if Obama is just trying to stay clear of the issue and let Congress do the work of investigating the Bush (mis)Administration or if he doesn't have the will to defend the Constitution. If he believes that what they did were crimes and he does anything to prevent their prosecution, he is acting as an accessory.
- Bombing of Pakistan by CIA. Allegedly he was briefed, so it would appear he gave his consent, unless, of course, the CIA is running its own war.
& We'll See:
- Iraq: So far, just talk. When do we leave?
All in all a very good start. Clearly though, this first week, especially Pakistan, shows us that change will not be immediate or complete. However, compared to his predecessor, he is inconceivably better.
I'm sure I've missed many things. As I said it was a busy week. It good to have a President who is not an embarrassment. Above all else, this makes me proud to have Obama in office. Also sad, because I realize how much George W. Bush destroyed this country. We are now proud to simply not be embarrassed.
Monday, January 19, 2009
A Nightmare Ends
It seems fitting that the official holiday celebrating the 80th birthday of Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. also marks the final day of the Bush (mis)Administration. While Dr. King famously had a dream, George Bush has given us a nightmare.
An ABC News poll, released today, showed that only 22 % of the nation approves of the job Bush is doing, while 73 % disapproves. My only question - Who are these 22 %.
Inheriting a budget surplus, Bush has driven us to the brink of recession. He took all the goodwill directed towards the country post 9/11 and squandered it with bullying and cowboy diplomacy. Promising peace in the Middle East, his final days saw the Palestinian-Israeli conflict boil over. His efforts in encouraging democracy led to the election of Hezbollah and Hamas. The privatization of the government led to a "heck of a job" during Katrina. The nation that was once the champion of liberty and civil rights opened a torture chamber at Guantanamo.
How is it possible that even 22 % of the country APPROVES of the job Bush has done? I wouldn't think it possible that even 22 % of his immediate family could approve of his work.
As the administration of George W. Bush finally draws to a conclusion and we awake from our national nightmare, the words of the Dr. King seem all to fitting: "Free at last, free at last. Thank God Almighty, We Are Free at Last."
An ABC News poll, released today, showed that only 22 % of the nation approves of the job Bush is doing, while 73 % disapproves. My only question - Who are these 22 %.
Inheriting a budget surplus, Bush has driven us to the brink of recession. He took all the goodwill directed towards the country post 9/11 and squandered it with bullying and cowboy diplomacy. Promising peace in the Middle East, his final days saw the Palestinian-Israeli conflict boil over. His efforts in encouraging democracy led to the election of Hezbollah and Hamas. The privatization of the government led to a "heck of a job" during Katrina. The nation that was once the champion of liberty and civil rights opened a torture chamber at Guantanamo.
How is it possible that even 22 % of the country APPROVES of the job Bush has done? I wouldn't think it possible that even 22 % of his immediate family could approve of his work.
As the administration of George W. Bush finally draws to a conclusion and we awake from our national nightmare, the words of the Dr. King seem all to fitting: "Free at last, free at last. Thank God Almighty, We Are Free at Last."
Thursday, January 15, 2009
Bush: The Legacy
The legacy tour continues, as Bush, Cheney and their minions attempt to manipulate memories and reality. "It all went well, really. History will vindicate us, you'll see." Bush even claimed in his press conference that the response to Katrina was "pretty good." Delusion or lie.
A complete litany of the failures of the Bush Administration is too long to begin. Even the list of major debacles has grown so long that it becomes impossible to recite them without leaving out something obvious. The threats to our rights, and the acts of utter disregard for the Constitution and our ideals, are surely even more numerous.
The legacy of the Bush Presidency though, can be summed up by the intersection of a number of the various domains of failure perfected by this thoroughly incompetent administration. To begin, in the final week of his presidency, Osama bin Laden releases another audiotape, continuing to taunt Bush. The hunt for bin Laden, marked by all the swagger and hubris we have come to expect from the Decider, serves as a symbol of the utter incompetence of this administration.
The inability to capture bin Laden was accompanied, over the years, by an ever frantic effort to ramp up fears of future attacks, and to justify all manner of acts antithetical to the professed ideals of this country. Torture was justified and denied at the same time. The moral authority of the nation was destroyed here and abroad.
Now that Judge Susan J. Crawford, who oversees the military trials at Guantanamo, has stated unequivocally that torture has occurred at that facility, the legacy tour will continue to point out there have been no attacks since 9/11. Forget that 9/11 occurred on their watch and the anthrax attacks occurred soon after. Know that the torture at Gitmo and Abu Ghraib ended serving more as a recruitment tool for al-Qaeda than it made anyone safe.
Finally though, the legacy of the Bush Administration can be seen in the complete lack of regard for which America is now seen in the world community. Rather than making the world or America safer, he has inflamed the very soul of the world. His eight years of dogmatic, ideological imperialism have confirmed the worst suspicions about America for its detractors. His incompetence has compounded the multitude of errors. Here we are, more than seven years after 9/11 and he still hasn't caught a six feet, five inch guy on dialysis who is one of the most recognizable figures in the world.
Bush's narrow minded view of the world fostered an "us vs. them" mentality that ultimately made us all less safe. He had furthered the likelihood of violence and confrontation in the world. A strong case can be made that the current actions in the Gaza Strip are occurring precisely because Bush is about to leave office. And remember, he was going to bring peace to the Middle East.
Incompetence. Torture. World Stature Destroyed. Quite a legacy. Oh, and I forgot the economy.
A complete litany of the failures of the Bush Administration is too long to begin. Even the list of major debacles has grown so long that it becomes impossible to recite them without leaving out something obvious. The threats to our rights, and the acts of utter disregard for the Constitution and our ideals, are surely even more numerous.
The legacy of the Bush Presidency though, can be summed up by the intersection of a number of the various domains of failure perfected by this thoroughly incompetent administration. To begin, in the final week of his presidency, Osama bin Laden releases another audiotape, continuing to taunt Bush. The hunt for bin Laden, marked by all the swagger and hubris we have come to expect from the Decider, serves as a symbol of the utter incompetence of this administration.
The inability to capture bin Laden was accompanied, over the years, by an ever frantic effort to ramp up fears of future attacks, and to justify all manner of acts antithetical to the professed ideals of this country. Torture was justified and denied at the same time. The moral authority of the nation was destroyed here and abroad.
Now that Judge Susan J. Crawford, who oversees the military trials at Guantanamo, has stated unequivocally that torture has occurred at that facility, the legacy tour will continue to point out there have been no attacks since 9/11. Forget that 9/11 occurred on their watch and the anthrax attacks occurred soon after. Know that the torture at Gitmo and Abu Ghraib ended serving more as a recruitment tool for al-Qaeda than it made anyone safe.
Finally though, the legacy of the Bush Administration can be seen in the complete lack of regard for which America is now seen in the world community. Rather than making the world or America safer, he has inflamed the very soul of the world. His eight years of dogmatic, ideological imperialism have confirmed the worst suspicions about America for its detractors. His incompetence has compounded the multitude of errors. Here we are, more than seven years after 9/11 and he still hasn't caught a six feet, five inch guy on dialysis who is one of the most recognizable figures in the world.
Bush's narrow minded view of the world fostered an "us vs. them" mentality that ultimately made us all less safe. He had furthered the likelihood of violence and confrontation in the world. A strong case can be made that the current actions in the Gaza Strip are occurring precisely because Bush is about to leave office. And remember, he was going to bring peace to the Middle East.
Incompetence. Torture. World Stature Destroyed. Quite a legacy. Oh, and I forgot the economy.
Monday, December 15, 2008
The Bottom of Our Shoes
Bush's surprise visit to Iraq, turned into a surprise on him. An Iraqi journalist, Muntader al-Zaidi, a correspondent for Al Baghdadia, tossed his shoes at Bush. The ultimate insult in Iraq, it means the recipient is considered lower than dirt. Mr. al-Zaidi is now being held by the Maliki government although it is unclear what law he has broken.
Bush, glib as always, commented that the shoe was a "size 10." The shoe would have had to have been Shaquille O' Neal's (size 22) to have matched the world's disdain. But the Decider doesn't get it. He's been living in a brush bubble in Crawford.
The media seems to be missing the message in this story. The U.S. press seems to be covering the story primarily as a filler. Mostly, it is approached as a bizarre type of human interest story. As I write this, Contessa Brewer is asking on MSNBC if the shoes were his own or if he brought in an extra pair. What next, a penetrating discussion of the brand of shoe? An Iraqi journalist commented that al-Zaidi has "ruined his career."
Nothing could be further off. Muntader al-Zaidi has likely already become a household name throughout the Middle East and soon, throughout the world. The story here is that someone has finally had the nerve to express the outrage the Bush Administration so richly deserves. George Bush has nearly destroyed the world and he must be remembered as such.
Bush's current effort to rewrite history must not be allowed to pass. For eight years George Bush has shown complete disregard for the opinions and people of the world. He has shredded the Constitution, claimed the powers of a king and ruined the reputation of America in the world.
As al-Zaidi threw his shoes he proclaimed in Arabic, "This is a gift from the Iraqi's, this is the farewell kiss, you dog!" On the second shoe: "This is from the widows, the orphans and those who were killed in Iraq." Muntader al-Zaidi spoke for the Iraqi people and that is why thousands are now in the streets of Baghdad protesting his detention.
Those of us who have opposed Bush as he lied us into war, opened prisons to circumvent U.S. law (Guantanamo), rationalized torture and generally dared an impotent Congress to stop him, now are coming to terms with the fact that he has gotten away with it. I used to think there would be leaders who would step forward to oppose him, that his crimes would eventually be exposed, even that he might have to answer for his crimes against humanity before a War Crimes Tribunal. Now, it is clear that he will return to his silver plated life and a village in Texas will regain its idiot.
Muntader al-Zaini has shown us the way. The Iraqi insult of the bottom of the shoe must become our own. No need to throw it, just show it. Should any of us be so unfortunate as to find ourselves in the presence of the "W", present the bottom of your shoe, and hold it as high as you can reach.
Bush, glib as always, commented that the shoe was a "size 10." The shoe would have had to have been Shaquille O' Neal's (size 22) to have matched the world's disdain. But the Decider doesn't get it. He's been living in a brush bubble in Crawford.
The media seems to be missing the message in this story. The U.S. press seems to be covering the story primarily as a filler. Mostly, it is approached as a bizarre type of human interest story. As I write this, Contessa Brewer is asking on MSNBC if the shoes were his own or if he brought in an extra pair. What next, a penetrating discussion of the brand of shoe? An Iraqi journalist commented that al-Zaidi has "ruined his career."
Nothing could be further off. Muntader al-Zaidi has likely already become a household name throughout the Middle East and soon, throughout the world. The story here is that someone has finally had the nerve to express the outrage the Bush Administration so richly deserves. George Bush has nearly destroyed the world and he must be remembered as such.
Bush's current effort to rewrite history must not be allowed to pass. For eight years George Bush has shown complete disregard for the opinions and people of the world. He has shredded the Constitution, claimed the powers of a king and ruined the reputation of America in the world.
As al-Zaidi threw his shoes he proclaimed in Arabic, "This is a gift from the Iraqi's, this is the farewell kiss, you dog!" On the second shoe: "This is from the widows, the orphans and those who were killed in Iraq." Muntader al-Zaidi spoke for the Iraqi people and that is why thousands are now in the streets of Baghdad protesting his detention.
Those of us who have opposed Bush as he lied us into war, opened prisons to circumvent U.S. law (Guantanamo), rationalized torture and generally dared an impotent Congress to stop him, now are coming to terms with the fact that he has gotten away with it. I used to think there would be leaders who would step forward to oppose him, that his crimes would eventually be exposed, even that he might have to answer for his crimes against humanity before a War Crimes Tribunal. Now, it is clear that he will return to his silver plated life and a village in Texas will regain its idiot.
Muntader al-Zaini has shown us the way. The Iraqi insult of the bottom of the shoe must become our own. No need to throw it, just show it. Should any of us be so unfortunate as to find ourselves in the presence of the "W", present the bottom of your shoe, and hold it as high as you can reach.
Wednesday, November 12, 2008
A Good Place to Start
In the first week after his election, advisers for Barack Obama have begun to "leak" his plans to close the disgrace of a prison at Guantanomo Bay. Undoing the damage of the Bush Administration will likely be a challenge that will require supreme efforts by Obama during the next four years. Bush has screwed up so many things it is hard to know where to begin.
Closing the prison at Guantanamo is a good place to start. Guantanamo or "Gitmo," as it has come to be called, is symbolic of the utter disregard for human rights and the rule of law that has pervaded the Bush Administration. Gitmo exists primarily as a means to evade U.S. laws concerning the right to trial and fair treatment, ignore centuries of law going back to the Magna Carta as regards the right of habeas corpus, and to circumvent international law regarding the proper treatment of prisoners and prisoners of war.
When Alberto Gonzalez referred to the Geneva Conventions as "quaint," he effectively exposed the true disdain for human rights that exists within the Bush Administration. Gitmo has been a blemish on our international reputation and a stain on our collective psyche. Too many, especially those within Bush's own party, have failed to question what this aberrant approach to incarceration has inflicted upon the nation. More than any other single issue, the prison at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba has sullied our national reputation and made the U.S. appear a hypocrite on the world stage.
As stated, closing this disgrace is a good place to start to regain our standing in the world. Beyond that, it is also a good place to begin to reclaim the values that made this country great. Standing for human rights and justice, fighting tyranny and extending a helping hand to those in need are all values once associated with this country. Unfortunately, the Bush Administration has destroyed all of these notions, both at home and abroad. To move forward, Obama must consciously undo the damage done by Bush.
Closing Gitmo is only a start, but a very good one.
Closing the prison at Guantanamo is a good place to start. Guantanamo or "Gitmo," as it has come to be called, is symbolic of the utter disregard for human rights and the rule of law that has pervaded the Bush Administration. Gitmo exists primarily as a means to evade U.S. laws concerning the right to trial and fair treatment, ignore centuries of law going back to the Magna Carta as regards the right of habeas corpus, and to circumvent international law regarding the proper treatment of prisoners and prisoners of war.
When Alberto Gonzalez referred to the Geneva Conventions as "quaint," he effectively exposed the true disdain for human rights that exists within the Bush Administration. Gitmo has been a blemish on our international reputation and a stain on our collective psyche. Too many, especially those within Bush's own party, have failed to question what this aberrant approach to incarceration has inflicted upon the nation. More than any other single issue, the prison at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba has sullied our national reputation and made the U.S. appear a hypocrite on the world stage.
As stated, closing this disgrace is a good place to start to regain our standing in the world. Beyond that, it is also a good place to begin to reclaim the values that made this country great. Standing for human rights and justice, fighting tyranny and extending a helping hand to those in need are all values once associated with this country. Unfortunately, the Bush Administration has destroyed all of these notions, both at home and abroad. To move forward, Obama must consciously undo the damage done by Bush.
Closing Gitmo is only a start, but a very good one.
Monday, August 4, 2008
Dreyfus in Guantanamo
The Dreyfus Affair, in which a young French military officer of Jewish descent named Alfred Dreyfus was convicted of treason, still stands as a marker of the danger in accepting government proof as absolute in a political trial. Conviction largely centered around fabricated documents produced by military counter-intelligence. However, due to public outcry and later re-examination of the evidence, Alfred Dreyfus was acquitted.
Lucky for Dreyfus that he was in France in the 1890's rather than a prisoner of America during the early part of the 21st century. Prisoners held by America in Guantanamo have no expectation that there is any possibility that a miscarriage of justice will be overturned. Even the defendants attorneys are not allowed to see all of the evidence against them. How can any possible trial be fair under these conditions.?
Salim Hamdan, Osama bin Laden's driver, has just received a split verdict in his trial at Guantanamo. Even with secret testimony, coerced evidence and a trial where even full acquittal would have resulted in his continued imprisonment was labeled a "fair trial" by White House Spokesman Tony Fratto.
The FBI now assures us that Bruce Ivins was responsible for the anthrax attacks. Of course, they were also pretty sure when they closed in on his colleague Mark Hatfill. Most of the condemnation of Ivins seem to rely on the idea that he was mentally unstable. If so, why was a man this unstable given access and permitted to work with biological agents?
As I write this, it was just reported on MSNBC at approximately 9:40 am that a woman believed to be assisting al-Qaeda has just been taken into custody and is being brought to the U.S. Her family denies she has any connection to terrorism. Will we ever see the evidence?
France had the one Dreyfus. With have at least three good contenders at the moment and that's if we don't count the hundreds of others held in Guantanamo or spirited around the world in our secret prisons. History condemned France for the Dreyfus Affair. What will history say of this period in American history?
How much longer will we let our country commit atrocities and ignore our own laws and Constitution? As the Dreyfus Affair illustrates, subverting your own values serves no purpose other than gaining a badge of humiliation.
Lucky for Dreyfus that he was in France in the 1890's rather than a prisoner of America during the early part of the 21st century. Prisoners held by America in Guantanamo have no expectation that there is any possibility that a miscarriage of justice will be overturned. Even the defendants attorneys are not allowed to see all of the evidence against them. How can any possible trial be fair under these conditions.?
Salim Hamdan, Osama bin Laden's driver, has just received a split verdict in his trial at Guantanamo. Even with secret testimony, coerced evidence and a trial where even full acquittal would have resulted in his continued imprisonment was labeled a "fair trial" by White House Spokesman Tony Fratto.
The FBI now assures us that Bruce Ivins was responsible for the anthrax attacks. Of course, they were also pretty sure when they closed in on his colleague Mark Hatfill. Most of the condemnation of Ivins seem to rely on the idea that he was mentally unstable. If so, why was a man this unstable given access and permitted to work with biological agents?
As I write this, it was just reported on MSNBC at approximately 9:40 am that a woman believed to be assisting al-Qaeda has just been taken into custody and is being brought to the U.S. Her family denies she has any connection to terrorism. Will we ever see the evidence?
France had the one Dreyfus. With have at least three good contenders at the moment and that's if we don't count the hundreds of others held in Guantanamo or spirited around the world in our secret prisons. History condemned France for the Dreyfus Affair. What will history say of this period in American history?
How much longer will we let our country commit atrocities and ignore our own laws and Constitution? As the Dreyfus Affair illustrates, subverting your own values serves no purpose other than gaining a badge of humiliation.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
.jpg)
Posts
