Site Presented By
Saturday, Nov 7, 2009
heru-ur
Published Letters: 3872
As I read your work Glenn, I am reminded of the position that Richard Nixon held that an action could not be illegal if the President ordered it done. That position was considered radical back in those days and a majority of Americans opposed such totalitarian impulses.
I am afraid that the position of Mr. Nixon has now become the accepted norm for a majority of Americans. We are fighting the "great threat of Islamic terrorism" after all, and we may not survive the technological might of the desert horror. (rocket propelled camels?)
This move to an elected dictatorship has been long in coming and has many parents in both parties. You keep holding them to account Glenn, but they just do not seem to see how wrong these things you write about are.
---
how you suffered for your sanity
how you tried to set them free.
They would not listen
they're not
list'ning still
perhaps they never will.
"But in today's America, it's considered a real burden -- an unjust plight -- when put-upon high government officials such as Lewis Libby and terribly-burdened huge corporations such as AT&T have to incur some fees in order to win extraordinary government protection from consequences after they get caught deliberately and continuously breaking numerous federal laws." (Glenn Greenwald)
It seems that modern Americans find the constitution and any law that binds the power of the central government to be dangerous or odious. Both parties are attempting to build the idea that the central government (in the incarnation of whomever is president) is our protector, guardian, and savior. We seem to have not learned the lessons that were shown by the German's experience in the 1930s.
We need to learn that freedom and liberty are much more important than safety.
“By any metric, that is a humiliating track record. More importantly, it's a perfect museum exhibit to illustrate how the Democratic Party failed completely to provide any meaningful opposition to the extremism, excesses and abuses of the Bush years, instead enabling and endorsing those abuses when they weren't standing by meekly and quietly allowing it all to take root” (Glenn Greenwald)
-----
I have never understood why Democrats concede the moral position on war. It may be that any real restraint on our conduct is as odious to the Democratic Party as it is to the Republican Party, but I hope not. For at least a thousand, years mankind has claimed to believe in the “Just War Theory” to some degree or the other. Why not subject all past, present, and future national actions to scrutiny using JWT as a measure?
As written in Wikipedia, “Just War Theory” states that (1)the damage inflicted by the aggressor on the nation or community of nations must be lasting, grave, and certain; (2)all other means of putting an end to it must have been shown to be impractical or ineffective; (3)there must be serious prospects of success; (4)the use of arms must not produce evils and disorders graver than the evil to be eliminated. The power of modem means of destruction weighs very heavily in evaluating this condition.
By this measure, the war and occupation of Iraq is immoral on grounds that most Americans can see if it is presented correctly. However, the donkeys never seem to even try; at least not as a unified party. Why is that? We know that the GOP is rotting in the hands of neo-cons, but can the Democratic Party not still claim some morality?
National leaders love to claim that they are "religious" and love God. It is time to ask them to "walk that talk".
Glenn, when you meet with various leaders to plan strategy or to interview them, please ask if anyone believes in any constraints at all anymore. I may be a stranger in a very strange land, but I am hoping that the American Empire has not brainwashed all of us.
Another fine post Glenn.
As I understand you, we must fight to get the powers that be in the imperial city to honor, in a small way, the constitution of the US. I agree with you that this is necessary at this time, given the facts and history of the situation. However, it leads to a question that your background indicates that you can well answer. What good is the constitution?
I am serious. What good is a document that is rarely followed in the imperial city; it seems all political groups interpret the words of the document in accordance with their wants and desires -- if they even pretend to honor the document at all.
Perhaps we need to fight for a different system since the present one is just one evil followed by another.
Much of the initial coverage about Fort Hood turned out to be wrong. Is there anything wrong with that?
The accountability imposed by another country for the CIA's kidnapping and torture reveals much about our own.
Fox News' morning show plays to type, talking about whether Muslims in the Army should face "special debriefings"
The Maine fight was supposed to be the dress rehearsal for repealing California's Prop. 8 -- but gay marriage lost
Once one obtains Seriousness credentials in the Washington media, they are irrevocable no matter one's conduct.
Salon headlines in your mailbox
