Letters to the Editor
-
Tyranny for Dummies
...or another short-cut to tyranny.
Even women who have been raped have to face who they are accusing, even though I imagine for most women, next to the actual rape, it has to be the worst experience of their lives to once again re-experence the rape with public testimony in front of the man that brutalized them. We force women to go thru this because the Constitution demands over everything else, the right of the accused to face their accuser.
Imagine a person accused of rape, being held in custody but never tried because the state does not want to further hurt those they believe to have been raped. This is a valid concern emotionally, but then this means the accused have been sentenced without being tried.
Which is what we do with "non-combatants". ("non-combatants" - nice term which has no meaning outside of what Bush says it means at any given point in time.) The state makes an accusation, and then declares we cannot prove our case because it would hurt the state. Nice. And I say so what. Figure it out and take the pain as necessary. For those who have been raped, they know justice is messy and painful, and a fuk of a large burden is placed on them and the state in order to convict. But that is the price of living in a free society under the Constitution of the U.S.A. Those blind to this, are nothing more than petty wanna be tyrants.
On the behalf of national security, we do not want justice and the Constitution melting into a puddle of... I don't know what, but it's something pretty goddamn smelly.