There is now well-documented evidence that the Bush administration is running roughshod over the rule of law, demonstrated by actions such as its warrantless wiretapping and repeated court rebuffs on military tribunals. It is also clear that President Bush has seriously damaged the United States’ moral authority through use of torture, withholding the right to challenge detention and extraordinary rendition.
I would have therefore expected that the Democratic-led Congress would demand that Attorney General-designate Michael Mukasey unambiguously declare his opposition to these policies. But the apparent green light from the Senate Judiciary Committee to move forward on the nomination is not reassuring.
As it is clear from Mukasey’s testimony that he cannot be trusted to return integrity to the Department of Justice, he should not be confirmed.
Mukasey has been unable to decide if the practice of waterboarding is torture. Despite the fact that the State Department has criticized other countries for using it. Despite the fact that after World War II, the United States prosecuted Japanese soldiers for engaging in the practice against U.S. soldiers. Despite that fact that U.S. military officials have called it torture. Even administration apologist Senator John McCain has called it “very exquisite torture.” If Mukasey’s powers of inquiry are so feeble that he can’t collect the facts he needs to come to a decision, then surely he isn’t fit to lead the nation’s law enforcement activities.
Mukasey’s view of executive privilege has more far-reaching consequences for the principles which are the cornerstone of our country’s moral clarity—namely the rule of law. In his testimony, Mukasey stated that it is acceptable for the President to violate laws written by Congress, as long as his actions are within the Constitution. That is dangerous thinking for a country founded upon the separation of powers. It is precisely this arrogance on the part of the Bush administration—that believes it can ignore, rather than challenge, the legislative branch—that is seriously eroding the protection of our constitutional and civil rights.
Hopefully the Democratic controlled Congress will stand up to Bush’s attacks on our country’s principles—as the electorate signaled they wanted last November—by refusing to support the nomination of Michael Mukasey for Attorney General.
Showing posts with label Bush human rights. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Bush human rights. Show all posts
Wednesday, October 24, 2007
Monday, October 30, 2006
Liberty and justice for all; well, maybe not all.
I was in my daughters’ school the other day, and overheard the pledge of allegiance: “…with liberty and justice for all.” Unless, of course, you happen to be caught in the Bush administration’s war on terror dragnet. Then, in the name of protecting American values and liberty, you’re pretty much out of luck – it may even cost you your life.
You may be whisked away in secret to a foreign country like Syria to be tortured to give up information you don’t possess, as happened to Maher Arar, an innocent Canadian citizen who fell victim to the CIA practice of extraordinary rendition.
You may be locked up for a month without access to legal counsel through abuses of the material witness statue, as happened to Abdallah Higazy. He is an Egyptian citizen who was staying in a New York city hotel room on 9/11, in whose room the previous occupant left an aviation radio that was deemed suspicious.
Or you may be the taxi-driver Mr. Dilawar, who died in an Afghan prison after being assaulted and tortured – even though investigators had concluded that he was almost certainly innocent of involvement in the attack for which he was being held. Or perhaps you were, until recently, in a secret CIA prison, where the Bush administration wanted to engage in interrogation practices that would not be deemed acceptable by civilized countries around the world.
More likely, you’re one of those still languishing in Guantánamo in legal limbo, not charged with any crime, with no recourse to challenge their detention. Why? Because the right to file for a writ of habeas corpus no longer exists for those deemed to be illegal enemy combatants, thanks to the “new and improved” military tribunals conceived of by the Bush administration (after its first attempt was found to be unconstitutional). Has Bush so terrorized Americans that we don’t think twice about locking somebody up indefinitely, before their guilt has been established?
I don’t consider myself to be soft on terrorists, and I want the U.S. to be aggressive in hunting down and prosecuting them. But I also want our country to be able to look itself in the mirror, and be able to say we are doing so in a manner consistent with our principals. We are not infallible; we do make mistakes, we have already made some egregious ones. Not everybody that we think is a terrorist – even under reasonable assumptions – is. That is why our judicial system is built on a foundation of due process.
Beyond the liberties and lives of innocents that have been lost, the Bush administration policies have cost America’s reputation in the world dearly. As Colin Powell remarked recently, “the world is beginning to doubt the moral basis of our fight against terrorism.” This, and Bush’s failed strategy in Iraq, have increased the threat from terrorism, as the recent National Intelligence Estimate made clear.
Throughout these past five troubling years, the Republican congress has done virtually nothing to hold Bush accountable for his misguided and incompetent strategies in the war on terror. That is why I’m voting for Ned Lamont for senator and Diane Farrell for representative in next week’s midterm election. It’s time to send legislators to Washington who will alter the disastrous course along which Bush is leading us.
You may be whisked away in secret to a foreign country like Syria to be tortured to give up information you don’t possess, as happened to Maher Arar, an innocent Canadian citizen who fell victim to the CIA practice of extraordinary rendition.
You may be locked up for a month without access to legal counsel through abuses of the material witness statue, as happened to Abdallah Higazy. He is an Egyptian citizen who was staying in a New York city hotel room on 9/11, in whose room the previous occupant left an aviation radio that was deemed suspicious.
Or you may be the taxi-driver Mr. Dilawar, who died in an Afghan prison after being assaulted and tortured – even though investigators had concluded that he was almost certainly innocent of involvement in the attack for which he was being held. Or perhaps you were, until recently, in a secret CIA prison, where the Bush administration wanted to engage in interrogation practices that would not be deemed acceptable by civilized countries around the world.
More likely, you’re one of those still languishing in Guantánamo in legal limbo, not charged with any crime, with no recourse to challenge their detention. Why? Because the right to file for a writ of habeas corpus no longer exists for those deemed to be illegal enemy combatants, thanks to the “new and improved” military tribunals conceived of by the Bush administration (after its first attempt was found to be unconstitutional). Has Bush so terrorized Americans that we don’t think twice about locking somebody up indefinitely, before their guilt has been established?
I don’t consider myself to be soft on terrorists, and I want the U.S. to be aggressive in hunting down and prosecuting them. But I also want our country to be able to look itself in the mirror, and be able to say we are doing so in a manner consistent with our principals. We are not infallible; we do make mistakes, we have already made some egregious ones. Not everybody that we think is a terrorist – even under reasonable assumptions – is. That is why our judicial system is built on a foundation of due process.
Beyond the liberties and lives of innocents that have been lost, the Bush administration policies have cost America’s reputation in the world dearly. As Colin Powell remarked recently, “the world is beginning to doubt the moral basis of our fight against terrorism.” This, and Bush’s failed strategy in Iraq, have increased the threat from terrorism, as the recent National Intelligence Estimate made clear.
Throughout these past five troubling years, the Republican congress has done virtually nothing to hold Bush accountable for his misguided and incompetent strategies in the war on terror. That is why I’m voting for Ned Lamont for senator and Diane Farrell for representative in next week’s midterm election. It’s time to send legislators to Washington who will alter the disastrous course along which Bush is leading us.
Friday, March 17, 2006
Impeach Bush? Not yet.
On the one hand, I would welcome the opportunity see President Bush impeached. Through his willful manipulation of intelligence, condoning of torture and violation of constitutional protections of due process and privacy, he has done more to destroy the integrity of the United States than any president since President Nixon. President Clinton may have embarrassed the office, but he did not threaten our institutions.
However, impeachment is a misplaced fantasy at this time, just as is Senator Russell Feingold’s call for censure of President Bush. What Democrats, and Republicans, should be calling for is a vigorous examination of the facts – which the Republican leadership has been thwarting for months.
Congressional energy should be directed towards getting Senator Pat Roberts, chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, to fulfill his promise to investigate administration misuse of intelligence in the war on terror. Roberts has been stalling the conclusion of his investigation for months. He is a disgrace to the principle of an independent legislative branch of government.
Rather than doing deals to legitimize the NSA domestic spying program, the Republican leadership, and Senator Arlen Specter, chairman of the Judiciary Committee, should be demanding a full investigation of that program to determine whether Bush has violated constitutional protections, as the current evidence strongly suggests.
Only then can we know whether censure, or more, is the appropriate response.
However, impeachment is a misplaced fantasy at this time, just as is Senator Russell Feingold’s call for censure of President Bush. What Democrats, and Republicans, should be calling for is a vigorous examination of the facts – which the Republican leadership has been thwarting for months.
Congressional energy should be directed towards getting Senator Pat Roberts, chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, to fulfill his promise to investigate administration misuse of intelligence in the war on terror. Roberts has been stalling the conclusion of his investigation for months. He is a disgrace to the principle of an independent legislative branch of government.
Rather than doing deals to legitimize the NSA domestic spying program, the Republican leadership, and Senator Arlen Specter, chairman of the Judiciary Committee, should be demanding a full investigation of that program to determine whether Bush has violated constitutional protections, as the current evidence strongly suggests.
Only then can we know whether censure, or more, is the appropriate response.
Labels:
Bush human rights,
Congressional oversight
Tuesday, March 1, 2005
Bush report on human rights. Look in the mirror.
Dear President Bush:
I read with astonishment the findings of the State Department's report on human rights, which calls attention to abuses by the Iraqi Government. Your policies and actions in regard to human rights, juxtaposed against
this report, represent the height of hypocrisy. While you point the finger at other countries' human rights violations, you are engaged in similar, if not as egregious, activities.
You send individuals to the very countries cited for torture (Syria, Egypt, Saudi Arabia) in secrecy, with no due process. You have held a US citizen in detention for almost three years without bringing any charges. You are holding hundreds of foreigners at Guantanamo as virtual prisoners of war with little to no evidence that they were in fact involved in terrorist activities.
I want the United States to take an extremely aggressive stand on the war on terror. Yet your arrogant disregard for the values of our country are doing irreparable harm to my country's ability to push for human rights around the world, and are bringing into question the very meaning of being an American. Meanwhile, your obsession with Iraq has left our homeland dangerously unprotected, as evidenced by the recent report on port security.
Court after court have repudiated your belief that the United States can flout the Constitution as you prosecute the war on terror. Yet, oblivious to why your actions are so repugnant, you continue on.
I urge you to reflect on what it means to protect the values of the United States that you insist you are fighting for. You should call for an immediate end to extraordinary rendition, lack of due process and
interrogation techniques that rely on torture. And, you should hold those who have propagated these practices to account, including your Secretary of Defense and newly appointed Attorney General. It is a disgrace to the
reputation of the United States that you would even consider including these two men in your administration, let alone cite them for their service to the nation.
I read with astonishment the findings of the State Department's report on human rights, which calls attention to abuses by the Iraqi Government. Your policies and actions in regard to human rights, juxtaposed against
this report, represent the height of hypocrisy. While you point the finger at other countries' human rights violations, you are engaged in similar, if not as egregious, activities.
You send individuals to the very countries cited for torture (Syria, Egypt, Saudi Arabia) in secrecy, with no due process. You have held a US citizen in detention for almost three years without bringing any charges. You are holding hundreds of foreigners at Guantanamo as virtual prisoners of war with little to no evidence that they were in fact involved in terrorist activities.
I want the United States to take an extremely aggressive stand on the war on terror. Yet your arrogant disregard for the values of our country are doing irreparable harm to my country's ability to push for human rights around the world, and are bringing into question the very meaning of being an American. Meanwhile, your obsession with Iraq has left our homeland dangerously unprotected, as evidenced by the recent report on port security.
Court after court have repudiated your belief that the United States can flout the Constitution as you prosecute the war on terror. Yet, oblivious to why your actions are so repugnant, you continue on.
I urge you to reflect on what it means to protect the values of the United States that you insist you are fighting for. You should call for an immediate end to extraordinary rendition, lack of due process and
interrogation techniques that rely on torture. And, you should hold those who have propagated these practices to account, including your Secretary of Defense and newly appointed Attorney General. It is a disgrace to the
reputation of the United States that you would even consider including these two men in your administration, let alone cite them for their service to the nation.
Thursday, January 6, 2005
Oppose Gonzales Nomination
A letter I sent to my CT Senators...
I am writing to urge you to do everything in your power to deny confirmation to President Bush’s nomination of Alberto Gonzales as attorney general of the United States.
It as an absolute disgrace for the Senate to have to even consider the nomination of an administration official who has so little regard for the values embodied in our constitution. While Mr. Gonzales’ exact role is still unclear, it is without doubt that he was party to the deliberations and policies of the Bush administration that created a climate leading to widespread and continuing abuse and torture of prisoners captured in Iraq and Afghanistan. And practices at Guantanamo in which detainees may be held forever without access to due process.
As a recent Op-Ed column in The New York Times stated, “By using torture, the country relinquishes the very ideological advantage – the promotion of democracy, freedom and human rights – that the president has so persistently claimed is America’s most powerful weapon in defeating Islamic extremism.”
Granted, the war on terror requires new ways of prosecuting war to be successful. But to subvert the very ideals that we are fighting to protect is not an option.
It is clear that President Bush will not hold members of his administration accountable for their moral, strategic and tactical errors. Nor is it likely that the Republican leadership will force Bush to do so. It is incumbent upon you to bring this administration to account for its moral lapses, and for the tremendous harm it has done to the reputation and integrity of the United States.
You can begin that process by denying confirmation to Alberto Gonzales for attorney general.
I am writing to urge you to do everything in your power to deny confirmation to President Bush’s nomination of Alberto Gonzales as attorney general of the United States.
It as an absolute disgrace for the Senate to have to even consider the nomination of an administration official who has so little regard for the values embodied in our constitution. While Mr. Gonzales’ exact role is still unclear, it is without doubt that he was party to the deliberations and policies of the Bush administration that created a climate leading to widespread and continuing abuse and torture of prisoners captured in Iraq and Afghanistan. And practices at Guantanamo in which detainees may be held forever without access to due process.
As a recent Op-Ed column in The New York Times stated, “By using torture, the country relinquishes the very ideological advantage – the promotion of democracy, freedom and human rights – that the president has so persistently claimed is America’s most powerful weapon in defeating Islamic extremism.”
Granted, the war on terror requires new ways of prosecuting war to be successful. But to subvert the very ideals that we are fighting to protect is not an option.
It is clear that President Bush will not hold members of his administration accountable for their moral, strategic and tactical errors. Nor is it likely that the Republican leadership will force Bush to do so. It is incumbent upon you to bring this administration to account for its moral lapses, and for the tremendous harm it has done to the reputation and integrity of the United States.
You can begin that process by denying confirmation to Alberto Gonzales for attorney general.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)