The Madness of "King" George
Here's is the immediate source of our concern:
Feb. 13, 2006 issue - In the latest twist in the debate over presidential powers, a Justice Department official suggested that in certain circumstances, the president might have the power to order the killing of terrorist suspects inside the United States. Steven Bradbury, acting head of the department's Office of Legal Counsel, went to a closed-door Senate intelligence committee meeting last week to defend President George W. Bush's surveillance program. During the briefing, said administration and Capitol Hill officials (who declined to be identified because the session was private), California Democratic Sen. Dianne Feinstein asked Bradbury questions about the extent of presidential powers to fight Al Qaeda; could Bush, for instance, order the killing of a Qaeda suspect known to be on U.S. soil? Bradbury replied that he believed Bush could indeed do this, at least in certain circumstances. //full article//
Here is the direction our thoughts are heading:
Say that for the sake of some kind of sense "security" we give up common sense as well as basic freedom and sanction the neocon obsession with their own peculiar brand of "freedom fighting." Say for the sake of argument that we agree that the US needs to help "everyone" fight for freedom (ouch, even for the sake of argument typing that is painful...)
Here's Queenie's Daughters Dilemma: the more we advocate the use of violence for any means, the more we (whomever that may be but in this case the US) becomes exactly the same as the threat we are supposed to be fighting.
So we decide it is okay to kill people who disagree with us in foreign lands, then we extend that and say it is okay to kill people who disagree with us on our own soil. Very basic question: what freedom are we defending? Surely the right to dissent is basic to the American system of freedom - that very freedom we are supposedly defending all over the world. But basically, Bush is saying that if you disagree with him he'll kill you. More importantly he has the right to kill you, he has the Executive Power to kill you anywhere, any time.
This sounds familiar to us. We remember vaguely in our history books some other despot named George trying to take away America's freedom...
It's Monday morning: Do you know your rights as an American? Are you sure you have any?
Feb. 13, 2006 issue - In the latest twist in the debate over presidential powers, a Justice Department official suggested that in certain circumstances, the president might have the power to order the killing of terrorist suspects inside the United States. Steven Bradbury, acting head of the department's Office of Legal Counsel, went to a closed-door Senate intelligence committee meeting last week to defend President George W. Bush's surveillance program. During the briefing, said administration and Capitol Hill officials (who declined to be identified because the session was private), California Democratic Sen. Dianne Feinstein asked Bradbury questions about the extent of presidential powers to fight Al Qaeda; could Bush, for instance, order the killing of a Qaeda suspect known to be on U.S. soil? Bradbury replied that he believed Bush could indeed do this, at least in certain circumstances. //full article//
Here is the direction our thoughts are heading:
Say that for the sake of some kind of sense "security" we give up common sense as well as basic freedom and sanction the neocon obsession with their own peculiar brand of "freedom fighting." Say for the sake of argument that we agree that the US needs to help "everyone" fight for freedom (ouch, even for the sake of argument typing that is painful...)
Here's Queenie's Daughters Dilemma: the more we advocate the use of violence for any means, the more we (whomever that may be but in this case the US) becomes exactly the same as the threat we are supposed to be fighting.
So we decide it is okay to kill people who disagree with us in foreign lands, then we extend that and say it is okay to kill people who disagree with us on our own soil. Very basic question: what freedom are we defending? Surely the right to dissent is basic to the American system of freedom - that very freedom we are supposedly defending all over the world. But basically, Bush is saying that if you disagree with him he'll kill you. More importantly he has the right to kill you, he has the Executive Power to kill you anywhere, any time.
This sounds familiar to us. We remember vaguely in our history books some other despot named George trying to take away America's freedom...
It's Monday morning: Do you know your rights as an American? Are you sure you have any?
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home