My OperaI need some time to digest this..
Thursday, February 14, 2008 3:28:13 AM
Like the Iraq war - I expected it, I was prepared for it. I'd heard the rhetoric, I'd seen the sad excuse for lawmaking taking place, and I knew that the probability the Congress would walk straight into it with both hands over their eyes on purpose, for no other reason that it's contumaciously the opinion in polite circles that the US is an empire, that that the president is emperor - and that therefore it is the mission of the democratically elected representatives to follow the democratically elected chief unquestioningly. After all, what's that constitution shit about, anyway.
But it still shocks me for some reason.
I'm sorry. What am I on about? It's now clear that in the long and predictable line of Congressional absence of mind, conscience and constitutional responsibility - they have now decided, after accepting the president's views on torture, on spying on americans violation of the constitution, on the political appointees in the DOJ and all the way to the Supreme Court, on Guantanamo and indefinite detention, on Black sites, on CIA torture flights and abductions, on Abu Ghraib, on the never- ending Iraq war, on the permanent bases there, the non- auditable budget and the stream of money thrown into the project, the utilisation of the army without a congressional declaration of war - on North Korea and China, on coaxing even Japan to consider nuclear weapons, not to mention Iran and the ever- impressive handling of middle east relations, etc. - after that, they have now decided to accept the President's views on giving the telcommunication companies amnesty.
That is, at once admitting they broke the law, while simultaneously claiming they broke the law for such a good reason they should not be held accountable in a court. Did I say good reason? What I mean was - they broke the law at the President's behest. Meaning, therefore, that the President and his followers acknowledges that the law does not apply as far as they're concerned, and they claim the power to contradict it at will. This is also the view of the Congress.
And therefore this has now happened - the Congress has followed the president's lead on giving the telecoms amnesty - and thereby actively precluding pending court- cases, and the final avenue to ever pursue the various examples of unlawful conduct in this case.
It bears to be mentioned that in the law, there is already a provision for giving the defendant no criminal liability if they reasonably believed they were not breaking the law - that is, if they genuinely believed they acted as the law required, when deciding to break the law on the president's behest.
But that was not enough, since this might indeed open up certain possibilities rather left unexplored (like in the Libby case). And so the telecom lobby, their democrat and republican allies, and the bush- Administration, have now succeeded in shutting off any remaining possible avenue to pursue this case further. Thereby precluding - as in the DOJ torture scandal where the DOJ itself decides that something is legal, and therefore will not accept starting an investigation into the already decided question - the final avenue for challenging this case. Lawbreaking is therefore legal, if the president says so.
Only this time it is not an internal Bush- administration gerrymandering of the process. It was a conscious, and open choice by the vast majority of the people's elected representatives, to abrogate all congressional responsibility to the leader.
I should probably end with some sort of ominous appeal to not continue the slow road directly to fascism. But you wouldn't get that point anyway, would you.
Goebbels says: That was my idea, you know! Gern gescheh'n!
But it still shocks me for some reason.
I'm sorry. What am I on about? It's now clear that in the long and predictable line of Congressional absence of mind, conscience and constitutional responsibility - they have now decided, after accepting the president's views on torture, on spying on americans violation of the constitution, on the political appointees in the DOJ and all the way to the Supreme Court, on Guantanamo and indefinite detention, on Black sites, on CIA torture flights and abductions, on Abu Ghraib, on the never- ending Iraq war, on the permanent bases there, the non- auditable budget and the stream of money thrown into the project, the utilisation of the army without a congressional declaration of war - on North Korea and China, on coaxing even Japan to consider nuclear weapons, not to mention Iran and the ever- impressive handling of middle east relations, etc. - after that, they have now decided to accept the President's views on giving the telcommunication companies amnesty.
That is, at once admitting they broke the law, while simultaneously claiming they broke the law for such a good reason they should not be held accountable in a court. Did I say good reason? What I mean was - they broke the law at the President's behest. Meaning, therefore, that the President and his followers acknowledges that the law does not apply as far as they're concerned, and they claim the power to contradict it at will. This is also the view of the Congress.
And therefore this has now happened - the Congress has followed the president's lead on giving the telecoms amnesty - and thereby actively precluding pending court- cases, and the final avenue to ever pursue the various examples of unlawful conduct in this case.
It bears to be mentioned that in the law, there is already a provision for giving the defendant no criminal liability if they reasonably believed they were not breaking the law - that is, if they genuinely believed they acted as the law required, when deciding to break the law on the president's behest.
But that was not enough, since this might indeed open up certain possibilities rather left unexplored (like in the Libby case). And so the telecom lobby, their democrat and republican allies, and the bush- Administration, have now succeeded in shutting off any remaining possible avenue to pursue this case further. Thereby precluding - as in the DOJ torture scandal where the DOJ itself decides that something is legal, and therefore will not accept starting an investigation into the already decided question - the final avenue for challenging this case. Lawbreaking is therefore legal, if the president says so.
Only this time it is not an internal Bush- administration gerrymandering of the process. It was a conscious, and open choice by the vast majority of the people's elected representatives, to abrogate all congressional responsibility to the leader.
I should probably end with some sort of ominous appeal to not continue the slow road directly to fascism. But you wouldn't get that point anyway, would you.
Goebbels says: That was my idea, you know! Gern gescheh'n!
