|
 |
Friday, June 11, 2004 |
"Commonly, people think of philosophy as a quest, however ill advised, for truth. John Dewey called it the quest of certainty. But it is more illuminating to say that, at its best, philosophy is the quest for honesty."
9:15:35 PM
|
|
Diminishing America's Meaning. Richard Cohen (Washington Post): A Plunge from the Moral Heights. The Bush administration constantly reminds us that there's a war on. That's wrong. There are two. One is being fought by soldiers in combat, and the other is being fought for the hearts and minds of people who are not yet our enemies. However badly the administration has botched the first war -- where, oh where, is Osama bin Laden? -- it has done even worse with the second. It has jutted its chin to the world, appeared pugnacious and unilateralist, permitted the abuse of POWs and others at Abu Ghraib, and now toyed in some fashion with torture. The Bush administration has shamed us all, reducing us to the level of those governments that also have wonderful laws forbidding torture, but condone it anyway. Even if there wasn't a moral issue, you'd imagine that even this crowd would grasp the practical necessity of treating prisoners with decency. If we declare license to do this to other nations' combatants, other nations will do it to ours.
But the issue is deeper. As Michael Froomkin, professor of law at the University of Miami, notes on his blog, the adminstration's rationale is truly frightening. Of a redacted copy of the Justice Department memo Ashcroft won't give Congress but which has been leaked widely to the media, Froomkin writes: (It) sets out a view of an unlimited Presidential power to do anything he wants with “enemy combatants”. The bill of rights is nowhere mentioned. There is no principle suggested which limits this purported authority to non-citizens, or to the battlefield. Under this reasoning, it would be perfectly proper to grab any one of us and torture us if the President determined that the war effort required it. I cannot exaggerate how pernicious this argument is, and how incompatible it is with a free society. The Constitution does not make the President a King. This memo does. Will this be the catalyst that helps Congress find its spine? [Dan Gillmor's eJournal]
8:57:12 PM
|
|
© Copyright 2004 John McDonald.
|
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
| June 2004 |
| Sun |
Mon |
Tue |
Wed |
Thu |
Fri |
Sat |
| |
|
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
| 6 |
7 |
8 |
9 |
10 |
11 |
12 |
| 13 |
14 |
15 |
16 |
17 |
18 |
19 |
| 20 |
21 |
22 |
23 |
24 |
25 |
26 |
| 27 |
28 |
29 |
30 |
|
|
|
| May Jul |
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
|