DOMESTIC SPYING? TORTURE? IN AMERICA?

PRESIDENT BUSH. RIGHT OR WRONG ?

There is considerable controversy and outcries not only in the U.S. but around the world concerning recent revelations about domestic spying on citizens and the torture of suspected terrorists or their affiliates, actions which have been ordered or sanctioned by President Bush.

The Bush administration avows the president is within his legal rights as Commander in Chief to order these actions. Many people, including some of his supporters, argue that these were illegal and immoral acts and unconstitutional. There are more and more references to President Bush as "King George", as if our president has assumed regal powers. It does appear at times that he suffers from megalomania and overestimates his presidential power.

One might wonder why he should entertain ideas of unlimited power. There has been some indication that he may feel that he was ordained by God to lead this nation in the direction that he thinks is the true path, and if this is true, his grandiose ideas have surely been bolstered by his advisors.

There is ample reason for this belief in the posting below, "Scholar Stands by Post-9/11 Writings on Torture, Domestic Eavesdropping". To escape the long link, click on the tinyurl afforded by Granny to access the full article. It is well worth the read.
http://tinyurl.com/8han9 ( last digit is a 9)

You may get an annoying "script error" pop up and an advertisement partially blocking the top. Keep clicking the script error box until it goes away, and wait until the advert completes downloading. Then click on the right slidebar area (even if the bar itself is covered), and usually the unwanted material at the top will disappear and you have free access to the article. It is quite revealing regarding the thinking of the Bush administration.

Attorney and scholar Yoo "...found his audience in the highest echelons of the White House, where the President and Vice President already tended to see the courts, Congress and international conventions as constraints on the conduct of foreign affairs and national security."

Re-read that sentence again. Does it scare you. It should. Read on.

"...Yoo redefined torture, reinterpreted the Constitution and classified as archaic the long established humanitarian rules of the battlefield."

Georgetown University's David Cole said, "...(Yoo) had made his career developing arguments for unchecked power ...essentially he told the President, 'you can do what you want.' "

Our President sees the courts, Congress and international conventions as constraints? Yoo advocates unchecked power for the President? Redefines torture? Reinterprets the Constitution? Classifies humanitarian rules as archaic?

Highly respected " Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O'Connor wrote, in a critique of administrative views espoused by Yoo, 'a state of war is not a blank check for the President when it comes to the rights of the nation's citizens.' " Undoubtedly this is not what President Bush wanted to hear and it is small wonder that he wants her replacement to be someone whose views are more in keeping with his own and that of his advisors like Yoo.

It seems that President Bush is committed to his belief in unchecked power, and that he can do what he wants, and sycophants like Yoo bolster that belief.