Bush's New Approach
Jonathan Schell, in a new piece in The Nation, examines the tactic President Bush is using to deal with the extra-legal NSA spying scandal.
When faced with allegations of wrongdoing in the past, such as the cooking of intelligence on WMD, and torture, he has had a standard response. Denial.
Now Bush has taken the approach of confirming the allegations, but always adding the caveat: it is legal because I am President and we are under threat of terrorism. No regret. No second thoughts. He announced that he even renewed the executive order over 30 times. And the program would continue.
Schell writes:
Secret law-breaking has been supplanted by brazen law-breaking. The difference is critical. If abuses of power are kept secret, there is still the possibility that, when exposed, they will be stopped. But if they are exposed and still permitted to continue, then every remedy has failed, and the abuse is permanently ratified. In this case, what will be ratified is a presidency that has risen above the law.
The danger is not abstract or merely symbolic. Bush's abuses of presidential power are the most extensive in American history. He has launched an aggressive war ("war of choice," in today's euphemism) on false grounds. He has presided over a system of torture and sought to legitimize it by specious definitions of the word. He has asserted a wholesale right to lock up American citizens and others indefinitely without any legal showing or the right to see a lawyer or anyone else. He has kidnapped people in foreign countries and sent them to other countries, where they were tortured. In rationalizing these and other acts, his officials have laid claim to the unlimited, uncheckable and unreviewable powers he has asserted in the wiretapping case. He has tried to drop a thick shroud of secrecy over these and other actions.
Schell slips a bit when he declares that, although nearing some invisible boundary, Bush is not a dictator per se.
That may be true, but can the United States afford to see how much further he is willing to go?
When faced with allegations of wrongdoing in the past, such as the cooking of intelligence on WMD, and torture, he has had a standard response. Denial.
Now Bush has taken the approach of confirming the allegations, but always adding the caveat: it is legal because I am President and we are under threat of terrorism. No regret. No second thoughts. He announced that he even renewed the executive order over 30 times. And the program would continue.
Schell writes:
Secret law-breaking has been supplanted by brazen law-breaking. The difference is critical. If abuses of power are kept secret, there is still the possibility that, when exposed, they will be stopped. But if they are exposed and still permitted to continue, then every remedy has failed, and the abuse is permanently ratified. In this case, what will be ratified is a presidency that has risen above the law.
The danger is not abstract or merely symbolic. Bush's abuses of presidential power are the most extensive in American history. He has launched an aggressive war ("war of choice," in today's euphemism) on false grounds. He has presided over a system of torture and sought to legitimize it by specious definitions of the word. He has asserted a wholesale right to lock up American citizens and others indefinitely without any legal showing or the right to see a lawyer or anyone else. He has kidnapped people in foreign countries and sent them to other countries, where they were tortured. In rationalizing these and other acts, his officials have laid claim to the unlimited, uncheckable and unreviewable powers he has asserted in the wiretapping case. He has tried to drop a thick shroud of secrecy over these and other actions.
Schell slips a bit when he declares that, although nearing some invisible boundary, Bush is not a dictator per se.
That may be true, but can the United States afford to see how much further he is willing to go?
posted by Effwit at 11:28 AM
4 Comments:
Meet the new President of the United States: Saddam Hussein.
At least, it's beginning to seem that way. All the things we've accused him of doing seem to be unfolding in the Bush administration, too. The thirst for power, I guess, can result in pretty abusive policies and behavior, regardless of the form of government or the progressiveness of the society.
Saddam is in prison. Perhaps Bush should be there, too.
Drew L:
Yeah, Bush has got the arrogance thing down. The imperial orders sound about the same. "Just because I say so it is the law."
P.S.: You wrote a great piece on the Justice Dept. investigation of the New York Times leak.
Also, the Rare Pink Floyd link is broken.
Effwit-
Thanks. Yes, the Rare Pink Floyd site was my brother-in-law's site, but he sold off his inventory and closed down the site recently. I had neglected to remove it from my blog.
Happy New Year!
DrewL
Drew L:
Happy New Year to you, keep a smile on your face while you battle the enemies.
If there really are any enemies.
There may only be people remaining to be convinced.
Post a Comment
<< Home