Quote:
Originally Posted by BarbaraGordon
Absolutely. The point was never how many individuals were being subjected to enhanced interrogation techniques or whatever else. Nobody but the human rights activists really cares what happens to a seventeen year old from Bangladesh who likely had a shitty life either way.
The concern for Americans was (or should have been) that our government -- theoretically by the people for the people -- was using a fabricated security threat as an excuse to extend executive privilege without popular consent. It has been the defining characteristic of this administration.
|
Bull. While Bush has certainly been interested in restoring a strong executive, calling it the "defining characteristic" for Gitmo is exceptionally obtuse.
The Bush admin detained people they identified as threats to national security. We can dicker over the criteria, but securing the nation in a time of war was the objective. And it's truly hard to argue that it hasn't been effective, by any measuring stick available to us.
__________________
"Have we been commanded not to call a prophet an insular racist? Link?"
"And yes, [2010] is a very good year to be a Democrat. Perhaps the best year in decades ..."
- Cali Coug
"Oh dear, granny, what a long tail our puss has got."
- Brigham Young
|