Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Krugman: Just Trust Us

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Editorials & Other Articles Donate to DU
 
RamboLiberal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-10-04 10:59 PM
Original message
Krugman: Just Trust Us
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/05/11/opinion/11KRUG.html?hp=&pagewanted=print&position=

Didn't you know, in your gut, that something like Abu Ghraib would eventually come to light?

When the world first learned about the abuse of prisoners, President Bush said that it "does not reflect the nature of the American people." He's right, of course: a great majority of Americans are decent and good. But so are a great majority of people everywhere. If America's record is better than that of most countries — and it is — it's because of our system: our tradition of openness, and checks and balances.

Yet Mr. Bush, despite all his talk of good and evil, doesn't believe in that system. From the day his administration took office, its slogan has been "just trust us." No administration since Nixon has been so insistent that it has the right to operate without oversight or accountability, and no administration since Nixon has shown itself to be so little deserving of that trust. Out of a misplaced sense of patriotism, Congress has deferred to the administration's demands. Sooner or later, a moral catastrophe was inevitable.

Just trust us, John Ashcroft said, as he demanded that Congress pass the Patriot Act, no questions asked. After two and a half years, during which he arrested and secretly detained more than a thousand people, Mr. Ashcroft has yet to convict any actual terrorists. (Look at the actual trials of what Dahlia Lithwick of Slate calls "disaffected bozos who watch cheesy training videos," and you'll see what I mean.)

Just trust us, George Bush said, as he insisted that Iraq, which hadn't attacked us and posed no obvious threat, was the place to go in the war on terror. When we got there, we found no weapons of mass destruction and no new evidence of links to Al Qaeda.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
4dsc Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-10-04 11:01 PM
Response to Original message
1. Mr. Ashcroft has yet to convict any actual terrorists.
That should be a headline by itself!!

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
meow2u3 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-11-04 10:21 AM
Response to Reply #1
7. That's because the real terrorists
...are running this country--into the ground!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
xray s Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-10-04 11:05 PM
Response to Original message
2. another example
Edited on Mon May-10-04 11:06 PM by xray s
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A7016-2004May6.html

By requesting that CBS delay its report on prisoner abuses at Abu Ghraib by two weeks , Gen. Richard B. Myers, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, deprived the country of a full and forthright oral argument before the Supreme Court on the rights of U.S. citizens whom the government has detained as "enemy combatants."

Oral argument in those cases, Hamdi v. Rumsfeld and Padilla v. Rumsfeld, ended about noon April 28. CBS aired the report eight hours later. Had the report aired the previous week, the government's responses to certain questions at oral argument would certainly have been different. Specifically, it would have been clear what abuses could be perpetrated under the government's theory that "enemy combatants" have no rights.

As it happened, the justices asked Principal Deputy Solicitor General Paul D. Clement what in the law would check the executive branch from torturing prisoners. He responded that the government would honor its obligations under the "convention to prohibit torture and that sort of thing."

He also explained that as a practical matter torture is not the best means of extracting information from prisoners, because one "would wonder about the reliability of the information you are getting"; the "way you get the best information from individuals is that you interrogate them, you try to develop a relationship of trust. . . ." Mr. Clement said that it is "the judgment of those involved in these processes, that the last thing you want to do is torture somebody." He concluded in response to a question about checks on the executive branch's authority to engage in torture: "You have to recognize that . . . where the government is on a war footing, you have to trust the executive ..."

As the abuses at Abu Ghraib show, one cannot simply trust the executive branch to protect human rights under U.S. criminal law, the Constitution and the Geneva Conventions. For the sake of our security and for the protection of human rights everywhere, we believe the court should agree.

JAMES F. FITZPATRICK

Washington

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RUMMYisFROSTED Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-11-04 09:47 AM
Response to Reply #2
6. Interesting timing, that.
Thanks for the link.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LibertyorDeath Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-11-04 03:19 AM
Response to Original message
3. Kick
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ze_dscherman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-11-04 05:10 AM
Response to Original message
4. Trusting the U.S.
The system of checks and balances the U.S. has to re-establish must not only be an internal one. The U.S. tends to forget that it only is a small part of the global community. This community is struggling hard and still needs to struggle harder to agree on certain rules and sanctions.

Under the illusion of superiority the U.S. has not only insisted to make or break the rules, but has chosen to play outside of the rules. It has insisted to stay outside of international jurisdiction and bullied smaller states to excempt its soldiers and political leaders from prosecution when they break international law.

Whatever has been left of trust in the United States is very much on stake - the whole world is watching now what consequences its people and its government take from the self inflicted Iraq desaster.

The United States desparately needs to return to international accountability. The rules it has to obey to will also serve as an external "supervision" of its own system, that has proven to be not trustworthy anymore.

Of course, this is not only issue of the United States alone, but also of all other states that need to enforce the compliance to international law.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Beetwasher Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-11-04 08:50 AM
Response to Original message
5. One of His Best Yet, or Maybe That's Just Because it's the Most Recent
Says it all...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Raster Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-11-04 10:36 AM
Response to Original message
8. thank god Krugman has the courage to say....
...what most of the whore media refuses to even consider, much less report fairly or duly examine. Paul has been a shining voice of sanity throughout the coup d'etat and the bastard monarchy. His is one of the truthful and brave media voices that will be remembered in years to come.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Tue May 07th 2024, 10:31 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Editorials & Other Articles Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC