Too Bad Justice Sanders Ain’t Black
By Larry Johnson on November 26, 2008 at 1:31 PM in Current Affairs
I like what the Obama team is doing with Hillary at State, Jones at the NSC, and Gates at Defense, but Eric Holder at Justice is a stinker. I recognize the need for “diversity” in selecting and staffing the cabinet. But the next head of the Justice Depatment needs to be a person of impeccable integrity and courage.
Washington state Supreme Court Justice Richard B. Sanders (seen below, right, talking to Justice Sandra Day O’Connor at a 2006 University of Washington Law School event in Seattle, Washington) is a model candidate in my view. He heckled current Attorney General Mukasey at last week’s soiree for the Federalist Society. Mukasey was joking about ignoring the Geneva Conventions:
In his speech, Attorney General Mukasey justified the Bush administration’s policies in the War on Terror, which included denying meaningful hearings for prisoners in Guantanamo, and other questionable tactics, all in the name of national security. Mr. Mukasey said those who criticize the Administration for abandoning provisions of the Geneva Conventions fail to recognize that “… Al Qaeda [is] an international terrorist group, and not, the last time I checked, a signatory to the Conventions.” Although the United States is a signatory, and these Conventions prohibit torture, the audience laughed. Attorney General Mukasey received a standing ovation. I passionately disagree with these views: the government must never set aside the Constitution; domestic and international law forbids torture; and access to the writ of habeas corpus should not be denied.
Candidly, I wish Mukasey had suffered a stroke and been forced from his job. He dishonors America with this nonsense. Anyway, here is what Sanders, an elected justice on the Washington State Supreme Court, did:
The program provided no opportunity for questions or response, and I felt compelled to speak out. I stood up, and said, “tyrant,” and then left the meeting. No one else said anything. I believe we must speak our conscience in moments that demand it, even if we are but one voice.
I hope those who know my jurisprudence will agree that to truly love the Constitution is to uphold it, to speak out for it, not just in times of peace and prosperity, but also in times of chaos and crisis.
I did not “heckle” Attorney General Mukasey, and I did not disrupt the meeting, as those who watch the video of his speech on the Federalist Society’s website will discover. I left before Mr. Mukasey had his frightening collapse. I learned of his collapse later, from news reports. It should go without saying that, despite our vastly different views on what constitutes upholding the rule of law, I hope he continues to recover and remain in good health.
For Mukasey and other so-called conservatives to insist that the threat of terrorism is so grave and so unique that we have no obligation to adhere to international conventions governing the treatment of prisoners, torture, or genocide is the kind of thinking that Nazi jurists used to justify acts like the Holocaust. And it was the horrors of the Holocaust, the Japanese prison camps, and the Japanese rape of Nanking that laid the foundation for the civilized world to insist that even in the face of possible annihilation, nations and their governments are obligated to conduct themselves with a minimum of morality and ethics.
Torture is not in the eye of the beholder. Torture is defined very precisely in the international convention:
For the purposes of this Convention, the term “torture” means any act by which severe pain or suffering, whether physical or mental, is intentionally inflicted on a person for such purposes as obtaining from him or a third person information or a confession, punishing him for an act he or a third person has committed or is suspected of having committed, or intimidating or coercing him or a third person, or for any reason based on discrimination of any kind, when such pain or suffering is inflicted by or at the instigation of or with the consent or acquiescence of a public official or other person acting in an official capacity. It does not include pain or suffering arising only from, inherent in or incidental to lawful sanctions.
Only people incapable of reading would argue there is no acceptable or legal definition of torture.
Which brings me back to Eric Holder. Holder, unfortunately, already is on the record stating that the Geneva Convention does not apply to the people we have captured during our Global War on Terrorism. Here he is back in 2002 on the matter:
Holder needs to be very clear about one issue–does the United States have the unilateral right to declare someone a terrorist and hold them indefinitely without trial and subject them to harsh interrogation. The Bush Administration insists that the answer is yes. We do not yet know what the position of the Obama Administration will be in practice.
As for me and my house, there is no room for compromise on this. No government in the world has the inherent right to unilaterally declare someone a terrorist or enemy of the state and hold them indefinitely. That is the position of tyrants. No matter how evil or depraved a person is, they are still entitled to due process. Adolf Eichmann was a monster. He had the blood of millions on his hands. But Israel did not use his evil to justify using evil against him. My view is that if Israel can give due process to the mastermind of the Holocaust surely we are civilized and strong enough to do the same to Islamic jihadists.
That is a point that Judge Sanders clearly understands and has the courage to express. We need a person of Sanders’ courage and integrity at the head of Justice. I don’t think Eric Holder has demonstrated the backbone necessary.
(Release: November 13)
on sale for only $16.95.
has a spatula.)
And check out these: 
("This crazy redhead is on to something. Her pink Rambler story alone is worth the price of the book," writes 
- “Richard Sale’s reportage on Washington, the CIA, the American armed forces, and foreign intrigue has created a perfect background for this account of the steady growth of President Clinton as a master of the game of nations.”--W. Patrick Lang, former head of Middle East Operations, DIA
"Anne C. Heller's stunning biography of Ayn Rand" uses a "plethora of newly unearthed research and fresh insight."
I agree one gazillion percent! There is no “selective” justice in my book. Its a dangerous slippery slope.
I recall Eichmann was kidnapped by Mosad from a sovereign nation and secretly flown back to Israel. I obviously agree he should have been tried for his crimes although I do not support death as a punishment. I was curious if you could address the kidnapping or “arrest” if it could be called that. I also recall he was interrogated pretty harshly as well.
Excellent post Larry. I always interested what you have to say. I totally agree with you on this appointment.
HAPPY THANKSGIVING TO YOU & EVERY ONE IN OUR BLOG
So you have no problem with Larry wishing a stroke on our current AG? Is this a sign of the left? This thread belongs over at DailyKos. When did it become ligitimate to wish ill health on anyone? How outraged would you be if I wished a stroke on Larry for such a stupid entry?
Do it. I double-dog dare you.
I agree that’s a harsh remark and one I would generally refrain from using in public, but its the kind most people will say in private. He did mark it as candid:
You do have a valid point. It would be nice if people did not wish each other harm, even if not meant literally. I do not believe Larry meant that literally though.
Its OK for you to have a problem with the remark. That’s your opinion and you should state it. I personally if I shared your sentiment would not make it as a reply to nancy sabet but you are free to do that as well.
So other than your criticism of the left and Larry anything else? By the way Larry’s views as are mine are all over the map. I tend to lean left and even way left on some things. Other things I am conservative or moderate. A lot of people on this blog are all over the map. Some are hard left and hard right. Ces la vie.
I am not accusing you personally of this, but I’ve noticed some people come on to the blog looking for any excuse to tear Larry down. I know he doesn’t care. But I think there are people with an axe to grind with him and that’s fine I guess, but it does get tiring to witness this behavior.
Galt, my point is, as you seem to have noticed, is not that I find fault with Larry’s concept, but I do find fault with wishing anyone harm, even if done candidly.
I have no use for Barack Obama, think he is a liar and cheat, but I do not, and would not, wish any harm to him.
I also do not agree that heckling is a form of protest that should be engaged in by adults. I don’t agree when the right does it, and I will not condone it when done by the left. Sanders is a U.S. Justice and if he has any disagreements with the AG he should handle those disagreements like an adult, not like some college student at a Cindy Sheehan rally. I do not find it unreasonable to ask the adults that sit on the bench to act like adults.
I am dead set against Holder. On that Larry and I agree, but to go over to the dark side and wish someone harm, even “candidly” considering even Sanders saying he hoped the AG would remain in good health, is out of line.
One other point: what “due process” did FDR give the German POWs that were housed on American soil (research Camp Swift)?
I hope that — especially in view of what occurred in the “Democratic” primary and election just held — people like Sanders do no less than stand up and voice an honest INFORMED opinion. Where were the media, sir? I hate to bring that quaint children’s nursery rhyme here, but if wishes were horses then beggars would ride. I believe that our current AG will break bread in good health with his loved ones this holiday. And the First Amendment is preserved for another day. And for that may we all give Thanks.
retire05, I caught that as well, thought not to comment, but when you think about it, Larry should just acknowledged the AG has already had one, if one uses his Congressional testimony as a metric.
do I understand you your meaning to be the Honorable Judge Saunders was wrong in calling Mukasey a tyrant and walking out? If so on that we can disagree as I would have done as he did (and have).
Any Judge who is standing for the Constitution and not using a sandwedge to do so is a winner in my book.
And Hey! What could be better than a judge who likes “The X-files”? From his site; “The Truth Is Out There”
Your question is the same thing Larry is saying.
I wonder if this was a sneaky little trap on Larry’s part. I don’t wish harm on anybody either. That’s the point. Mukasey was justifying and excusing torture. He obviously wishes harm on people.
Now…I hate torture and think we shouldn’t use it; but I probably would turn a blind eye to people like Joran Vander Sloot getting his ass beat!
Until SOMEONE finds CONCRETE EVIDENCE that DEFINITELY links Joran van der Sloot to Natalee Holloway’s disappearance, you need to back off on such rhetoric (although, given your handle, I understand why you would write such).
Van der Sloot was held by Aruban authorities for as long as they were able and they couldn’t find anything while he remained in Aruban custody. And, I’d point out that when Aruban authorities thought they did have new evidence against him, he returned to Aruba to face that new evidence (only to be released–again–when it turned out that the authorities had nothing concrete).
I don’t know about Joran van der Sloot, but I can tell you one thing; if I was Mark Lundsford I would have called the CIA to provide me with a crash course in waterboarding and ask the police to give me just five minutes with John Cuey.
Also, I would like one person to prove to me that our refusal to continue with the practice of waterboarding has ever stopped the torture practices of terrorists? I guess those who beheaded Daniel Pearle have now changed their minds about doing that to anyone else and are now going to adhere to Geneva Convention rules, right?
I am totally against using torture, as Larry is. Because the terrorists use torture is just one more reason that we must be better people.
When they were doing their beheadings, my first thought was, “Thank God we do not do such things.”
I watched a History Channel or Public channel showw (can’t remenber which) recently about this whole issue. My thought was this: I am so happy my two boys, one who did do military service and one who did not, will never have to be placed in a position to be ordered to do the things our military personnel are being asked to do. It harms their souls, psyches–or whatever you want to call it.
No Torture Allowed Ever should be our firm commitment.
I recall Bill Clinton’s stance: he was against it being legal to use torture. Under the extreme circumstance of a “WMD about to go off in Times Square in half an hour” (a scenario often used by torture proponents), he suggested the president could authorize torture BUT should face the consequences for this action. Its an interesting point of view. Thank god I will never have to make such a decision!
While I can understand the urge to punish and coerce terrorists, it is absolutely wrong to actually do it. It is one of the very difficult things police and other authorities have to learn, to respect the rights of the offender, no matter what he or she did.
Even if it were not ethically wrong, think of the consequences, if we, as members of the civilized world, would start allowing torture when it fits our interests?
We know torture can probably not be totally eradicated, but for us to condone it, to make it acceptable by allowing or even asking for it, is a step back towards midieval conditions and tyranny.
And what about our Christian believes? Are our Christian ethics only meant for the Sunday services at church? What hipocrisy to call ourselves Christians, if we don’t even try to live up to our most important Christian ethics!
What kind of an example do we give to the world by torturing our enemies? Are we still an “authority” on Democracy, imposing such rule on others???
We need to rise above our fears and vengence and show the world what true Democracy stands for, how it is operative even in adverse circumstances and stay true to our values, especially also when it is difficult.
Obviously retire05 missed the death wishes and other threats against those who would not vote for mystery man Obama. Terrorism doesn’t just come from foreign nationals; we’ve got more than enough home grown ones here and they go inside caucuses to threaten voters and stand outside voting precincts with clubs in the name of O-BA-MA. And no one in either political party thinks that is wrong.
Excellent post Larry. I always interested what you have to say. I totally agree with you on this appointment. I have to go, but
HAPPY THANKSGIVING TO YOU & EVERY ONE IN OUR BLOG
The United States has been the epitome and model for humane treatment of the worst offenders and our own enemies. It is to our standard of humaneness that civilized societies gravitate. If not us, then who? What other nation in history has ever set the standards for fairness and human dignity, even for those who seem to have no redeeming qualities?
Once the US abandons the very standards we have sought to enforce upon the world at large in matters of human rights and fair trials, even to the point of humane executions of convicted felons, we can no longer expect any other country or terrorist organization to show any mercy to our own soldiers. We would no longer have any expectation of respect from the citizens or armed forces of other nations. If we abandon those principles, we would forfeit any right to those expectations.
Well said Larry!
And what courage for Judge Sanders to speak…especially at the Federalist Society.
These people seem intent on over-riding many facets of our Constitution, and we need people to be bold enough to prevent it.
I have no sympathy for terrorists, BUT they will not be the only victims if we desert our principles!
Why do foreign national combatants, captured on the battle field, deserve civil liberties outlined in the US Constitution? These rights are only extended to US citizens.
I think the underlying issue is as Larry put it:
Its the declaration that people are terrorists without due process which is at issue. And that is a Constitutional issue for certain and the SCOTUS has intervened already on this. Are we to just take Bush’s word someone is a terrorist? There has to be a legal process to protect the rights of the alleged terrorist. I say alleged because some people accused of terrorism have been released with no charges ever filed. We can fight terrorism and still protect our principles as a nation. We must do it this way, or Franklin will be prove prophetic:
“Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.”–Benjamin Franklin
I don’t see it written in the Constitution or the Declaration of Independence that the right to due process is restricted to US citizens. So, please clarify.
You would not give due process to legal permanent residents? So my son-in-law is not entitled to due process? He is a British citizen and permanent resident of the US who owns a business that provides employment to three US citizens.
There is an order of magnitude difference betweeen extending civil liberties to peaceful, legal residents and doing the same for foreign nationals with no ties to the US expect the intent to murder Americans.
I think you are missing the point. There has to be a system of checks and balances to make sure we are even dealing with a terrorist to begin with. There’s a brick wall here. If we start carving out exceptions even for alleged terrorists, you or I could be next for expressing an unpopular opinion about the state. I think that expresses the crux of the matter.
I would question why the Middle Eastern nations supporting terrorism, and the tyrants and corporations behind them, some American, haven’t been penalized, financially?
So, instead, Wall Street falls?
Because we can stand as a nation that does more than talk its talk?
There are international rights accorded to foreign detainees in the Geneva Convention, it is these that the U.S. has been flouting.
Happy Thanksgiving. Please don’t drive after drinking.
Well, it surely isn’t the first, nor the last, will Camp Obama or his prmoters be promoting symbolism over substance, will it?
Thank you for that video. UN BE LIEvable. His argument is the same as justifying torture.
…How gross. He understands, we want our people treated under Geneva Conventions, but not the people we’re fightng or capturing? And he said that with a straight face. This no doubt has Senator McCain feelin’ peachy over this guy.(snark)
The Geneva Convention only extends to uniformed legal combatants, not to spies and saboteurs. Spies possess the advantage of traveling in cognito, but aren’t granted privileges under the GC. People in uniform lose the element of surprise, but gain protection, if caught, under the GE. There is also the principle of reciprocity, which no one expects with enemies like Al Qaeda.
Of course, the U.S. is claiming the right to be the final arbiter of what constitutes a uniform when we are invading someone else’s country.
There is also the principle of reciprocity, which no one expects with enemies like Al Qaeda.
In Matthew 25:31-46, Jesus proclaims that how you treat the hungry, the thirsty, the sick and other “least of these,” is how you treat Jesus himself. As a nation which calls itself a Judeo Christian society, we must do for the “least of these” exactly what we would do for those who are signatories to the Convention — a document which we have played fast and loose with during the course of the past eight years — in the eyes of the world.
I think the reaction of Justice Sanders is very commendable. His clear and courageous position is probably the very reason that someone like him would not be chosen as a Cabinet member.
I think it is safe to assume that Obama did not find Eric Holder somewhere in a cabbage patch. One of Obama’s influential supporters is probably sponsoring Mr Holder. I did a quick Google check to see what the positions of two early Obama supporters, Patrick Leahy of the Senate Judiciary Committee and Mr John Conyers, Chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, were with respect to Guantanamo and the Geneva Conventions. The top links on Leahy showed clear opposition to torture, etc. But You-Tube videos, news releases, interviews etc of Mr Conyers were not so clear. It was difficult for me to understand exactly what his position is based on the links I checked out. In fact, Mr Conyers vague, circular responses to questions on these issues reminded me very much of Mr Holder’s video above.
Conclusion: Mr Holder is Mr Conyers choice for Attorney General and will probably reflect WHATEVER Mr Conyers positions are on significant issues relevant to the Judiciary Committee.
One other little interesting tidbit was, according to Wikipedia, Eric Holder opposes the death penalty…even though he is definitely ambiguous on the question of the Geneva Conventions and terrorists.
Consistency from either Obama or Holder or Conyers is apparently something not to be hoped for.
Ambiguity is the new “coat of many colors.”
They’re afraid.
They’re afraid of the stupid press response, and the Atwater trick, crippling already weak leadership skills.
So, we have a complete void in leadership.
You have to do what’s right to insure the survival of this country, good political theory, balls and brains, compassion and ethics, but if they’re afraid of Karl Rove (?!!!!), or some stinking incompetent news executive (?!!!!), if they simply went into politics because they’re narcissistic cheese, they’re won’t be able to make the big decision, or stand up to the bullies within Washington, those who would impose their will on the Presidency.
Case in point is Nancy Pelosi, who should have been advocating since the day she became speaker for Bush’s removal.
Instead, she pandered, so what, they could elect another push over in Obama to further destroy the already fetid American political and international corporate infrastrucutre?
Guess so.
And they got what they wanted.
Brilliant.
America Wants to Know!
Obama REFUSES to show his ORIGINAL birth certificate. Why?
http://americamustknow.com/default.aspx
SIGN THE PETITION TO FORCE BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA TO PRESENT HIS QUALIFICATIONS.
PETITION FOR PUBLIC RELEASE OF
BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA’S BIRTH CERTIFICATE
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=81550
Hey, did you hear the other day, Michigan radio station called Kenya to ask if they were celebrating, etc and one of the morning DJ’s asked about recognizing Obama’s Birthplace in kenya with a marker. His “Excellency” replied, that it’s pretty common knowledg of his birthplace already, but they are already looking at something, especially because his paternal Grandmother is still alive.
NO KIDDING.
it’s 12 minutes in on this archived audio.
12.32 to be exact-you can fast forward. I just drage the button.
http://my.wrif.com/mim/?cat=9
I know that this is important to you but please use the OPEN THREAD for non responsive posts. Everyone really appreciates it when you do … thanks!
For me it is as simple and as easy as one, two, three:
1. I believe we must speak our conscience in moments that demand it, even if we are but one voice. (Richard B. Sanders)
2. No government in the world has the inherent right to unilaterally declare someone a terrorist or enemy of the state and hold them indefinitely. (Larry Johnson)
3. …if Israel can give due process to the mastermind of the Holocaust surely we are civilized and strong enough to do the same to Islamic jihadists. (Larry Johnson)
“The greatest dangers to liberty lurk in insidious encroachment by men of zeal, well-meaning but without understanding.” (Louis D. Brandeis, Supreme Court Justice)
I hope Eric Holder continues taking a tough stand in the WOT. The US tried to ignore the fact that Al Qaeda had declared war on us & treat people we managed to catch as run of the mill criminals. The end result is that bombs were set off in NYC, our embassies blown up, and “suspects” end up stabbing prison guard’s eyes out:
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9C02E2DE123DF935A1575AC0A9659C8B63
adagioforstrings:
After reading your stirring defense of torture as a policy of the United States, another link comes to mind:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/11/25/AR2008112502104.html?hpid=opinionsbox1
I don’t define aggressive interrogation as “torture”. The management of the WOT has prevented another terrorist attack on US soil since 2001.
What good will do you think you will buy from AQ if you grant them more pleasant prison accomodations than in Cuba? What is going to happen when you integrate AQ suspects with the general US prison population? AQ will to try to use prisons as recruiting stations, as they did with Jose Padilla.
You’re justifying torture thinking it has some level of efficacy.
It doesn’t.
So, why are we torturing, then?
And I respect the opinions of those who win, without torture, those who understand WHY the Constitution prohibits torture, before I would take the world of some military kook, and his lightweight CIA kook counterpart, neither of whom has achienevd anything other than graduating from some Ivy League university, the high point of his life.
Maybe they’ll never understand, mostly because they dont understand themselves.
But they dont’ have a right to destroy the country, becuase they’re both stupid, and fearful.
In the end, if the country is to prevail, the smarter people have to prevail.
Yours is a classic post hoc ergo propter hoc fallacy. You need to go back and take Logic 101.
adagioforstrings
People like you scare the hell out of me — because you don’t know what you’re talking about — and you seem to believe this line of BS.
Torture doesn’t work — for all the reasons that sane and logical people understand. (I’m not going to rewrite that book here.)
One of the major reasons NOT to torture POWs is that there are rules of war — and our guys can become POWs — we hope that the enemy treats our troops as we treat their troops — oops that won’t work since the US now tortures captured individuals — can’t say that all the individuals are soldiers or involved in armed resistance — but we do know that some of the individuals that the US had/have in prisons were SOLD to the US by other countries (or indivduals). So the US was buying people who they were told were “bad guys” — these people were then tortured — and of course some of these people were going to tell torturers whatever they wanted to hear.
But mostly I’m against torture because I want our troops to be treated well if they are captured — I don’t want their children back home to become orphans.
I was raised in the military — born in a military hospital so in a way I’ll never be a “full” civilian — I know what it’s like to have a parent flying over “enemy” territory and knowing that he could be shot down.
Rob in Chicago,
If you ask people what the fourth of July is about how many people would know?
I badly frightened when asking my then 10th grade daughter the same question.
She said it was about fireworks. She has learned since then. After I told her if she wanted me to pay for her college education, she had to “pass” this quiz and do one other thing, VOTE.
Agreed, perfectly stated.
I am generally against the death penalty, but the execution of the Nazis was correct, was justice.
Depending on the degree of treason, those who betray the government in an egregious manner should also be executed, it seems a certain arrogance pervades those who deal with those harming this country, whether it be Obama, and Auchi, or Exxon execs,
meeting with Cheney, dividing Iraq before 9.11.
Not to mention the casual outing of Plame.
Rather sad Holder doesn’t seem to understand the need to protect the Constitution, buying into the pander that is cable news, and Washington.
Maybe they didn’t believe what they were seeing, maybe they’re complicit in some way, profiting from the war, but either way, Obama’s camp seems to be doing the very predictable two step in terms of enabling Cheney’s POV, just another bait and switch, Obama would say anything to get elected, right?
Making Obama no better than Bush, or Bush, which we all kinda knew, anyway.
FISA, energy, NAFTA and whatever else, why, again, did people feel he was superior?
Again, pay to play, look who the donors are, corporations liable for the war on terror, and Iraq, in part.
Eric Holder, the architect of the Marc Rich pardon, may provide the most interesting confirmation hearing since John Ashcroft’s. IMHO, Holder is a worse pick than Brennan.
Great article-very enlightening-worth the read.
Al Qaeda [is] an international terrorist group, and not, the last time I checked, a signatory to the Conventions.”
That is almost word for word what Gonzales said while “testifying” (read lying through his teeth) before congress.
Only people incapable of reading would argue there is no acceptable or legal definition of torture
Hey, LJ the irony of this statement is that, even those held in bondage and incapable of reading (by law) knew what torture was.
It is not reading skills, it is the lack of a moral compass.
I stood up, and said, “tyrant,” and then left the meeting.
Judge Sanders; A man after my own heart.
We need a person of Sanders’ courage and integrity at the head of Justice.
Doesn’t that start with the person that nominated him? And at present the word “Clinton re-treads” is the meme of the hour in the Echo chamber.
On this point, what is the complexion of DOJ? I can’t help but wonder what it is like there. Are there powerful interests entrenched at DOJ, so as to make progress difficult?
With the current state of liability for those that commited war crimes in our name, do you think an effort will be made to investigate it?
How is the next head of the FBI?
Mukasey’s role as a judge in the first attack on the World Trade Tower as it relates to his wimpy ass testimony during his confirmation was sad. One of these days Patrick Fitzgerald should write his memoirs….he was there then and he is in Chicago now.
I want more people like Saunders and Fitzgerald to lead.
When will the “sand thowers” be named and shamed?
Great, he’s putting a token black man without integrity or backbone into a position that requires a person who is committed to justice. Can’t say I’m surprised… Probably is going to be just more of the same of what we’ve had in the Bush administration..
That you would endorse the conduct of a state judge who shouts his opposition to the speaker at a private function in a derogatory word, calling him a “model candidate” evidences you know nothing about the rules governing judicial conduct. Choosing to shout “tyrant” at the sitting USAG was not only in poor taste - I would argue, a more effective and eloquent treatise on the subject could have been accomplished by a prompt and dignified departure from the room - but also could have subjected the justice to a reprimand from the WA committee on judicial misconduct.
As for arguing whether conduct imposed on a class of individuals is allowed under international law… such laws only establish the floor of acceptable conduct. Parsing words so as to find legitimate claim to embracing the floor is, to coin a phrase, beneath us.
Sorry, Larry. I normally agree with you on practically everything, but, not on this one. Once a terrorist, always a terrorist! Being well learned in Islam, I do know why the faiths collide. Christians believe in forgiveness and peace. Christians believe in “hell” for the ones that do not follow the values of the Creator. Hell can mean anything, coming back as a lower being as a punishment, coming back as a deformed person, coming back as an animal, we just don’t know. The Creator is the only one that is the Judge. And if any Christian scholar tells you different, they are lying. No-body knows what happens to you when you die. These terrorist spend their entire lives following radical Islam. Many Muslim scholars believe Yeshua will return from heaven and punish Jews and Christians for their failure to accept Muhammad as the Prophet. He will help establish Islam by destroying all who do not believe in Allah. In the Judeo-Christian, you are given a chance as to worship or not, but, never to kill people because they don’t believe in Yeshua. That will be the judgment of G-d’s only. So, letting them loose in the United States because of some liberal attorneys who got the military laws confused with regular laws for prisoners is not only not good for this country but who is going to watch over them as they regroup and kill innocent people again? They should be given education on Christianity and Moderate Islam and show them that the Word is love. Without these teachings, they will be back in the saddle after being released and bombing people again. When child molesters and rape monsters are release, what does the police department do? They are watched and monitor. If these people are to be released and roam around our country, who is going to monitor them? We are still looking for the father who killed his two daughters for honor killing and he isn’t nowhere to be founded. No, sorry, Larry, you are always right, but, this time I disgree with your article. Now, torture is not right, that I agree with.
So, according to you, being deformed is a punishment of bad deeds in a former life? Or being an animal as well??? And why give up your own ethics when facing an enemy with other ethics? Either you believe in yours and live by them, or your ethics are really just to be applied when it is convenient? How can you change your own believes (forgivness, compassion, respecting etc) acording to whom you encounter?
Of course our laws must be abided by everyone living here, and prosecution and punishment for offenders must be put in place. But to impose our christian believes and ethics on people with other believes is against the constitution.
A little off topic - but too bad Justice Sanders is shown in a picture speaking to Sandra Day O’Connor. tha leaves a bad taste in my mouth. O’Connor is a true unsung villain of the last eight years. Sure she was the swing vote on abortion cases, but she was also the DECIDING swing on Bush vs. Gore. It was literally her vote that ended the recount and set our country off onto an eight year descent into war and infamy, giving us the administration that broke the world’s economy and destroyed America’s standing in the world. She’s also the justice who, while healthy as an ox, decided to retire from her lifetime appointment to the Supreme Court, leading to the seating of arch conservative Justice Alito. She looks like she was having fun in those photos. I wonder if she ever stops to consider her role in the last eight years. Not many people at that end of the spectrum frequently ever have the compassion to stop and care; or to reflect on their personal role in the misery of others. I’m sure she is well insulated from it all.
Larry thanks so much for the post. BHO, Hillary and McCain were against torture, as many of us are. I have no idea who put this into Bush’s head that torture was the route to take to get information, but they were sorely mistaken, and an idiot. It didn’t work.
It seems that many Americans are dissing our Constitution. We need more like Justice Sanders to lead our country in the right direction.
Again, thanks for the post.