In the end, Gonzales's argument is circular: You need not reach the constitutional question of executive authority to violate the law, because the president acted consistently with the law. But you must find that the president acted consistently with the law because otherwise the law would be an unconstitutional infringement on the president's powers. At the center of this circle is an astounding assertion of presidential power -- the power to choose the "means and methods of engaging the enemy" without being subject to any legal limits imposed by Congress, whether they be limits on cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment, torture, or spying on Americans.You see the President is like Batman - he has to be outside the law in order to protect us. The terrorists, they don't play by the rules. So the President can't play by the rules either.
What the NSA spying debate is ultimately about is this: Do we want to live in a country where the president, like the rest of us, is bound by law, or do we want to live in a country where the president, by invoking the magic words "commander in chief," can order that criminal laws be violated in secret? One thing is certain: The Bush administration will never want a hearing on that question.
The terrorists aren't worried about the complexities of American Laws - neither can our President can't.
The terrorists don't care about civilian deaths or infringement of basic human rights - neither can our President.
The terrorists don't admire or care for western decadence and commitment to ideals like ideals of human decency - President Bush needs to feel the same way in order to defeat them.
In order to defeat the terrorists, our President needs to become a terrorist. That is the only path to victory.
No comments:
Post a Comment