Why did the Founding Fathers take the limitation of the power of the State so seriously? The NPR story linked to in the title gives ample evidence that people with a political stake in the status-quo and having the power of the State to wield will often succumb to hubris, deluding themselves that the ends justify the means. Is protecting ourselves from would-be terrorists in the heat of a paranoid witchhunt worth losing the moral high-ground earned over decades of standing by our principles of fair-treatment and human rights?
Is Mr. Pedilla a criminal? Maybe. Is he a terrorist? Maybe he'd like to think he is. Is he dangerous? I doubt he'd crack the top 1,000. Does he deserve to be treated the way he has? Most definitely not.
When it comes to the governments treatment of detainees, the Bush administration would like us to believe that anything that gets the bad-guy to confess is ok. Congress is complicit when they passed a bill that allows procedures that would not be Constitutional if used in our courts.
The question to ask is, would you consider the treatment or procedure in question acceptable if used on your spouse, son/daughter, or brother/sister by some other country? If the answer is no, then why are we allowing our country to do it to anybody for any reason?
Tuesday, January 23, 2007
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment