On Torture and the Constitution

****** made a comment about your note "Why, Obama, Why?":

What you may be too young to know, is that "torture" has been a round for a very long time. Bush didnt invent it. Its just that the media and far left sympathizers have brought it to your attention recently. You know the old adage.......kill one to spare millions? The people who may be "tortured" are the very ones willing to kill you and your family and friends. If they carried out their plan of death and destruction, would you still care if they had been tortured first? Regarding the V........I think it has to do with ones interpretation, of what can happen in times of war. I took that as, is times of war all these "rights" can be eliminated.I cant believe you care about the very people who blew away innocent people on 9-11. You cant possibly be that naive

---

I care about innocent people who have been detained and potentially tortured. I am not 'suddenly concerned' with this because of recent claims of 'far left sympathizers'. To call me naive from your narrow bubble is insulting. No professional or legal interpretation in the courts in 200 years has said that the government has the right to suspend citizens' rights. Many a president and congress has tried. Wilson tried it. Adams tried it. In fact, the Bush administration was very reluctant to put any of the alleged terrorists in custody through the court system because of the likelihood of the courts holding up these rights.

I am concerned with the rights and safety of those innocents rounded up with the terrorists, and of the precedent this sets for future circumstances. That is very different from 'caring about the 9/11 terrorists'. But since you bring that subject up: I think the sane and reasonable and especially Christian thing to do is to examine openly and honestly what caused the terrorists to carry out their despicable acts and why they hate the United States so much. Not so we can apologize or make excuses for them, but so we can prevent further attacks by attacking the problem at its roots.

Suicide attacks, contrary to being the sole domain of religious extremists, have more to do with the nationalist fervor of those carrying them out. A great number of suicide bombings were carried out by adherents to secular, communist and nationalist causes. Most of the 9/11 terrorists came from Saudi Arabia, our supposed ally. None of the 9/11 terrorists came from Iraq, by the way. Most of these attacks are shown to be motivated not by the fact that we are predominantly a white or Christian nation, as some have argued. They are because these people resent US influence in other countries, what they see as war profiteering and a new wave of imperialism, which they had enough of when the Brits were doing it. And let's be honest, oil is a big reason why we've got our hands so deep into the honey pot of the middle east.

In fact, our involvement since the War on Terror began has actually had the opposite effect, bolstering the number of recruits for terror cells. Possibly because of all of the collatoral damage such a messy and difficult war has caused. I still think we should go after the terror cells, but to pretend that there aren't side effects is delusional. In many ways, it mirrors the complete failure that is our War on Drugs, which has allowed vast criminal empires to amass fortunes.

Let's also examine how the Patriot Act was made into law. Congress was given one draft the weekend before, and at the time of the vote the one being voted on was drastically different. They were given a document over 1000 pages long and absolutely no time to read it. That is not democracy. That is strong-arming legislation through that very likely would not have passed were they to take the time to read it. By the way, I don't blame Bush for that. I blame the Legislature for not doing their freaking job. An act, by the way, that could have still allowed various intelligence agencies to work together without allowing for the invasion of peoples' rights were it to be amended or replaced by something far less sinister.

And by claiming that you think the Constitution allows for suspension of rights in a time of war, you are saying that putting Japanese Americans in internment camps was the right thing to do. You are saying that arresting anti-war protesters during WW1 was the right thing to do. In fact, if our current far-left government decided that arch-conservatives and anyone who listens to Rush Limbaugh were seditionists in a time of war, that he should be able to arrest you and keep you locked up until this War on Terror is won. Damn, don't you wish you had the legal system to avail yourself of? Oh well, you willingly gave up that right. Congratulations. I hope you enjoy simulated drowning.