Subject:
|
Unjust, unwise, unAmerican
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Sat, 19 Jul 2003 02:00:35 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
140 times
|
| |
|
|
Jul 10th 2003
From The Economist print edition
"America's plan to set up military commissions for the trials of terrorist
suspects is a big mistake..."
Here's the link to the rest of the story but it won't work, I don't think,
unless you're a subscriber:
http://www.economist.com/displaystory.cfm?story_id=S%27%29HH%2CRQ3%2B%21P%20%3C%0A
(The Economist at 100 USD/year, about what I pay, is a better value than Time,
even when it comes in free, in my view)
The net of this article (the leader, actually, their lead editorial for the
week) from last week's print edition, is pretty well summed up in the subject
line.
The Economist supported the war in general but they're sure right about this:...
(their final para, quoted for purposes of review)
Mr Bush could have asked Congress to pass new anti-terrorism laws. Instead, he
is setting up a shadow court system outside the reach of either Congress or
America's judiciary, and answerable only to himself. Such a system is the
antithesis of the rule of law which the United States was founded to uphold. In
a speech on July 4th, Mr Bush rightly noted that American ideals have been a
beacon of hope to others around the world. In compromising those ideals in this
matter, Mr Bush is not only dismaying America's friends but also blunting one of
America's most powerful weapons against terrorism.
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
4 Messages in This Thread:
  
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
