Lt. Commander Charles Swift was a model officer in the US Navy. Self-motivated, always taking the initiative to exceed expectations, proud of his country, his branch of the service, and loyal. Because he successfully did the job he was assigned, he was informed that not only would he not be promoted, but that, as such, his services were no longer needed by the Navy. To some it matters that Lt. Commander Swift's JOB was to defend Gitmo detainee Salim Hamdan against terrorist charges. Well, technically that's not entirely accurate. No charges had actually been filed against Hamdan. He'd just been held at Gitmo for almost 5 years with no explanation. Swift simply tried to gain for Hamdan the rights guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution, the Uniform Code of Military Justice and the Geneva Convention. Swift felt that the way we treat others is how we might expect others to treat us. He figured out laws mattered. That the world might remember why they respected the U.S. if we could return to the nation of laws we were prior to this administration's spiral away from those principles. In order to check his beliefs and demonstrate our principles to the rest of the world, Swift had to sue his Commander in Chief and the Secretary of Defense. He won. He was fired. The world can now make its decision.
Will that make us look bad? Do ya think it might make us and our troops a target?
In a similar move in the civilian world, where more people seem to notice and care, even though everyone these days claims to support the troops, the Bush administration is now being investigated for misusing the Patriot Act to fire U.S. Attorneys, whose political independence is the backbone of our freedom, the very basis upon which this country was founded. At least we're a nation that acts on our beliefs, eh?
2 million Iraqis have fled their homeland because of the destruction our actions have caused there and to this day neither they, nor the American citizens who will eventually pay $1 trillion for this effort, have been given an explanation of why we invaded the country in the first place.
The vice president criticized the democractic spending debate for Iraq saying it's what al qaeda and bin Laden would want. That strikes me as a little odd since bin Laden never had any significant ties to Iraq. Isn't Cheney admitting that Iraq was a mistake by invoking his name now... in favor of continued war in Iraq???
Long time Republican loyalist, conservative, Vietnam veteran Chuck Hagel has indicated that the only way Bush will face any accountability is via impeachment. Hagel's words: "The president says, 'I don't care,' he's not accountable anymore. Which isn't totally true. You can impeach him, and before this is over, you might see calls for his impeachment." Thank God someone with the power to do something is at least considering this.
I was pretty excited about a month ago when the loyalists to this page agreed to engage in a civil debate about religion's role and importance in our modern world, but between being busy at my temp job, and looking for less temporary employment, keeping my family sane in our temporary living arrangment and searching for more permanent living arrangements, and watching the world around me that's well beyond my control continue its downward trend, I just can't get into it.
I've often been heard arguing that the old adage about never arguing politics and religion is the most ridiculous piece of advice humans on this earth could ever agree to follow. What could possible be more important? What issues could be more worth overcoming some discomfort in or order to reach some agreement? I still think that way, I'm just not up to the argument right now.
No comments:
Post a Comment