Colext/Macondo
Cantina virtual de los COLombianos en el EXTerior
--------------------------------------------------
Dice PANG: Honolable hijo n�melo 2 acaba envial alt�culo acelca boca de
Bush:
-------------------------------------
The Mouth That Erred --Harley Sorensen, Special to SF Gate Monday,
December 3, 2001
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----
With all due respect, George W. Bush really ought to watch his mouth.
I'm not referring to the Bushisms he made famous during last year's
presidential campaign. Those were mostly slips of the tongue, seized upon by
his political opponents. Nor am I referring to his major faux pas of calling
America's campaign against terrorists and their neighbors a "crusade."
No, I'm referring to ways in which he really screwed up. I'll mention two of
them.
A mighty big error in presidential judgment occurred in Philadelphia on Aug.
4, 2000. That was the day Bush accepted the nomination of the Republican
Party. It was a happy day for him, an upbeat day for the party.
In his acceptance speech, here's one of the things Bush said: "We have seen
a steady erosion of American power and an unsteady exercise of American
influence. Our military is low on parts, pay and morale. If called on by the
commander-in-chief today, two entire divisions of the Army would have to
report, 'Not ready for duty, sir.'"
Suppose now that you're a group of would-be terrorists from Saudi Arabia,
such as those who bombed the Pentagon and the World Trade Center on Sept.
11. Suppose you heard Bush in Philadelphia and believed what he said.
Wouldn't you believe that now was the time to act? Wasn't Bush's lament an
invitation to strike? What would a terrorist have to fear from an underpaid
American army low on morale and spare parts?
Even given the latitude of a political campaign, wasn't it rather stupid of
Bush to paint America as such a weak sister?
The second way in which he screwed up -- and keeps screwing up -- popped up
immediately after Sept. 11. He called the criminal acts of that day acts of
war. Dumb mistake.
On Sept. 12, he said, "The deliberate and deadly attacks which were carried
out yesterday against our country were more than acts of terror. They were
acts of war."
Bush keeps repeating his war theme. Last Thursday, speaking to a new crop of
US attorneys, he said, "We're at war. The enemy has declared war on us."
And: "Many of you will place a crucial part in our victory against
terrorism, and, make no mistake, we're going to win the war."
If I were a criminal-defense attorney, I'd be licking my chops over Bush's
"war" statements. He has handed those who defend terrorists a perfect
weapon: "Your Honor, my client is not a terrorist. He is a combatant in a
war. Therefore, his acts are not crimes. He is no more a criminal than an
American pilot who, let us say, deliberately bombs a Red Cross warehouse in
Afghanistan."
So, first Bush paints us as so weak we can't resist attack, then he
inadvertently covers up for the murderers in New York and Arlington by
saying they were combatants in a war.
Don't you agree that the man should watch his mouth? He should remember that
he's president now, not governor of Texas. He has to take more careful aim
these days. Shooting from the hip is no longer acceptable.
On another subject, the article by William Carlsen in last Friday's
Chronicle and on this Web site should be required reading for anyone
interested in justice in the United States.
In it, Carlsen shows some of the flaws of the military tribunals used during
World War II against suspected German saboteurs. On the basis of that
article, it would appear that the use of military tribunals, as ordered by
Bush, is a terrible idea.
The government of Spain seems to think so, too. Last week, in the words of
the Independent of London, "Spain signalled politely but firmly ... that it
would not hand terrorist suspects over to the United States to be tried at
secret military tribunals where they could face the death penalty."
Call me an alarmist if you will, but I think the self-proclaimed "world's
greatest democracy" has a problem when nations like Spain don't trust us to
carry out justice in our courts.
Spain has arrested 14 people suspected of belonging to Osama bin Laden's
terrorist network. Other suspects have been arrested in Belgium, France,
Germany, Italy and England, countries that don't have -- and don't believe
in -- the death penalty.
You can imagine the strain on diplomatic relations when we decide to
extradite those suspects to be tried by secret courts and possibly executed
after being found guilty by a mere "preponderance of the evidence" and a
two-thirds vote of carefully selected military "judges."
In his acceptance speech last year, Bush said that "the largest lesson I
learned in Midland [where he grew up] still guides me as governor: Everyone,
from immigrant to entrepreneur, has an equal claim on this country's
promise."
That was then. Now Bush wants to subject all of America's 18 million
noncitizens to the possibility of trial by secret military tribunal, giving
them somewhat less than an "equal claim" on America's promise.
I've said it before, but I feel compelled to say it again: I heartily agree
with our violent yet restrained military action in Afghanistan. The nations
of the world should have taken the Taliban on long before Sept. 11.
I give the Bush team great credit for its ability to fight a war, although
some of Bush's more bellicose statements have me waiting for the other shoe
to drop. I only wish I could give Bush and his team equal credit for a
commitment to preserve America's traditions and freedoms.
Harley Sorensen is a longtime journalist and iconoclast. His column appears
Mondays. E-mail him at [EMAIL PROTECTED] �2001 SF Gate
--------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with UNSUBSCRIBE COLEXT as the BODY of the message.
Un archivo de colext puede encontrarse en:
http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/
cortesia de Anibal Monsalve Salazar
