Perhaps I'm a little late in realizing the full implications of the torture and denial of basic human rights used on prisoners in Iraq, but according to tonight's reading (The American Anomoly, by Raymond A. Smith), "Congress and the public learned that the US military had been using torture and depriving detainees of due process rights in Iraq and elsewhere, and that Iraq had not, in fact, possessed weapons of mass destruction. Likewise, press reports revealed that the president had authorized the wire-tapping of phones withing the United States without obtaining judicial warrants, as required by the Fourth Amendment."
Now, I understand that Congress had been pretty much goin along for the ride at that point, but if we can impeach a president for having sex with another woman and then lieing about it (not exactly a high crime) shouldn't we impeach a president for violating not only the Constitution and the oath he took to defend it, but also the rights of the people that he governs only by consent?
I'm really at a loss here...
1 comment:
President Clinton faced impeachment proceedings for allegedly lying under oath.
The wording of the text toward the end of chapter six really pulls away from the ambiguity you would expect an introductory politics course book to have.
However, as the text mentioned, the assumption that Iraq did possess weapons of mass destruction (as reported by then CIA director George Tenet) was one premise of the invasion of Iraq. While I couldn't care less if someone from the government is listening to my phone calls (they would be wasting their time and would probably be pretty bored) I agree that it is a breach on individual privacy and citizens' rights.
Post a Comment