How He Got Here
Many will say that it took too long for a minority to become the president of the United States of America. But it’s better late than never, as others will say.
President-Elect Barack Obama will become the first bi-racial black and white man to hold the office of Commander-in-Chief.
Many black, and even white, Americans suffered from the racial injustices of evil men of both colors. Many black Americans dared to dream of a better life and some, like Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., paid with their lives for having such dreams of freedom.
And in so many ways, Obama is the embodiment of that dream of Dr. King’s. His mother was white and his father was black and many Americans voted for him because of his character. Dr. King would have been so proud.
And now, Obama is one of the few Americans who has the power to become a racial bridge of equality and will hopefully establish a more color-blinded society. A growing society that will live up to the dream that Dr. King envision:
That people are judged not by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character.
2009 Jackass of the Year: #4
15 hours ago
6 comments:
But can he lead?
I'll give the guy a fair shot, and I don't care what color(s) he is, but I'm not encouraged by the people he's surrounding himself with and the fact that liberals and the media are treating him like a Messiah.
Yesterday's NY media were full of glowing comparisons to Lincoln and Kennedy. Pretty good reviews for a guy who hasn't even been inaugurated yet...
Remember, absolute power corrupts absolutely.
-- Last NJ Cowboy
Well, Last N. J. Cowboy, as I wrote in my Nov. 4, 2008 editorial, “Showing Respect For The New President,” I think we should respect President-Elect Obama, but we have a right to respectfully disagree with any of his decisions or policies that we may take issue with.
Sadly I have not had the time, but one of the issues I have with our next president is how he may stop the interrogation methods of captured terrorists. From what I’ve read, these methods, while cruel, have worked. I would feel better that all methods are used against our enemies to protect the American people and other innocent lives throughout the world.
LNJ Cowboy: It's no different than the way religious conservatives said that Bush hadn't been elected, rather he'd been chosen by God. I think the reaction you're seeing is that of a large group of people overjoyed to be finally free from the grip of an invasive and borderline tyrannical administration.
The Times Observer: The fact that you might feel better about having your enemies tortured doesn't make the practice any more legal or ethical. The ban on torture provided by the Geneva accords exists to protect American troops in captivity as well; I think its more important to hold to the principle of the rule of Law above all else, if America reacts to acts of terrorism by becoming a rogue state in its own right it loses any moral high ground when it comes to the actions of its enemies.
The Great Fox Hating Potentate I see what you’re saying, but sadly, that isn’t really the case. Our enemies had no problems breaking the Geneva accords or using torture against Americans on 9/11.
The fact is, because tortured was used, it broke 14 al-Qaeda leaders and they told U.S. investigators vital information that saved lives. And the torture techniques that were used are still very tame compared to what our enemies use.
Let’s put it this way: If my young son and daughter are visiting New York City and on that day, terrorists are planning to set off a dirty nuke bomb, then I want any method used against captured terrorists so they can tell who is involved so they can be stopped.
Times Observer: You're saying two different things here and neither one of them is morally conscionable.
1) "Our enemies had no problems breaking the Geneva accords or using torture against Americans on 9/11."
First, to deal with the technical errors here; "Our enemies" in this case were not a specific nation or group of nations acting against the U.S. but rather a group of militant fanatics who, not being a nation unto themselves, could not by definition break the Geneva Convention because they were never signatories to it. Also, who was tortured on 9/11? Thousands of people tragically lost their lives but, by U.S. law, merely killing someone doesn't constitute torture otherwise the Constitution wouldn't allow for state sanctioned executions. Unless you have some knowledge as to torturous activities engaged in by the hijackers after they crashed the planes I don't really know what you're getting at here.
Second, your assertion that, since our enemies don't necessarily uphold the ban on torture we should be allowed to ignore it also, is puerile and sophomoric at best and outright ignorant at worst. Every kid over the age of 5 has heard the litany that two wrongs don't make a right, I shouldn't have to reiterate it here. If the U.S wants to frame the War on Terror in Manichean, Good vs. Evil, us vs. them terms (as it has since 9/11) it has to hold itself to a higher standard of behavior; if not what's to distinguish you (The Good) from them (The Evil)?
2)"If my young son and daughter are visiting New York City and on that day, terrorists are planning to set off a dirty nuke bomb, then I want any method used against captured terrorists so they can tell who is involved so they can be stopped."
I want a million dollars, but I'm not going to rob a bank, because that's against the law. I'd like Lindsay Lohan to call me back (joke) but I'm not going to stalk her until she does, because that's against the law.
There are plenty of things that we all want in the interests of bettering our lives or securing a greater degree of safety for our families. Let me give you a scenario to chew on:
I take my two year old daughter to the beach and notice a man in his forties looking at her a little too long. I shoot him. The next day the same thing happens only this man takes pictures of her. I shoot him. Ditto the next day, only in this case the man talks to my daughter and pats her on the back. I shoot him as well. Now let's say that, against all statistical probability one of these men turns out to have actually been a pedophile. Would I be excused for murdering the other two just because I happened to luck out and take a dangerous predator off the street? More importantly, should I be?
Without the rule of law to curtail actions like this we descend to a state of frontier vigilantism, the fact that the law being broken is one that binds the whole nation to a code of behavior doesn't make it less important it makes it more so. Nations that know better should lead by example; what example do you want to set, one that justifies your enemies vilification of you or one that engenders international condemnation of your enemies on your behalf?
Great Fox Hating Potentate, I’m well aware that our enemies are not a nation, but that does not mean we should take them any less seriously.
In addition, the terrorists on those planes did torture some of those passengers before slamming the planes into buildings. There was psychological torture, where the terrorists said they had a bomb and there was physical torture, where some people were tied up or had bodily harm done to them.
And sometimes, two wrongs do make a right. Even my son of 6 years old realizes this. You use your scenario of taking your child to the beach and a man looks at her. To actually use that as a comparison compared to my scenario of terrorists planning to bomb New York City is weak at best.
Because in my scenario, we actually have terrorists locked up who know about the bombing and we have terrorists running around New York City about to blow it up.
Tell me, if your child was in my scenario, what would you allow U.S. investigators do? Picture it, you and your child is in New York City and a group of terrorists, unknowingly to you, are plotting to set off a bomb at noon. There are captured terrorists know when, where, how, and who.
After using all other methods of non-torture against them and they still won’t talk, would you be OK with them being tortured by methods that have proven to work in order to save your child? I know I would.
At the end of the day, we found out that torture against our enemies works to gather important information that couldn’t be gained by any other means. These bloodthirsty enemies have no compassion towards their fellow man. If water boarding them breaks them and gives us the information that we need to save lives, then that makes me feel a lot better.
“Nations that know better should lead by example; what example do you want to set, one that justifies your enemies vilification of you or one that engenders international condemnation of your enemies on your behalf?”
The terrorists are crazed fanatics who see things that aren’t there. From the news articles that I read, some were upset to see Muslim children wearing American clothes and that helped set them off. Anything in their twisted minds would “justify” their vilification of the U.S., so much so that they actually hijacked airplanes and killed thousands of innocent lives on a bright, sunny September day.
It can be deadly to paint our enemies as rational people.
Post a Comment