A war on two fronts
People — not enough, but the numbers are growing — are rightfully up in arms about the increase in civil liberties violations in the name of new policies appearing seemingly deus ex machina. Dan Gillmor’s experience at the Ramada New Yorker hotel is an example at one end the spectrum, the case of Mike Hawash (see yesterday’s posting) at the other.
For Gillmor’s column, see
http://weblog.siliconvalley.com/column/dangillmor/archives/000918.shtml#000918
Looking at the international scene, many people are also dismayed that the US is flaunting or selectively opting out of treaties and international law. Michele Landsberg’s March 23 column discusses the enormous health consequences arising from the use of weapons that deposit depleted uranium and possibly uranium-236 into the environment, actions that arguably violate the Geneva Convention’s Protocol 1.
For Landsberg’s column, see
http://www.thestar.com/, click on “star columnists” in bar at left, and go to “Michele Landsberg.” From there, go to her column re. “Precious Environment…”
Landsberg points out that the US didn’t sign Protocol 1. You can easily find other examples, and while the Bush administration clamors for the support of the rest of the world, it refuses to be bound by any treaties it doesn’t like.
These are two sides of the same coin. In both instances, an executive agency (the government, eg.) puts itself above and outside a legally established framework and instead works toward an agenda that lies outside the electorate’s control. I don’t know who reads these blogs. Maybe I’m talking to 3 or 4 converted friends, as I did with my emails before I started blogging. Or perhaps pulling information together can contribute to the catalyst for change.
Canadians, meanwhile, are continuing their protests against the war. See:
http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/ContentServer?pagename=thestar/Layout/Article_Type1&c=Article&cid=1035780530933&call_pageid=968332188492&col=968705899037
No Comments yet
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.