One of the most prevalent myths over the past eight years is that America’s fight against “terrorism” somehow is furthering the goal of destroying violent wars and brutality in the world. In 2001, there was no al-Qaeda in Iraq, in 2001, the Taliban and al-Qaeda were not fighting and controlling large parts of Pakistan, and in 2001, the Taliban were confined to Afghanistan. A panel of jurists issued a report, “Assessing Damage, Urging Action” which blasts the Bush effort against “terrorism” as a disaster for human rights. Arthur Chasklalson, former chief justice of South Africa, comments: “in the course of this inquiry, we have been shocked by the extent of damage done over the past seven years by excessive or abusive counter-terrorism measures. The result is a serious threat to the integrity of the international human rights legal framework.”
The group noted that many countries now justify their abuse of people by citing the Bush program against terrorism. Of course, one man’s “terrorist” is another man’s “hero.” The American colonists who rebelled against England in 1776 certainly fit the Bush definition of being “terrorists” but since Bush is an American he justifies their actions on grounds they were right. In the Bush version of human rights, if you believe your actions are right, then anything you do is justified on grounds if “they” win the outcome will be worse.
The American people have spent the past several years watching and applauding violations of human rights as portrayed on the TV show, “24” which depicted using any form of abuse on grounds there was a “ticking bomb” someplace and you had to save the nation. It is time to put aside “24” and return to the United States Constitution.