Another Triumph of Our Government.

dcsleeps — Tue, 28 Nov 2006 17:26:35 +0000

I read this statement while at work. Our government at times seems to make absolutely no sense. Do they honestly believe that they have no boundries, no one to answer to, and no rules to follow?

November 17, 2006

Pentagon Wants to Build a White Elephant, According to

Amnesty International

(Washington, DC) – Larry Cox, Amnesty International USA’s executive director, issued the following statement in response to today’s news reports that the Department of Defense is planning to build a “legal compound” at the U.S. detention facility in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba:“Once again, the Defense Department seems to be operating in – even constructing – its own universe. The new rules for the proposed military commissions under the Military Commissions Act(MCA) have not been made public, and not a single charge has been filed under the new system. And yet the Pentagon wants to build a permanent homage to its failed experiment in second class justice.“It is absolutely nonsensical that the U.S. government is proposing to spend 125 million American taxpayers’ dollars to build commission rooms and supporting structures, when there’s a chance that the U.S. courts may strike down the new commissions. Rather than wasting tons of money creating edifices that may prove to be a white elephant, the U.S. government should use the sophisticated and fully adequate facilities already available to it to try terrorism suspects – federal courts.”

Ethics, law, and the border.

dcsleeps — Wed, 08 Nov 2006 02:11:11 +0000

There has been a lot of talk about how our government should handle the US/Mexico border in this recent election season. Most of the arguments used to support the fence, the creation of felony charges against those here illegally, and other political immigration reforms have been based in the proclamation of following the law. I am concerned when the law is the only thing used to gauge right and wrong. Many times in the past we have found laws to be unethical, immoral, and just plain wrong. A good example would be past laws that discriminated against racial minorities. Though following the law was used as a weapon to chastise those who fought for rights, we would later look back on these laws as in fact wrong and deserving to be abolished or changed. Take Martin Luther King Jr. for example. Many religious leaders, colleagues of King, found following the law more important than fighting for what was right in the struggle for civil rights. What does it take to bring people to the realization that ethics, the decision to do what is right, comes before the law. In the sense of the US/Mexico border, we have to think of the right thing to do toward our fellow man, not just whether they cross over a desert without our permission. I’ve heard the argument that people should not have to be ethical towards “lawbreakers”, but is that how we honestly gauge ethical behavior? If you consider ethics, and look from the standpoint of many who are willing to pay coyotes to show them across a dangerous border, the crossers are making an ethical choice. They are choosing to risk their lives to ensure that they can support their own basic needs and that of their family. To them, that is the right thing to do, the ethical choice.

So how do we address the border issue from an ethical standpoint? We must first stop using ethnocentric policies to address the issue and look at the roots of the problem that drive these people into our borders. We also really need to look at what we really are afraid of. Is it really racially motivated? Are we as a country capable of looking past nationalistic and unethical standards in order to do what is right for thousands of desperate people waiting to risk it all to come here?

“The alien who resides with you shall be to you as the citizen among you; you shall love the alien as yourself, for you were aliens in the land of Egypt: I am the Lord your God” (Leviticus 19:34)

DC Sleeps » Civil liberties and human rights

Another Triumph of Our Government.

Ethics, law, and the border.