Monday, November 21, 2005

Well, Most Of Em Were Guilty

Texas Executes An Innocent Man

Normal Reaction: I can't believe we did this! We should re-evaluate the death penalty. Good, moral Americans cannot murder innocent people!

Predictable Republican Reaction: So what? Everybody makes mistakes. Now if you'll excuse me, I have to go to church.

Of course, the death penalty is small potatoes compared to our brand new form of justice, which the CIA lovingly calls, "'unique' methods to obtain 'vital' information."

Hmm. "Unique." Interesting. What's a synonym for "unique"? How about "Unusual"? As in "Cruel and Unusual Punishment"?

Oy. Let me just respond to the spin for a moment. No one likes murderers, and no one likes terrorists. In fact, we hate murderers, and hate terrorists. But, I mean, who's a murderer? Who's a terrorist? Sometimes it's difficult to tell. Which is why we have trials, and why we have a legal system. We don't torture or inflict unusual punishment upon prisoners because to do so would be sadistic and morally reprehensible. And... they might be innocent.

John McCain was tortured. His captors asked him to reveal the names of his fellow cellmates, his fellow soldiers. Rather than endure another moment of brutal pain, McCain gave them names. Of the Green Bay Packers offensive line.

Are we busy following up on the names of Iraqi soccer players? Intelligence gleaned from a wounded and desperate man's attempt to end the pain?

Are we ok with executing innocent people, just because we like to execute guilty ones? And are we ok with torturing innocent people, just because it MIGHT give us some intelligence?

Every totalitarian dictator in history was ok with it.

So are Bush and Cheney.

No comments:

Visitor Map: