Gonzales nomination hearing: US Senate welcomes a war criminal
/The focus on whether or not the nominee for the office charged with
upholding the US Constitution is for or against the barbaric methods
associated with Nazism and military dictatorships is a stark indication
of the terminal degeneration of American democracy. The hearings had a
farcical character. There was a pretense of "tough questioning" for the
nominee, whom, as everyone present was well aware, is deeply complicit
in war crimes. No one was "tough" enough to suggest that Gonzales
should be behind bars rather than occupying the chief law enforcement
position in the US. Nor did a single Democrat even go so far as to
declare that Bush's lawyer should be denied the nomination. In what is
now a standard device for blocking any unflinching examination of the
issues at hand, much was made of Gonzales's ethnic background.
Democrats and Republicans fell over each other in heaping praise upon
the nominee for his Mexican-American roots and celebrating his
nomination as some kind of Horatio Alger story, proving American racial
equality. Gonzales himself claimed his ethnic background gave him a
special sensitivity to civil rights. All of this is nonsense.
Gonzales's rise has proven only that a lawyer willing to work on the
behalf of the wealthy and powerful against the poor and oppressed, and
who has no compunction about turning the law inside out to serve
corporate interests, can go far in American bourgeois politics,
whatever his or her background. [more]
- Unfit to Serve. The Senate held
hearings yesterday for Attorney General-nominee Alberto Gonzales. As
White House counsel, Gonzales was personally responsible for a series
of memos that created the legal framework for torture. (For a
walkthrough of the memos behind the policies, read this guide.) As Sen.
Lindsey Graham (R-SC) charged, the White House "dramatically undermined
the war effort" by "getting cute with the law." He further stated, "I
think you weaken yourself as a nation when you try to play cute and
become more like your enemy instead of like who you want to be." [more]
Time and again, however, Gonzales refused yesterday to renounce those
policies or take responsibility for his role in their creation. As the
New York Times writes, "By the time the hearing ended, Mr. Gonzales,
now the White House counsel, had turned it into one of those depressing
exercises in avoiding straight answers and evading accountability." [more]
The Washington Post agrees, writing, "As attorney general, he will seek
no change in practices that have led to the torture and killing of
scores of detainees and to the blackening of U.S. moral authority
around the world.
- BELIEVES THE PRESIDENT CAN LEGALLY AUTHORIZE TORTURE: In March 2003, Gonzales approved a now-infamous memo which contended the president "wasn't bound by laws prohibiting torture and that government agents who might torture prisoners at his direction couldn't be prosecuted by the Justice Department." Once the memo -- which goes directly against the United Nations Convention Against Torture -- was made public, Gonzales backtracked, saying the memo was merely "unnecessary, over-broad discussions" about "abstract legal theories." During his hearing, Gonzales repeatedly dodged questions about whether he believes the president has the power to disregard U.S. law and order torture. Pressed to answer, he finally admitted: "I guess I would have to say that hypothetically that authority may exist." [more]Asked whether U.S. personnel could engage in torture under "any circumstances," he again refused to take a stand, saying, "I don't believe so, but I'd want to get back to you on that." [more]
- REFUSED TO CONDEMN TORTURE
TECHNIQUES: In July 2002, Gonzales held a secret meeting to discuss
just how far the U.S. could go in interrogating suspects.[more]
Among the techniques discussed: "Waterboarding," or making a suspect
think he's drowning; mock burials; and "open-handed slapping," hailed
for its slim chance of bone or tissue damage. Gonzales and the lawyers
"discussed in great detail how to legally justify such methods." Far
from urging restraint, Gonzales was aggressive, wondering if in fact
they were going far enough. During the hearing yesterday, Gonzales was
given the opportunity to stand up and publicly denounce torture
techniques. Instead, he demurred, saying only, "It is not my job" to
decide if these practices were okay. [more]
- BLAMING THE TROOPS: The abuse has been shocking and widespread, taking place in Guantanamo Bay, Iraq and Afghanistan. The FBI reports cases of abuse going back to 2002; there is also evidence the abuse has continued well after being exposed in graphic photos early last year. Gonzales refused to acknowledge the extensive, systemic problem was brought about by the string of memos and judgments muddying the U.S. stance on torture, saying, "those do not relate to confusion about policies." [more] Instead, he abdicated all responsibility and blamed it on "a failure of training and oversight," saying, "This was simply people who were morally bankrupt having fun, and I condemn that.'' He refused to say any more, contending his answers had to be limited to avoid prejudging cases. Sen. Joseph Biden (D-DE) dismissed that excuse as "pure malarkey."
- PUTTING U.S. TROOPS IN DANGER: One of the real dangers of stepping away from international law is that it puts the treatment and lives of U.S. troops in danger. Gonzales had the opportunity to promise that the U.S. will abide by international law. Instead, he waffled, saying the U.S. will follow the Geneva Conventions "whenever they apply." [more]
