Law and Ethics Abandoned for…9/11?
The exploitation of 9/11 to justify Iraq is even more offensive when one considers how it relates to wide-ranging ethical and legal violations.
A couple of months after Bush’s second inauguration, in March 2005, it was reported that the Bush administration used thousands of taxpayer dollars to further exploit 9/11 and promote the Iraq war and other issues in ever more creative ways. This time it took equally unethical forms such as creating so-called “fake news” segments or “video news releases” (VNRs) and paying columnists, all of which was simply PR-staged reporting.
The use of 9/11 to support the Bush administration’s war policies is also troubling in view of the judgments of those policies by the Supreme Court. The Court has more than once ruled Bush administration policies as illegal under the U.S. Constitution and the country’s obligation to honor the Geneva Convention on war crimes. In July 2004, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that “United States courts have jurisdiction to consider challenges to the legality of the detention of foreign nationals captured abroad in connection with hostilities and incarcerated at Guantanamo Bay." On June 29, 2006, the Supreme Court struck down the Bush administration’s plan for military commissions to judge prisoners suspected as Al Qaeda operatives. As the Washington Post put it: “Brushing aside administration pleas not to second-guess the commander in chief during wartime, a five-justice majority ruled that the commissions, which were outlined by Bush in a military order on Nov. 13, 2001, were neither authorized by federal law nor required by military necessity, and ran afoul of the Geneva Conventions.”
Degrading Freedom
The manner in which the Bush administration has exploited 9/11 for Iraq (first directly and then more loosely and desperately) had been accompanied by an exploitation of the very meanings and practice of freedom and politics.
In that much-discussed State of the Union Address for 2003, Bush insisted that the American military has been and would be deployed paradoxically to fight for peace and to export freedom. “We seek peace. We strive for peace. And sometimes peace must be defended,” he announced in support of his preemptive war policy. He continued, as he has many times since, by repeating the sacred term “freedom.”
This mantra has been repeated, following the political communication strategy of “staying on message,” no matter how intentionally vague that message is, right up to the fifth anniversary memorial address on 9/11. “One of the strongest weapons in our arsenal is the power of freedom. The terrorists fear freedom as much as they do our firepower,” Bush assured us. Then he denied we were all actors in an epic clash of civilizations, only to go on and reassert that we in fact were involved in such a Manichean clash. “We are now in the early hours of this struggle between tyranny and freedom. Amid the violence, some question whether the people of the Middle East want their freedom, and whether the forces of moderation can prevail.”
Article comments
1 - Mark Schannon
Very powerful peace. You make it clear that neither side has shown much courage or integrity through this terrible time.
Sigh...
In Jameson Veritas.
2 - Neelan
US also adopts double standards in dealing with terrorism.On the one hand it fights terrorism and on the other it takes the help of Mushraf in Pakistan .Since 1947,Pakistan has been training people in terrorism and has been tagetting India.Never has US or any other country condemned it.In fact,it seems,the Western countries have taken this up as an opportunity to sell arms.What has resulted is that Pak and other pan islamic nations have got support all along. and they had their training camps .And no one was bothered as long as India was targeted. Unfortunately,no one from the Islamic intelligentia have also ever condemned terrorist attacks on India ,by Pak trained militants.Even now,terrorist training camps are active inside Pakistan.Mr.Bush has to undersatnd taht
Death is same -whether it is in USA or India.
3 - jayson
Thanks, Mark. And Neelan, I agree. The "U.S." as a composite of different rulers/parties throughout the 20th Century (to say nothing of the 19th)has been ethically fickle in its foreign policy and valuation of human life. As you know, Chalmers Johnson has referred to this as blowback.
best,
Jayson
4 - Nancy
Excellent article, which just fuels my ongoing rage at & loathing of the current adminstration as well as the scumbags of both parties currently infesting congress. Unfortunately politics always seems to attract the lowest of the low ethically & morally, and they in turn infect & corrupt everything & everyone around them. As with any nest of vermin, I think we need a good fumigation of both congress & the administration, and then start over from scratch. It has become painfully obvious there isn't anything these bastards won't stoop to, for self-aggrandizement, retention of power, or continued opportunity to plunder & gorge at the public trough.