Internetworkers: http://www.ibiblio.org/internetworkers/

[Phillip Rhodes <mindcrime AT cpphacker.co.uk>]

Here's an interesting essay by Dr. Ron Paul,
Republican / Libertarian House Representative from Texas.



--- In republican AT yahoogroups.com, "givemeliberty01" <ariasam@e...> wrote:
Torture, War, and Presidential Powers

by Rep. Ron Paul, MD

A Wall Street Journal article last week detailed a Department of
Defense memo that discusses the legality of interrogation and
torture methods in the wake of events at Abu Gharib. The document
reportedly advises that the president has authority to order almost
any action, including physical or psychological torture, despite
federal laws to the contrary. The Pentagon lawyers who drafted the
memo were not shy about blatantly asserting that the Commander-In-
Chief can break the law when necessary, as evidenced by this quote
from the memo: "Sometimes the greater good for society will be
accomplished by violating the literal language of the criminal law."

The Justice department, for its part, is depressingly silent on the
issue. Attorney General Ashcroft refuses to release an existing
Justice department memo on the matter to Congress. Why can't the
American people, much less Congress, see how the Justice department
interprets presidential powers and federal torture laws? Why the
secrecy? The Justice department is charged with enforcing federal
laws, not suspending them or advising federal agencies to ignore
them.

Legal issues aside, the American people and government should never
abide the use of torture by our military or intelligence agencies. A
decent society never accepts or justifies torture. It dehumanizes
both torturer and victim, yet seldom produces reliable intelligence.
Torture by rogue American troops or agents puts all Americans at
risk, especially our rank-and-file soldiers stationed in dozens of
dangerous places around the globe. God forbid terrorists take
American soldiers or travelers hostage and torture them as some kind
of sick retaliation for Abu Gharib.

The greater issue presented by the Defense department memo, however,
is the threat posed by unchecked executive power. Defense department
lawyers essentially argue that a president's powers as Commander-In-
Chief override federal laws prohibiting torture, and the Justice
department appears to agree. But the argument for extraordinary
wartime executive powers has been made time and time again, always
with bad results and the loss of our liberties. War has been used by
presidents to excuse the imprisonment of American citizens of
Japanese descent, to silence speech, to suspend habeas corpus, and
even to control entire private industries.

It is precisely during times of relative crisis that we should
adhere most closely to the Constitution, not abandon it. War does
not justify the suspension of torture laws any more than it
justifies the suspension of murder laws, the suspension of due
process, or the suspension of the Second amendment.

We are fighting undeclared wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, and an open-
ended war against terrorism worldwide. If the president claims
extraordinary wartime powers, and we fight undeclared wars with no
beginning and no end, when if ever will those extraordinary powers
lapse? Since terrorism will never be eliminated completely, should
all future presidents be able to act without regard to Congress or
the Constitution simply by asserting "We're at war"?

Conservatives should understand that the power given the president
today will pass to the president's successors, who may be only too
eager to abuse that unbridled power domestically to destroy their
political enemies. Remember the anger directed at President Clinton
for acting "above the law" when it came to federal perjury charges?
An imperial presidency threatens all of us who oppose unlimited
state power over our lives.

A strong separation of powers is at the heart of our constitutional
liberties. No branch of government should be able to act
unilaterally, no matter how cumbersome the legislative process may
be. The beauty of the Constitution is that it encourages some degree
of gridlock in government, making it harder for any branch to act
capriciously or secretly. When we give any president – one man – too
much power, we build a foundation for future tyranny.

June 15, 2004

Dr. Ron Paul is a Republican member of Congress from Texas.
http://www.house.gov/paul/mail/welcome.htm
--- End forwarded message ---


One minor nit with the above... Ron Paul is nominally
a Republican, only because of Texas ballot access
laws that prohibited him from running as a Libertarian.
But Dr. Ron Paul is a member of the Libertarian Party,
and was actually the Libertarian Candidate for President
in 1988.

See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ron_Paul for more on Ron Paul.


TTYL,


Phil
--
Vote Badnarik for President 2004
www.badnarik.org

FREE AMERICA
Vote Libertarian
www.lp.org