Moral limbo dancing

From: Manthorp13 Jan 2007 09:06
To: ALL1 of 13
How low can you go? Had you asked me yesterday whether the US administration could sink to a new moral low, I would have had my doubts. They've pretty much hit bedrock, I'd have argued. Nothing lower but the pits of hell.

Then I read this editorial in today's New York Times:

quote:
Speaking this week on Federal News Radio, a Web site and AM radio station offering helpful hints for bureaucrats and helpful news for the administration, Cully Stimson, the deputy assistant secretary of defense for detainee affairs, tried to rally American corporations to stop doing business with law firms that represent inmates of the Guantánamo internment camp...

...In his interview, reported yesterday by The Washington Post editorial page, Mr. Stimson rattled off some of the most respected law firms in the country that, after initial hesitation, have courageously respected that right. He called it “shocking” that they were “representing detainees down there” and suggested that when corporate America got word of this dastardly behavior, “those C.E.O.’s are going to make those law firms choose between representing terrorists or representing reputable firms.” He added: “We want to watch that play out.”


It's not as if abandoning the principle of legal representation for all (let alone for those who have been illegally detained without trial for five years) is enough: Stimson wishes to do so by coercing US corporations into withdrawing contracts. The final turd atop Stimson's squalid shit pie are the dark hints that those law firms are being paid by The Sinister Other:

quote:
When his interviewer asked who was paying these firms for the work, Mr. Stimson said, “It’s not clear, is it?”

Actually, it is quite clear. Mr. Stimson surely knows that the vast majority of those cases are being handled for free by law firms that have not signed on to Mr. Bush’s post-9/11 revision of the American rules of justice. Still, he persisted, saying some lawyers were “receiving monies from who knows where.”


It's so morally repugnant I almost admire it. That Stimson could rise to a position of power and responsibility when he is so utterly devoid of any moral compass is startling: but then, perhaps it's a prerequisite in the Bush cabinet.
From: Peter (BOUGHTONP)13 Jan 2007 12:34
To: Manthorp 2 of 13
I was expecting a discussion on the moralities of compelling people to fold their body back lower and lower and potentially injuring themselves.

YOU HAVE DISSAPPOINTED ME!!! :@
From: Manthorp13 Jan 2007 14:30
To: Peter (BOUGHTONP) 3 of 13
But on the other hand, what wise words you DID read.
From: Peter (BOUGHTONP)13 Jan 2007 15:03
To: Manthorp 4 of 13

What, the barely legible tripe about some fuckwit merkan?
That was duller than listening to Travis. :@

EDITED: 13 Jan 2007 15:07 by BOUGHTONP
From: Manthorp13 Jan 2007 15:36
To: Peter (BOUGHTONP) 5 of 13
For shame, BP: I'll have you rewritten in ASP.
From: Peter (BOUGHTONP)13 Jan 2007 15:39
To: Manthorp 6 of 13
NOOOOOOOOO!!!!

I love you really, I do!
From: Manthorp13 Jan 2007 17:15
To: Peter (BOUGHTONP) 7 of 13
I'll let you off just this once.
From: paul13 Jan 2007 20:25
To: Manthorp 8 of 13

I wanted to reply but the words failed me. (fail)

 

Just to let you know that I am paying attention.

 

:O)

From: Manthorp13 Jan 2007 23:10
To: paul 9 of 13
A gent and a scholar, as always.
From: Mouse14 Jan 2007 06:15
To: Manthorp 10 of 13

If something like that happened in England there would be a big backlash from the press. Admittidly the left wing press mostly, but it would make the situation into something where at the very least elaborations on comments so extreme would be demanded.

 

Owt like that happen with the US press? Not a great deal it would seem :(

From: Manthorp14 Jan 2007 09:41
To: Mouse 11 of 13
It's still early days: the left-leaning papers have written editorials about it. More interestingly, the defense department is already distancing itself from his interview:

quote:
"Mr. Cully Stimson’s comments in a recent media interview about law firms representing Guantanamo detainees do not represent the views of the Defense Department or the thinking of its leadership,” a Pentagon spokesman said.

Given that he's pissed off a number of lawyers who believe they are acting out of principle and in defense of the constitution, and concerned the entire legal profession who see his comments as a threat to the principle of representing clients Pro Bono, I think he may be in for a bit more stick before it blows over.

Serve the fucker right.
EDITED: 14 Jan 2007 09:46 by MANTHORP
From: Rich (RICARD00)14 Jan 2007 13:38
To: Manthorp 12 of 13

How can that Government have the brass balls to be so blantant in it's disregard for human rights, it's own laws and civil liberties?

 

I'm astounded.

From: Mouse14 Jan 2007 15:28
To: Manthorp 13 of 13
Well that's something I suppose. It does seem rather stupid as well as plain nasty though. And very "Four legs good, two legs better".