 |
||||||||
|
3/29/2003 06:25:00 PM | Timothy More on the Columbia Teach-In Ira Katznelson began by speaking about how the Bush administration rejects international institutions, including the U.N. and at least some aspects of the Euro-U.S. alliance. The administration "mistakes coercive power for consent" and is "willing to flirt with one of the world's most hated possibility: colonialism." Katznelson said also that many brutal regimes around the world cynically deploy the rhetoric of anti-colonialism for own private obscene privilege. He was unhappy with the hubris on right, but also unhappy with those against the war who are too indifferent to the kind of regime that rules Iraq. Our first and primary responsibility should be to be accountable and trustworthy, and Bush has been a spectacular failure at that. Katznelson assailed how the reckless use of rhetoric was discrediting the language of freedom, and said how this debasement of language can have fateful consequences. The U.S. administration has shown profound disrespect for other countries, failed to build pluralism and consent, went to U.N. cynically and gave the process insufficient time. This administration abhors real politics, and the press have acquiesed and shown a terrifying lack of reasoned reporting. Katznelson also claimed that in addition to passing a resolution which supported the troops in the field, the Senate also unanimously expressed support for the leadership of President Bush. Katznelson ended by saying that "evil after all, can take more than one form." Prof. Ratner said that there are two way you can use force is this world: self defense and with the authority of the Security Council: "this war is an aggressive war, a crime against peace, and [is] flatly illegal." One thing that Ratner talked about was the incredible hypocricy of the U.S. when it talks about how Iraq violated the Geneva conventions. Of course Iraq should follow it, but the U.S. would be a lot more credible if it itself were obeying these conventions. Shock and Awe, if it were practiced as advertised, would be a war crime. Prof. Feltcher began by saying the beret may become the appropriate symbol of resistance. Fletcher also noted that legal scholars had questioned what Bush might ever use military tribunals for. A couple of weeks ago, the administration had been making noise about prosecuting the leaders of Iraq based on crimes they had committed a decade or so ago. Fletcher said he had wondered how U.S. courts could have jurisdiction over this (provisions in U.S. law penalize grave breaches of human rights which involve U.S. nationals). On February 28, the Defense Department published a list of crimes they intended to prosecute in military tribunals, and Fletcher think this list shows they intend to use the tribunals in Iraq, and it is very troubling if the death penalty can be imposed by a vote of three military officers. The M.C. for the first panel, Jean Cohen ended by saying: "I have to say I'm utterly amazed at the solidarity of speakers in keeping to their time limits." In a further post, I am going to talk about the Prof. who called for the U.S. to lose to war, which is all over the blogosphere. It is kind of ridiculous, in a sense, because his statement were entirely his, and not echoed by any of the other speakers. perma link |
| 0 comments
0 Comments: |
Dartmouth The Free Press Alums for Social Change The Green Magazine The Dartmouth Dartmouth Observer Dartmouth Review Dartlog Inner Office The Little Green Blog Welton Chang's Blog Vox in Sox MN Publius (Matthew Martin) Netblitz Dartmouth Official News Other Blogs Ampersand Atrios Arts & Letters Altercation Body and Soul Blog For America Brad DeLong Brad Plumer CalPundit Campus Nonsense Clarksphere Crooked Timber Cursor Daily Kos Dean Nation Dan Drezner The Front Line Instapundit Interesting Times Is That Legal? Talking Points Memo Lady-Likely Lawrence Lessig Lean Left Left2Right Legal Theory Matthew Yglesias Ms. Musings MWO Nathan Newman New Republic's &c. Not Geniuses Ornicus Oxblog Pandagon Political State Report Political Theory Daily Review Queer Day Roger Ailes SCOTUS blog Talk Left TAPPED Tacitus This Modern World Tough Democrat Untelevised Volokh Conspiracy Washington Note X. & Overboard Magazines, Newspapers and Journals Boston Globe Ideas Boston Review Chronicle of Higher Education Common Dreams Dissent In These Times Mother Jones New York Review of Books New York Times Salon Slate The American Prospect The Nation The New Republic The Progressive Tikkun Tom Paine Village Voice Washington Monthly Capitol Hill Media ABC's The Note American Journalism Review Columbia Journalism Review CQ Daily Howler Donkey Rising The Hill Medianews National Journal NJ Hotline NJ Wake-up call NJ Early Bird NJ Weekly Political Wire Roll Call Spinsanity Search Search the DFP  |
|||||||
The opinions expressed here are not necessarily those of Dartmouth College or the Dartmouth Free Press.