Who needs them? [2]

[Ivo Skoric]

You are right - I do not look at the psychoanalitical dimension 
enough. 

When the US was made in late 18th century, it was the expression 
of the most modern, brightest ideas, that could not be realized in 
Europe, burdened by its un-democratic, bloated, greedy, 
bureaucratic monarchies, where most (if not all) of the original US 
founders came from. Europe came a long way since that, though.

So, those brilliant people made a Constitution here, and it was all 
about being rational and precise and logical, making the first real 
capitalist democracy. Ahead of its time. But now it seems to be far 
behind. Its leaders seem to need a good psychoanalist...

And that's not something one would expect from the leadership of 
the hyper-power, and certainly it is very dangerous. I think everyone 
remember what happened when a group of delusional people took 
control over another strong Western economy in the last century.

ivo


Date sent:      	Fri, 18 Jul 2003 18:33:22 -0700
From:           	Laurie King-Irani <lkirani at uvic.ca>
To:             	ivo at balkansnet.org, JUSTWATCH-L <JUSTWATCH-L at LISTSERV.BUFFALO.EDU>
Subject:        	RE: Who needs them? [2]

Dear Ivo,

I don't think you are looking at the psychoanalytical dimension
enough. All your points are rational and precise -- if one looks at
this as simply a political or legal, or even martial, issue. But 
there is a big element of self-righteous indignation shading into
sadism with this lot. Look at the way Bush turned down
every attempt to appeal the death sentence when he was Governor
in Texas, most notably the woman, Karla Fay Tucker, who had made
a miraculous turnaround in prison, becoming a devout Christian and
ministering to others. Even the guards were awed by her. She had
clearly had a very deep and transformative experience, and had been 
high on drugs when she committed her crime (a particulary grisly murder
with a friend as accomplice). But Bush took delight in frying her, and even
made fun of her attempts to appeal in a way that was frankly repulsive.
Not only  is Bush dim and morally deficient, he is also unhinged. But
he is small potatoes compared to the people around him, who I would
hazard to say are some of the most evil and selfish people ever to hold
office in the USA. If they get in again, and win rather than steal, the next
election, I am becoming a Canadian the next day.

Sad for my country,

Best,

Laurie



>I am completely perplexed as to why does the US government
>need the military tribunals for terrorists?! I mean, if they already
>decided that anybody declared by the President to be a terrorist is
>as guilty as sin, denying those poor loosers any rights of due
>process (no open trial, no trial by jury, no right to chose a lawyer,
>no right to talk to anybody, no right to know all the evidence held
>against you, no right to appeal to an independent judiciary), holding
>them incomunicado at undisclosed places around the planet,
>preferrably such places that condone torture, WHY there is a need
>for tribunals at all? Military can just milk the information they need
>with stress and duress techniques out of the unfortunate suckers
>that got caught, and disappear them thereafter - who would know?
>This is simply a hipocrisy to allow for an illusion of justice, while
>there is really no intention to dispense it. The most fantastic
>aspect of the proposed tribunals is that even if the suspect is
>acquitted there is no guarantee that he would walk - he may be
>held continuously and indefinitely by the US authorities as a
>security threat. What exactly would then the acquital actually
>mean? And why on Earth would such a trial be neccessary to
>anybody but a few Washington's sanctimonious bureaucrats?
>
>ivo

Laurie King-Irani, Ph.D.
Sessional Lecturer
Department of Anthropology
B-320 Cornett Building
University of Victoria
Victoria, BC, Canada
V8W 2Y2


lkirani at uvic.ca
250/721-6159 (office)
250/213-6872 (mobile)