Thursday, March 10, 2011

So, ... Obama wusses out on closing Gitmo. OMG, what audacity!

Glenn Greenwald doesn't mince words, and his entire essay is a must read in order to appreciate how he gets to this observation:
Obama -- for reasons having nothing to do with Congress -- worked from the start to preserve the crux of the Bush/Cheney detention regime. Even with these new added levels of detention review (all inside the Executive Branch), this new Executive Order is little more than a by-product of that core commitment, and those blaming it on Congress either have little idea what they're talking about or are simply fabricating excuses in order to justify yet another instance where Obama dutifully "bolsters" the Bush War on Terror template. Indefinite detention and military commissions are continuing because Obama worked from the start for that goal -- not because Congress forced him to do so.
Reason points out:
The new executive order adds to the pile of evidence that Obama, despite his hope-arousing campaign talk about respecting civil liberties and the rule of law, is continuing his predecessor's anti-terrorism policies in almost all important respects. 
And, therefore, the awful and pathetic situation in which, Greenwald writes, we find ourselves as a country:
As as happened over and over, while progressives and civil libertarians are furious about the new Order, former Bush officials and right-wing Warriors are ecstatic. The anti-Muslim McCarthyite Rep. Peter King (R-NY) issued a statement this morning, as quoted by The Post, which lavished Obama with praise: "I commend the Obama Administration for issuing this Executive Order. The bottom line is that it affirms the Bush Administration policy that our government has the right to detain dangerous terrorists until the cessation of hostilities." That perfectly captures the legacy of Barack Obama on civil liberties.
It's certainly possible to claim that none of this much matters because other issues are more important. It's coherent to argue that -- everyone has to prioritize what matters most -- but that wasn't an argument I ever heard prior to January 20, 2009, when Democrats generally and Obama specifically aggressively touted these issues for substantial political gain.
Oh well ...

No comments: