« DSM: grab the corn with no hands | Main | 16 seconds in a neocon's nightmare »

rolling over, and over and over

“It’s a national disgrace that more than 100 inmates have died in American custody in Afghanistan, Iraq and Guantánamo,” writes Nicholas Kristof in today’s NYT. “…many of the people we tortured were innocent…it was clear from the moment Guantánamo opened that one-third of the inmates didn’t belong there.”

After summarizing neatly the grotesque crimes committed in the name of the United States, Kristof offers up—in the classic liberal fashion he decries in his article—a compromise for starters: “The first step of accountability isn’t prosecutions. Rather, we need a national Truth Commission to lead a process of soul searching and national cleansing.”

Funny, when the citizen-viewers commit heinous crimes against the highest laws of their country, on a massive scale, and leave a trail of evidence a mile wide, we don’t get a truth commission. We get an indictment. That’s the first step.

Creating a truth commission, especially one with subpoena powers, entails giving immunity to those who least deserve it. The truth commission process is both the first step of accountability and also the last. In South Africa, where government changed its basic character after the crimes and before the commission, it may well have been the best option. But this is, or was, a nation of law.

A process of soul searching? No, we need a process of putting criminals in prison. That’s the national cleansing we need.

Posted on Sunday, July 6, 2008 at 02:55AM by Registered Commentercitizen-viewer in , | Comments1 Comment

PrintView Printer Friendly Version

EmailEmail Article to Friend

Reader Comments (1)

I agree that Kristoff is infuriating, a special kind of infuriating. He specializes in shining the NYT's light on globalism's grotesqueries, often with a first-person involvement as with his series on sex workers (he was trying to get them out of the biz not employing them in it). Then he turns around and says there's reason on all sides and a good rap session will be the answer. This comes with an obligatory scolding of what Kristroff deems "the left" for being shrill and idealistic.

Question one: why call Kristoff's schtick liberal? It'weak-kneed, accommodationist, chickenshit, but liberal? That's a good name that the right has sullied, no need to abet their efforts by saying it fits Kristoff.

Question two: Is anyone reading this blog besides us and the other new guy?
Jul 7, 2008 at 01:33AM | Unregistered Commenterspanktronic

PostPost a New Comment

Enter your information below to add a new comment.
Author Email (optional):
Author URL (optional):
Post:
 
All HTML will be escaped. Hyperlinks will be created for URLs automatically.