America’s Spanish Inquisitor

America’s Spanish Inquisitor

Alberto Gonzalez, a lawyer and former judge, is now awaiting confirmation as Attorney General. If he is confirmed, the keeper of the laws of the land shall be the same man who held that humane treatment must be specifically mandated by international law – or it need not be given.

"Torture," re-defined, narrowly defined, to mean only "pain tantamount to major organ failure." So it is that the same Puritanical techniques utilized to test a witch were expressly authorized by Rumsfeld, supported by the Gonzalez legal memo, to test Islamic prisoners.

Coercive techniques that did not inflict such pain were, by legal definition, no longer torture. Such techniques were, therefore, no longer illegal under U.S. law, or in violation of international law.

Torture ceases to be torture and becomes merely interrogation or humiliation. Humanity reduced to a legalistic interpretation which allows, what any rational person would recognize as torture. But we are not talking about rational humanity, we are dealing with modern witch hunters in their usual guise as “people of morality.”

One must therefore think in terms of the Spanish Inquisition engaging in discussions of religious faith, and their persecution of those who did not bow to their warped interpretation of dogma. It is this which marks the legalistic interpretations by Mr. Gonzalez, and their implementation by the Bush Administration.

Divine "law" should never be invoked to override the protections of a just and fair legal system; but Bush has clearly stated his motivation and guidance comes from “a higher Father”, and so has declared his interpretation of divine mandate to govern.

Never should any legal system be used to circumvent clear, humane, and universally recognized standards of moral conduct – even in the name of “protecting” the people. But Bush, bolstered by the legalistic rhetorical manipulations of Gonzalez, has declared his right to indefinitely hold people without trial.

Granted, those prisons are now to be constructed outside the America’s national boundaries – and at significant ongoing cost to American taxpayers – in nations where the rule of law is, at best, a curiosity. But hiding ones immorality and blatant disregard for morally based legal propriety does not remove the stain of immorality from the nation and its people.

Words do have meaning, it is immoral to use language to shield monstrous conduct. Can we hold that Bush knew and understood the meaning behind the Gonzalez interpretation? Yes! Clearly he knew! We know he did – concurrent with the memo Bush withdrew himself from the jurisdiction of the World Court; he made sure he could not be tried for war crimes.

We have an obligation to set divine law against man’s law. To do that which is right over that the lawyers rhetoric and parsing of words allows. If the law does not dictate right, change the law.

Our willingness to defend torture depicts our willingness to defend whatever evil has, or will, be done in the name of the United States. Legalisms do not trump morality.

Then Office of the Attorney General is the guardian of our laws – and also our morality. The idea of a separation between church and state, between organized religion and sectarian governance, is a necessary reality. But any idea of a separation between law and ethical conduct – is insanity.

On both State and Federal levels, recent years show an increasing reliance of wordsmanship over the rule of law and basic standards of ethical and moral conduct.

The Red voter does not vote morality, they vote immorality. They vote torture – as inquisitors or puritanical witch hunters. They do not, and knowingly have not, voted for the morality contained within any scripture known to man. In Gonzalez they wish to appoint a Grand Inquisitor.

Thus we have it that they decree – as Paul did to his followers – the law has no meaning, it is to be replaced by faith. Faith in the power of those who hold the force to destroy humanity.

There is no mystical force, words do have meaning, actions do have meaning – the mystical comes from our willingness to bend our desires to the congruence of word with action or deed.

Separation by deceptive interpretation, or application, remains deception. It is by the action that we are defined, not the words we apply to justify that action. Gonzalez might claim disgusted at what the evidence shows – but it was by his words that the evidenced actions were taken.

He may not have utilized the techniques, but he, Rumsfeld, and Bush, approved those actions. It is they who, in our name, condoned, authorized and promoted the use of torture.

A blessing – the sin rests with those who, by their vote, or by not voting, authorized them to be their surrogates. A silent voice approves any horror and condones any evil. We who denounce can yield before their evil (Mat.5:39). Bin Laden has shown through the murder of innocents – a sponsoring of the killing of innocent children – that he spurns the Koran’s teachings; Bush, with the promotion of Gonzalez, and through demonstrative actions, has show his morality to be based on evil ...

All that is left to ask are: How did you vote? And why are you now silent?