(no subject)
Oct. 23rd, 2006 12:59 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
rymenhildHello, everyone! I may not have posted lately, but I live and I have computer access. I've been meaning to finish and post a review of Snicket's The End, as well as a few stories about fabulous things I have found in libraries over the last weeks. In the meantime, I'll provide links.
The world is a depressing place, both inside and outside Lemony Snicket novels.
From the AP: Bartlett: White House Flexible on Iraq.
This news would be so much better if the figure being quoted were Jed Bartlet, president of the United States, rather than Dan Bartlett, senior White House counselor for the Shrub administration.
The Jewish Daily Forward places the Military Commissions Act in its historical context and explains what's actually wrong with it:
What is egregious about the new anti-terrorism law is not the way in which it departs from America’s legal traditions, but the way in which it continues them. It is, in fact, the latest — and by no means the worst — in a long line of assaults on the Constitution that have been enacted by Congress and various administrations during times of foreign threat. The Alien and Sedition Acts of 1798, Abraham Lincoln’s nationwide suspension of habeas corpus in 1862, the Espionage Act of 1917 and the Sedition Act of 1918, Franklin Roosevelt’s internment of Japanese Americans — each of these acts entailed a massive assault on the Bill of Rights, endangering the rights of thousands of American citizens whom the government was sworn to protect from danger.
Does anyone have some good news?
The world is a depressing place, both inside and outside Lemony Snicket novels.
From the AP: Bartlett: White House Flexible on Iraq.
This news would be so much better if the figure being quoted were Jed Bartlet, president of the United States, rather than Dan Bartlett, senior White House counselor for the Shrub administration.
The Jewish Daily Forward places the Military Commissions Act in its historical context and explains what's actually wrong with it:
What is egregious about the new anti-terrorism law is not the way in which it departs from America’s legal traditions, but the way in which it continues them. It is, in fact, the latest — and by no means the worst — in a long line of assaults on the Constitution that have been enacted by Congress and various administrations during times of foreign threat. The Alien and Sedition Acts of 1798, Abraham Lincoln’s nationwide suspension of habeas corpus in 1862, the Espionage Act of 1917 and the Sedition Act of 1918, Franklin Roosevelt’s internment of Japanese Americans — each of these acts entailed a massive assault on the Bill of Rights, endangering the rights of thousands of American citizens whom the government was sworn to protect from danger.
Does anyone have some good news?
no subject
Date: 2006-10-23 08:49 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-10-23 09:21 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-10-24 12:27 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-10-24 06:09 am (UTC)Lister: Stranger things have happened.
Rimmer: Only two spring to mind - the spontaneous combustion of the mayor of Warsaw in 1546, and that incident in twelth century Burgundy when it rained herring.
no subject
Date: 2006-10-24 12:03 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-10-24 05:29 pm (UTC)