The Fleeting Lights of Freedom
by Chris Floyd
by Chris Floyd
In
the mystic haze of midsummer, a most unlikely Oberon stepped forth
last week to fling a spray of fairy light across the murk, rousing
the ill-enchanted sleepers on the ground with the hope that dawn
had finally come again. But as the magic glow fades, the spell-struck
victims will likely find they are still caught in a curse of perpetual
night.
We speak of
course of the
U.S. Supreme Court decision that struck down the ludicrous and
lawless "military tribunals" concocted by President George
W. Bush to serve as meat grinders for the captives in his Terror
War. Led by the sprightly if not spritely 86-year-old
Justice
John Paul Stevens, a narrow Court majority delivered a stinging
rebuke to Bush's assumption of imperial powers over the past five
years, clearly
rejecting the fundamental principle underlying the Crawford
Caligula's foul misrule: that the president's unbridled will is
the law.
The ruling
has been hailed as a "victory for democracy," the "light
at the end of the tunnel," a "turning point" in the
long struggle to reclaim the Republic from the usurping junta of
the Bush Regime. But we have seen these lights before, and watched
them fade. All the previous "turning points" scandals,
atrocities, judicial rebuffs, investigations, criminal convictions
have only led to more depredations; every seeming defeat
of unlawful power becomes instead a springboard for its further
advancement. There is no reason to think it will be any different
this time.
To
be sure, Stevens and his allies have fought a valiant rear-guard
action on behalf of liberty. They could have restricted their response
to the narrow technical points at issue in the case, but instead
took a broad scythe to the rank undergrowth of legal perversion
spawned by the White House and its chief Constitutional corrupter,
David Addington, the ruthless vizier to Vice President Dick Cheney.
As
the New Yorker reports, all laws must now pass through
the hands of this unelected factotum, who feverishly screens them
for any possible encroachments on presidential power then
writes the "signing statements" that Bush appends to every
major piece of legislation, declaring that he will follow the new
law or not as it suits him. "I'm the decider,"
as Bush likes to say in his cretinous playground patois. But it
is Addington and Cheney who have sown the noxious weeds of tyranny
that Bush so happily grazes upon.
So there was
rich irony in seeing their malevolent system chastised by Stevens
a conservative (in the old sense) Republican whose 1975 appointment
by President Gerald Ford was certainly handled by Ford's powerful
chief of staff: an ambitious apparatchik named Dick Cheney. And
the Stevens decision would indeed be a landmark ruling, a return
to sanity if we were still in an era where the institutions
of American government and society were actually functional, and
office-holders felt bound by law. But if there is no political will
in the American establishment to enforce the ruling to make
it mean what it manifestly says then it will be nothing more
than a pretty ornament for the Republic's coffin.
And where does
that will exist? Not in Congress, not in the media, not in the streets
and certainly not in the confused, craven Democratic opposition.
Yet the true nature of the Regime's wide-ranging war on liberty
has been glaringly obvious for years. I've been writing about Bush's
power grab in the Moscow Times and elsewhere since
November 2001, when I noted that he had given himself the right
to order the killing or incarceration of anyone on earth whom he
arbitrarily deemed a terrorist or even a terrorist suspect.
This was reported openly at the time, with approval from the gung-ho
corporate media and the American political establishment, with record-breaking
poll numbers for Bush and nary a peep from the Democrats.
The first press reports of tortured captives quickly followed, again
without controversy.
Indeed, for
all its reputed obsession with secrecy, the Bush Regime has been
remarkably open about its usurpations. "Extrajudicial killing,"
torture, indefinite detention, mass surveillance, defiance of court
rulings and Congress, employment of death squads, an unprovoked
war of aggression all have been carried out openly, readily
apparent to anyone with access to mainstream media sources. That
the Supreme Court has only now challenged the essence of Bush's
claim to authoritarian power is poignant testimony to how deep the
rot of tyranny has spread.
Bush's
reaction to the ruling is more evidence of the decay. After
a vague, haughty promise to "look at the findings"
rather than simply obey them, as the law requires Bush declared:
"One thing I'm not going to do, though, is I'm not going to
jeopardize the safety of the American people. People have got to
understand that." Thus in his mind the circular core of his
authoritarian philosophy the voracious worm that is devouring
the Republic, the very thing that the Court ruled against
remains intact: any action that he arbitrarily declares necessary
to ensure "the safety of the American people" cannot be
restrained by laws or courts.
Already, the
lickspittle, lock-step Congress is preparing laws to retroactively
"legalize" past Bush crimes and countenance future offenses.
As
legal scholar Mark Garber notes, this will likely satisfy at
least one of the Court's wavering moderates when the next test of
Bush's tyranny comes around, sinking the razor-thin majority for
liberty which will soon disappear in any case when the ancient
Stevens shuffles off this mortal coil. His bold stroke for freedom
was magic indeed, but it may prove, in the corrupted currents of
this world, to be such stuff as dreams are made on.
July
8, 2006
Chris
Floyd [send him mail],
Global Eye columnist for the Moscow Times, is the author
of Empire
Burlesque: The Secret History of the Bush Regime.
Copyright
© 2006 Chris Floyd
Chris
Floyd Archives
|