Gonzales nomination hearing: US Senate welcomes a war criminal

The focus on whether or not the nominee for the office charged with upholding the US Constitution is for or against the barbaric methods associated with Nazism and military dictatorships is a stark indication of the terminal degeneration of American democracy. The hearings had a farcical character. There was a pretense of "tough questioning" for the nominee, whom, as everyone present was well aware, is deeply complicit in war crimes. No one was "tough" enough to suggest that Gonzales should be behind bars rather than occupying the chief law enforcement position in the US. Nor did a single Democrat even go so far as to declare that Bush's lawyer should be denied the nomination. In what is now a standard device for blocking any unflinching examination of the issues at hand, much was made of Gonzales's ethnic background. Democrats and Republicans fell over each other in heaping praise upon the nominee for his Mexican-American roots and celebrating his nomination as some kind of Horatio Alger story, proving American racial equality. Gonzales himself claimed his ethnic background gave him a special sensitivity to civil rights. All of this is nonsense. Gonzales's rise has proven only that a lawyer willing to work on the behalf of the wealthy and powerful against the poor and oppressed, and who has no compunction about turning the law inside out to serve corporate interests, can go far in American bourgeois politics, whatever his or her background. [more]

• Unfit to Serve. The Senate held hearings yesterday for Attorney General-nominee Alberto Gonzales. As White House counsel, Gonzales was personally responsible for a series of memos that created the legal framework for torture. (For a walkthrough of the memos behind the policies, read this guide.) As Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) charged, the White House "dramatically undermined the war effort" by "getting cute with the law." He further stated, "I think you weaken yourself as a nation when you try to play cute and become more like your enemy instead of like who you want to be." [more] Time and again, however, Gonzales refused yesterday to renounce those policies or take responsibility for his role in their creation. As the New York Times writes, "By the time the hearing ended, Mr. Gonzales, now the White House counsel, had turned it into one of those depressing exercises in avoiding straight answers and evading accountability." [more] The Washington Post agrees, writing, "As attorney general, he will seek no change in practices that have led to the torture and killing of scores of detainees and to the blackening of U.S. moral authority around the world.
  

• BELIEVES THE PRESIDENT CAN LEGALLY AUTHORIZE TORTURE: In March 2003, Gonzales approved a now-infamous memo which contended the president "wasn't bound by laws prohibiting torture and that government agents who might torture prisoners at his direction couldn't be prosecuted by the Justice Department." Once the memo -- which goes directly against the United Nations Convention Against Torture -- was made public, Gonzales backtracked, saying the memo was merely "unnecessary, over-broad discussions" about "abstract legal theories." During his hearing, Gonzales repeatedly dodged questions about whether he believes the president has the power to disregard U.S. law and order torture. Pressed to answer, he finally admitted: "I guess I would have to say that hypothetically that authority may exist." [more]Asked whether U.S. personnel could engage in torture under "any circumstances," he again refused to take a stand, saying, "I don't believe so, but I'd want to get back to you on that." [more]
• REFUSED TO CONDEMN TORTURE TECHNIQUES: In July 2002, Gonzales held a secret meeting to discuss just how far the U.S. could go in interrogating suspects.[more] Among the techniques discussed: "Waterboarding," or making a suspect think he's drowning; mock burials; and "open-handed slapping," hailed for its slim chance of bone or tissue damage. Gonzales and the lawyers "discussed in great detail how to legally justify such methods." Far from urging restraint, Gonzales was aggressive, wondering if in fact they were going far enough. During the hearing yesterday, Gonzales was given the opportunity to stand up and publicly denounce torture techniques. Instead, he demurred, saying only, "It is not my job" to decide if these practices were okay. [more]
  
• BLAMING THE TROOPS: The abuse has been shocking and widespread, taking place in Guantanamo Bay, Iraq and Afghanistan. The FBI reports cases of abuse going back to 2002; there is also evidence the abuse has continued well after being exposed in graphic photos early last year. Gonzales refused to acknowledge the extensive, systemic problem was brought about by the string of memos and judgments muddying the U.S. stance on torture, saying, "those do not relate to confusion about policies." [more] Instead, he abdicated all responsibility and blamed it on "a failure of training and oversight," saying, "This was simply people who were morally bankrupt having fun, and I condemn that.'' He refused to say any more, contending his answers had to be limited to avoid prejudging cases. Sen. Joseph Biden (D-DE) dismissed that excuse as "pure malarkey."
• PUTTING U.S. TROOPS IN DANGER: One of the real dangers of stepping away from international law is that it puts the treatment and lives of U.S. troops in danger. Gonzales had the opportunity to  promise that the U.S. will abide by international law. Instead, he waffled, saying the U.S. will follow the Geneva Conventions "whenever they apply." [more]