Obama Breaks his First Promise

Since writing this, Obama's made some positive moves that completely undermine everything I complained about! Thanks for nuttin', Mr President! Read this post to learn more.

Obama mulls 'indefinite detention' of terror suspects
AFP

WASHINGTON (AFP) – As part of its plans to close Guantanamo Bay, the Obama administration is considering holding some of the detainees indefinitely and without trial on US soil, US media reported Thursday. Fulls story here.

You know, I've read a lot of posts from conservative bloggers about President Obama breaking promises, or failing to deliver the changes he said he would (see Coffee Bean's blog here, or Reverse_Vampyr's here.)

Until this point, I'd taken all that criticism with a pinch of salt - after all, many of Obama's detractors (especially on conservative talk radio) descended into childish petulance simply because he won the White House.

But now Obama's broken a promise I'd believed in, too - that America would cease the sketchy shenanigans occurring in Guantanemo Bay. While Obama has decided to close that detention facility, he's now pondering the continued indefinite imprisonment of 'terror suspects' without charge or trial.

This is a total volte-face on his campaign promise, when he pledged to end the Bush administration's policy of locking people up without any accountability. That behavior is just wrong - especially when it's done by a country that prides itself on representing freedom, liberty and justice throughout the world.

Now since I first started opinionating on the subject, I have received quite an education (largely from regular contributor Tom) that has clarified why the Bush administration felt empowered to imprison people without any regard to habeus corpus: We're at war.

In World War II, for example, nobody expected to offer German prisoners of war trials or tribunals - and they certainly didn't get released or sent home until after the war was over.

But the 'War on Terror' has always been a fuzzy, poorly defined conflict and in recent months, that 'war' has dropped off the radar completely (Obama's given it the less emotive title of 'Overseas Contingency Operation')

The detainees in Guantanemo aren't 'enemy combatants.' They're not criminal detainees, either. They're not 'anything,' really. It's this lack of designation which gave the Bush administration the loophole to lock them up indefinitely (the Bush administration even tried to deny them the basic human rights granted under Article 3 of the Geneva Convention.)

Now, I'm not arguing that the detainees aren't potentially dangerous people - terrorists committed to causing terror and destruction across the free world. I'm just arguing that America - the 'land of the free' - has a responsibility to set an example to the rest of the world in how we deal with people in our power.

If the detainees at Guantanamo Bay are dangerous terrorists - people who have committed atrocities already and threaten to commit more if they're released - then we should continue to lock them up to protect America and the rest of the world.

However, we first need to establish by fact of law that these prisoners committed the crimes for which they were detained. Secondly, and more importantly, we need to establish that they pose a continued threat to world peace.

As far as I'm concerned, it doesn't matter if these facts are established in a court of law or a military tribunal - but they do need to be established and it does need to done in a transparent, accountable environment.

It's not even that difficult. A detainee stands trial for throwing a hand grenade at an American soldier in Afghanistan? That soldier's testimony is enough to convice me he's guilty - and would be lobbing more grenades if given the opportunity again. Sentence him and lock him up.

I'm a reasonable, rational guy. It wouldn't take much to convince me that a detainee is a dangerous terrorist and should remained locked up. However, I still deserve to hear that case made. I don't trust the government enough to blindly hand them authority over other people's lives.

I'm not suggesting that the detainees deserve (or even appreciate) the concept of a 'fair trial' or basic legal rights or protections - but this is America, a country which was established on the ideal of justice for all. We can't claim to be principled people if we turn our back on those principles as soon as it's politically convenient.

The Founding Fathers rebelled against Britain for many reasons, including because King George III suspended their habeus corpus rights during colonial squabbles and denied those accused of smuggling, piracy, treason or sedition fair trials in their homeland (shipping some off to England for trial, or sentencing others without letting them plead their case in front of a jury.)

These rights are an essential, foundational part of what America stands for - and even in the midst of a 'War on Terror,' we need to stick to them.

In Defence of the French...

Barack Obama was in Paris last week, wooing expatriate voters and playing 'president' opposite French head of state Nicholas Sarkozy.

Sarkozy was very diplomatic about things - stopping just short of endorsing Obama as America's next president, but admitting: "I wish Barack Obama luck — if it's him, France will be very happy."

One reporter went a little further than Sarkozy, accidentally referring to Obama as 'president' as if he'd already won the election - and forcing a rather embarrassed Barack to correct her!

Sarkozy and Obama have quite a lot in common - both being young, good looking presidential personalities who have been described as 'rock stars' rather than politicians. That goes a long way to explain why Sarkozy, although friendly with John McCain, enthusiastically supports Obama in his campaign for the White House.

France just loves Barack Obama.

I was watching this press conference during the lunch break at work - and was chatting to a colleague about how much the French seem to love Obama (snootily throwing in that my parents live in France and, therefore, I'm highly qualified to make blanket generalisations about the country.)

It was at that point that one of our bosses came in - a very senior executive. He watched the press conference for a moment or two and then said: "Do we really want a President the French love?"

He was voicing an opinion common throughout the United States - one that gained ground following 9/11, when France refused to join America and Britain in invading Iraq.

Many Americans simply hate the French.

I've always found this very curious. I mean, the level of antipathy goes beyond even the average uneducated Brit's opinion of the French - something along the lines of "Yeah, well, they all smell like garlic and don't wash, right? And the only thing France is fit to host is an invasion."

In America, people commonly accuse the French of being cowards, drearily dig up that old 'they'd all be speaking German if it wasn't for us' rubbish and I'm sure you'll remember congress renaming French Fries 'Freedom Fries' in the cafeteria.

In fact, it went so far as some people pouring boycotted French wine down the drains back in 2003! That, in my book, is the only crime worth of capital punishment.

So I say to your French-haters: 'Enough is enough!"

It's time you grew up about our friends, the French. If you'd spend less time watching American Idol and more time reading the wisdom of the great Thomas Jefferson you'd clearly see that France is America's closest ally and oldest friend.

Sure, some redneck idiots might argue 'the Frenchies would be speakin' German if it weren't for us.' But just as valid an observation is this - America would still be a British colony if it wasn't for the French.

France sent money, ships and troops to help overthrow the British rule in the thirteen colonies. In that respect, France was the midwife that helped give birth to the American nation. If it wasn't for them, an independent America would have been a long time coming - and probably along the same lines as Canada (with pictures of the Queen on their banknotes.)

France and America have certainly had their disagreements - especially recently. But to criticise and defame France, like so many American 'patriots' do, is to be utterly ignorant of that nation's long standing friendship and fraternity with America.

Go to MacDonalds this instant (or Chateau McDo as the French call it) and order yourself a jumbo serving of French Fries - and eat them with pride, mes amis!

Philadelphia in the Rain

There are probably better ways to enjoy America's Constitution City than stuck in the hard shoulder of I-95 in the pouring rain. But that was how Philly welcomed me this morning.

Suitably disgraced, my formerly reliable chariot went off for a new starter motor and I went off to work in the downtown district of the birthplace of the American Republic.

Now people say a lot of bad things about Philadelphia. So far, I think it's a lovely place.

One of the older cities in America, it's beautifully designed and the buildings in the centre of the city are gorgeous. Elegant sky-scrapers, historic museums, ritzy art galleries and tree-lined boulevards that glisten in the rain (I'd have preferred more glistening and less rain, but I can't get everything, can I?)

What's more, the people in Philly are different.

Now I've always had a fondness for New Yorkers (I married one, didn't I?) But from the breakdown driver to my Camaro obsessed mechanic, everybody's been incredibly nice to me. There's just a different attitude here - like people are willing to say hello to you before they demand what they want.

Of course, it's not New York. The pizza's not as good, it costs $30 a day to park here (rather than $30 an hour) and the public transport's provided by authentic 1940's trams, rather than urine-scented subways.

But while New York is the gateway to America - where a million American dreams began - Philadelphia is where the American Dream got started - when 13 fledgling colonies met in congress to sign the Declaration of Independence and give birth to the American nation.

The unassuming red-brick building where the Continental Congress signed this historic document is less than two miles from my hotel. I'd visit there tonight, except my boss suggested I didn't roam the streets on my own after dark!

Great American Gingers No. 1: Thomas Jefferson

Unsurprisingly, my school didn't spend much time teaching us about American history. "We lost" was about the gist of it, followed by the much more seemly study of King George III's descent into insanity.

Now I'm living in America, however, it's about time I learnt what most American kids do in High School - the history of the great American nation.

It's pretty exciting stuff. I've started off with Steve Wiegand's U.S. History for Dummies, which gives an astonishingly brief and inconsequential overview of the major events - I will have to return to and study it in more depth later with The Great American Handbook by Cheri Sicard, A History of the United States by Philip Jenkins, New York Times bestseller Don't Know Much About American History by Kenneth C. Davies and all three volumes of Magill's The American Presidents.

All courtesy of North Brunswick public library, I might add.

So far, I'm up to 1800 and one thing has become apparent. Thomas Jefferson was (to use an American expression) 'the man.'

And, more importantly than that, he was ginger.

Yep, another of history's outstanding gingers. He joins the ranks of Henry VIII, Elizabeth I, Christopher Columbus and Winston Churchill. A truly astonishing man and an even more astonishing redhead (although his ginger bouffant had turned white by the time he was in his early thirties.)

Thomas Jefferson was, of course, the third president of the United States. More than that, he was one of the founding fathers and the author of the Declaration of Independence. John Adams (soon to be second president) commissioned him to write it in his stead, saying: "I am obnoxious, suspect and unpopular. You are very much otherwise... ...you can [also] write 10 times better than I can."

That's what gave birth to the most famous document in modern history and the concept that 'all men are created equal' - even though hundreds of Americans, including Thomas Jefferson, owned slaves. In mitigation, though, it's worth remembering that Jefferson was an outspoken opponent of slavery (despite owning them himself) and unsuccessfully motioned for it to be outlawed in the Virginia legislature in 1769.

Thomas Jefferson also gave birth to the Republican party - although his streamlined and sensible political party has become distorted, hypocritical and entirely contradictory to the original Republican ideals it once stood for.

He was also an atheist - or, more specifically, a 'deist.' He suspected there of being some higher power, but entirely rejected Christianity and organised religion. Instead of superstition and blind faith, he believed man was placed on the earth with the power to discover things for himself through reason and rationality. He believed overwhelmingly in the complete separation of Church and state. The fact that Jefferson penned the Declaration of Independence is further proof that America was founded on secular principles.

All in all - and considering I'm not even up to his first term in office yet - Thomas Jefferson seems like a legendary man. Brilliant. Charismatic. A true American hero. As John F. Kennedy once said, when welcoming some impressive guests to a dinner at the White House, "you gentlemen are the finest group of genius and talent to sit at this table since Thomas Jefferson dined alone."

America is a Secular Nation

If you repeat a lie often enough, it almost becomes the truth.

One such lie is: "The United States was founded on Christian Principles!"

This 'misconception' is often touted as truth by conservative Christians. It appeals to the more evangelical of them. Popular history paints the pilgrims as pious and protestant and it's affirming for conservatives to believe there is a direct link between the beliefs they hold today and the beliefs of the people who built the American nation.

But however affirming and appealing the idea is, it remains a lie.

America is a secular nation, founded on secular principles. All it takes to dispel the fantasy of America's 'Judeo-Christian roots' is to open a history book.

America's Secular Roots

Conservative Christians often argue that the founding fathers themselves - as devout Christians - would have incorporated their faith when penning the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution.

The problem is, the founding fathers weren't necessarily devout - or even Christian. This is just an assumption conservatives make because the founding fathers lived during the tail-end of the eighteenth century.

In fact, out of the 55 delegates at the Philadelphia Convention (who we now refer to as the 'Founding Fathers') many belonged to no particular Christian affiliation at all.

Thomas Jefferson, 3rd President of the United States, was a confirmed atheist. He penned the 'Jefferson Bible' which removed all superstition and supernatural references from the Bible. It presented the story of Jesus as if he was just a wise, yet mortal man - similar to how I've come to consider the story of the New Testament.

George Washington, John Adams, Benjamin Franklin and Thomas Paine wrote extensively against organised religion and many of the 'Christian values' conservatives claim America was founded on.

Franklin, Jefferson, Paine and Ethan Allen were deists - believing that if there was a heavenly creator, he did not come to mankind through religion, but by granting man the gift of rationality and reason.

In short - the founding fathers were not all pious Christians. In fact, the most American of Americans (like George Washington, Thomas Jefferson and Benjamin Franklin) would be horrified at 21st century evangelical superstition.

The Proof - On Paper

If there are any lingering doubts about the secular background of many of the founding fathers, it's worth looking at the documents they penned. The Declaration of Independence and the United States Constitution are clearly and indisputably secular in nature.

The "Laws of Nature and of Nature's God" entitle people - not a Christian God.

"The Creator" grants all men "with certain unalienable Rights." Not God. Not Jesus. In fact, not not necessarily a deity at all. Just that which has created man.

The First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution is interpreted by no less than Thomas Jefferson as "a wall of separation between church and state." This clearly establishes that the foundation of the United States of America took place entirely independently of any religious considerations.

Further irrefutable proof

If that mountain of evidence is not enough to satisfy the more rabid conservative Christian, the following will. The 1797 Treaty of Tripoli, signed into law by the founding fathers without any discussion, debate or opposition, states the following firmly in black and white:

"The government of the United States of America is not in any sense founded on the Christian Religion."

These words were written by - and signed into law by - the founding fathers of the United States. The 55 delegates who created the American nation - comprising atheists, deists, protestants and catholics amongst them - were unified on this important principle.

The United States has was never founded on Christian principles. Anybody who tells you differently is either ignorant - or a liar.