|
Comment on this article |
View comments |
Email this Article
|
|
News :: Miscellaneous |
|
American Public Supports Assassination of Foreign Leaders |
Current rating: 0 |
by Joe Futrelle
Email: futrelle (nospam) shout.net (unverified!) |
16 Sep 2001
Modified: 09:47:41 PM |
|
According to a CBS/NYT poll, the majority of the American public supports changing U.S. law to allow assassination of "people in foreign countries who commit terrorist attacks". What was not asked is potentially more telling. |
According to a CBS/NYT poll, the American public supports changing U.S. law to allow assassination of "people in foreign countries who commit terrorist attacks". What was not asked is potentially more telling.
The public was apparently not asked how the decision to exercise this discretion ought to be made.
What constitutes a terrorist attack? Should this discretion to assassinate be limited to attacks against the U.S., or ought it reflect the prevailing rhetoric that Tuesday's attack is an "attack on civilization"?
If so, would the U.S. public support the assassination of figures such as Ariel Sharon, Slobodan Milosevic, and Theodore Sindikukwabo? And why exempt U.S. terrorists? If a U.S. citizen commits an act of terrorism on foreign soil, should the victim country -- as a member of the international coalition against terrorism -- have the right to assassinate him or her? For instance, should Cambodia have the right to assassinate Henry Kissinger?
What about international law? Does the U.S. public know what it is?
And what makes the U.S. public think that we have such a law, when it is a matter of public record that the U.S. has attempted to assassinate Muammar Qadhafi, Saddam Hussein, and Osama bin Laden -- not to mention the assassinations in which we have been implicated in Chile and elsewhere?
It is telling that these questions and issues were not put before the American public in the poll.
The public was apparently not asked in the poll if they would support trying foreign terrorists in an international war crimes tribunal, rather than assassinating them.
The poll can therefore not be taken as an indicator of public opinion on the important issues raised here. This shows how polls are being used to create perceptions of public opinion which exclude the consideration of various critical issues. |
See also:
http://www.nytimes.com/2001/09/16/national/16POLL.html
|
|
P.S. |
by Joe Futrelle
futrelle (nospam) shout.net (unverified) |
Current rating: 0
16 Sep 2001
|
|
It could be argued that I'm conflating terrorism with state violence against civilians when I characterize leaders such as Milosevic and Sharon as terrorists. That's correct: from the perspective of human rights, both are crimes against humanity. However, I concede that the poll was not intended to address war criminals in general but rather terrorists in particular. The question of what constitutes terrorism is obviously pivotal. |
|
Theodore Sindikukwhatzit? |
by Michael Feltes
mfeltes (nospam) newmail.net (unverified) |
Current rating: 0
16 Sep 2001
|
>If so, would the U.S. public support the assassination of >figures such as Ariel Sharon, Slobodan Milosevic, and >Theodore Sindikukwabo?
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
I'm sorry, but I'm not familiar with this last fellow. Who is he, and what did he do? |
