Tuesday, November 6, 2007

Dick Wants Freedom in Peru

Guess who's been silent on the loss of liberty in Burma and Pakistan? That would be the two bellwether's of freedom in America, Freedom's Watch and the Federalist Society. Neither made so much as a peep on behalf of oppressed people in those countries. But noted speaker, Vice President Dick Cheney (in the above picture from Islamabad) did weigh in on Peru. His was an accident.

While criticizing Venezuelan leader Hugo Chavez at a World Affairs Council meeting, Mr. Cheney said "the people of Peru deserve better." Dick is just the man to give them "a better leader" courtesy of U.S. tampering. What other insights does the V.P. have for us? Last year he spoke to the Federalist Society about the role of the judiciary and the war on terror, both key issues in dictator ruled Pakistan. What did he say?

"The Federalist Society stands firm, as well, for the principle that courts exist to exercise not the will of men but the judgment of law. Federal judges are appointed for life and serve outside the democratic process." Not in Pakistan, Mr. Cheney! Courts have been disbanded and lawyers placed in jail by the thousands. The Federalist Society did mention Pakistan on international iintellectual property rights.

"The relative safety (since 9-11) is the result of focused, determined, necessary efforts to track down these enemies, to understand their ambitions, to stop them before they strike again, and to deny them safe havens and access to even deadlier weapons." Rumors are that Musharraf is in cahoots with Islamic extremists. The day of his coup, BBC news reported 28 suspected suicide bombers were released in a prisoner exchange for soldiers.

"And it is they, the terrorists, who have ambitions of empire. Their goal in the broader Middle East is to seize control of a country, so they have a base from which to launch attacks against governments that refuse to meet their demands." Pakistan has nuclear weapons.

"The United States has also carried out our commitment to deny the terrorists control of any nation. That's why we continue to fight Taliban remnants and al Qaeda forces in Afghanistan. And that's why we're working with President Musharraf to oppose and isolate the terrorist element in Pakistan." Who knew those terrorists infiltrated Pakistan's lawyer community, independent media and Supreme Court? That sounds serious enough for the country to be bombed back to the Stone Ages. Where's Richard Armitage when you need him?

The Vice President characterized a court order tying the hands of the President of the United States in the conduct of a war as very troubling. And this is a matter entirely outside the competence of the judiciary. Conduct of a war? The war on terror? Can you see where this is going in an eerily silent Pervez Musharraf kind of way?

"All of this has been sorted out before -- not in our own era, but in the time of the Framers themselves. And what was true in 1789 is equally true (today)." Actually no, Mr. Vice President. Under the bill in Congress, H.R. 1955 most of our Founding Fathers would be characterized as "homegrown terrorists" that advocate "ideologically based violence".

And we know, as Ronald Reagan did, that "no weapon in the arsenals of the world is so formidable as the will and moral courage of free men and women. It is a weapon our adversaries in today's world do not have. It is a weapon that we as Americans do have." Well, other than those nukes, it appears Pakistan has been disarmed as their men and women are no longer free...

One might expect the Vice President to eloquently speak out on behalf of the Burmese and Pakistani people, much as he did for an oppressed South American country. So if you hear him cite Thailand or India, you'll know Dick is in the right neighborhood! Then the wait will begin for the other two groups to weigh in. Will Freedom's Watch pop first or the judicially staid Federalist Society?