I wanted to pass along part of an article in today's New Haven Register about a talk Senator Dodd gave around his book, Letters from Nuremberg.
Dodd now uses the lessons of Nuremberg as political talking points against the Bush administration’s policies.
Dodd said the ultimate value of his book is its importance to younger people.
"The rule of law is transcendent," Dodd said. "The principles embodied at Nuremberg are something we need to be mindful of today."
Dodd then cited reported abuses of Iraqi prisoners by U.S. forces at Abu-Ghraib Prison, safeguarding the right of defendants to habeas corpus, especially for the suspected terrorists being held at Guantanamo, and "warrantless wiretapping," all of which have angered President Bush’s opponents.
"The idea that we won’t be safe unless we give up some of our freedoms is a dangerous, dangerous notion," Dodd said as the audience applauded.
Dodd said the lesson of Nuremberg is that "a handful of people, including my father, at a critical moment when they could have chosen vengeance, chose a different course. They stood up and defended the rule of law."
Dodd called these principles "the centerpiece of who we are as a people."
I see this as a critical reminder of the importance of restoring the Constitution and maintaining our respect for the rule of law as a means of restoring our moral authority and standing in the global community. Doing so will make us more secure at home as well. The Register piece does a great job explaining the connection between Tom Dodd's work at the Nuremberg Trial and Chris Dodd's prioritizing these issues in his presidential campaign.
Comments
Right. And one of the strongest proponents of the rule of law as a restriction on what the agents of government can do is Justice Anthony Kennedy. That the Republican party seems to have abdicated its commitment to the rule of law in favor of rule by an autocrat whose diktats just happen to be written down should be a major distress to all Americans.
Some people would argue that in designating a private corporation as having the same rights as a person we started down the slippery slope of negating the rights of the individual. I don't think it's as simple as that. The status of the private corporation (as opposed to public corporations such as town, cities and states) has been enhanced for the sole purpose of shielding the behavior of public officials behind the private corporate screen.