by TChris

Can the U.S. convince citizens of other nations that our ideals are real, much less worth adopting, if we jettison those ideals whenever they seem inconvenient? Take, for instance, the right to due process and to the presumption of innocence -- rights that protect individuals from the arbitrary actions of government. Or freedom from cruel and unusual punishment, which has long been understood to include torture.

Stuart Taylor Jr. explores the question: Must We Become More Like the Barbarians to Save Ourselves? His answer: the administration's policy of presuming guilt and violating fundamental rights has been a strategic disaster. If Bush intended to persuade the world that our ideals mean nothing, he's done a masterful job.

"The only thing I know for certain is that these are bad people." So said Bush last July, in response to a reporter's question about whether the 660 suspected Qaeda and Taliban members then imprisoned at Guantanamo (aka Gitmo) were "getting justice." The "bad people" included three Afghan boys between 13 and 15 years old who have since been released as harmless, after many months in captivity.

Bush decreed in January 2002 that no Gitmo prisoner would be allowed to go before a tribunal, because it was clear beyond doubt that every single one of them was an unlawful combatant. This was ludicrous on its face. In the fog of war—against enemies without uniforms who hid among civilians, while dishonest bounty hunters collected rewards for all the "terrorists" they could grab—many of those detained will inevitably turn out to be civilian noncombatants. Indeed, anonymous officials have asserted that, despite supposedly careful screening in Afghanistan, dozens, if not hundreds, of men were sent to Gitmo by mistake. And the Pentagon has released more than 130 Gitmo detainees.