Jan. 17th, 2007
The Continued Decline of the Apology
Jan. 17th, 2007 01:40 pmThis article contains most of what you already know. From what I understand, this guy thinks that these law firms are somehow playing a hidden agenda in offering pro bono services to detainees at Guantanamo Bay. Could one of the lawyers on my f'list explain to me how defending--for free--people suspected of being terrorists and enemies of the United States would ever accomplish anything for a law firm? What goal, what press, what attention could they possibly garner through this move that would be positive? The best they get is the pat on the hand from the deans of law schools who see--rightly--that the public outing of these firms (again, weren't exactly publishing this connection, so what plans?) with a threat against their solvency by encouraging their clients to drop them is not only hateful, but thoroughly un-American.
I won't go into how absurd it is that this guy actively wanted retribution against firms representing detainees. For one, they're not even going to really get trials--the government has since declared they don't have a right to a trial at all, let alone a fair one. For two, my god! Habeus corpus is dead? We don't have a problem with this?
That stuff has been covered, and better. I'm more appalled and frustrated with this right now. The man who said "I think quite honestly when corporate CEOs see that those firms are representing the very terrorists that hit their bottom line in 2001, those CEOs are going to make those law firms choose between representing terrorists or representing reputable firms" has come up with "I didn't mean exactly what you know I meant" for his apology.
Is...is he kidding?
( Somebody, tell me he's kidding? )
I won't go into how absurd it is that this guy actively wanted retribution against firms representing detainees. For one, they're not even going to really get trials--the government has since declared they don't have a right to a trial at all, let alone a fair one. For two, my god! Habeus corpus is dead? We don't have a problem with this?
That stuff has been covered, and better. I'm more appalled and frustrated with this right now. The man who said "I think quite honestly when corporate CEOs see that those firms are representing the very terrorists that hit their bottom line in 2001, those CEOs are going to make those law firms choose between representing terrorists or representing reputable firms" has come up with "I didn't mean exactly what you know I meant" for his apology.
Is...is he kidding?
( Somebody, tell me he's kidding? )
Resolutions underway
Jan. 17th, 2007 08:24 pmOne of my resolutions for this year was to complete five artistic projects, and one thought I had was to learn a new craft. As one of those five projects, I think I'm setting the goal-within-a-goal of finding and making successfully seven new food dishes (the idea being that I will have a week's worth of food options by the end of the year). This shouldn't be too hard. I've added one tonight--it's the stir fry my former roommate used to make. It's simple and I think I pulled it off about right, which is nothing short of amazing given that there's a marinade involved--a marinade, I tells you.
So, that's one! Six more dishes, four more projects. Off to get working on another project now--my sister's very belated wedding gift--while I watch Spooks (second season first disc finally arrived!).
So, that's one! Six more dishes, four more projects. Off to get working on another project now--my sister's very belated wedding gift--while I watch Spooks (second season first disc finally arrived!).