Well... we're in good company

Along with Hitler, Idi Amin, Stalin, Pol Pot...

This is what happens when you open the door to torture. You become one of the bad guys.

Bryan of Why Now? points out that Canada has cancelled a refugee agreement with the US because we torture:

The Canadian court has ruled that the US tortures by proxy and and does not abide by its treaty obligations. We have officially moved into the group that we once called “Evil Empires” or “Axis of Evil” because our government has chosen to become “evil”. This will, of course, complicate extradition from other countries as we are no longer considered one of the “good guys.” What can you expect when a Jewish law professor suggests that torture is permissible because it worked for the Nazis.

Maybe we can get Canada to invade and spread democracy in America...

Update: Both Bryan and Chet Scoville of Vanity Press note that we declare we have the right to go into other countries and kidnap their citizens.

I guess we need to buy those really cool knee-high boots and have book burnings now....

Update: Pygalgia also notes:

Sometimes it seems that shrub is trying to unite the world against us. I mean, last time I looked, the British were one of the few countries that we have good relations with. Pissing them off doesn't strike me as a good move.

How would America respond if another country (oh, say Germany) decided that they are entitled to abduct an American citizen (oh, say Donald Rumsfield) whom they accuse of a crime?

Or is shrub tacitly implying that America now rules the world?

Added: Cernig of The NewsHoggers adds this thought:

But the same administration has vigorously pursued immunity from prosecution for US citizens by other nations for crimes committed while in those nations. Such a double standard, fuelled by a view of American exceptionalism which draws its inspiration from past colonial powers (including, it must be admitted, Britain) gives a clear lie to administration supporters' claims of there being no intention for hegemonic dominance. Only the most blinkered "my country, right or wrong" zealots could argue otherwise.

Hey, look! It's the War Czar!

I wondered where he had gone. So he's popped up to say that staying in Iraq in permanent bases is sorta ok and the process will skip Senate ratification because it's not a treaty:

Spencer Ackerman of TPMmuckraker:

Could Congress stop a Bush administration-brokered deal to garrison U.S. troops in Iraq indefinitely? Not according to General Douglas Lute, the so-called "war czar." Here's Lute at today's gaggle:

Q General, will the White House seek any congressional input on this?

GENERAL LUTE: In the course of negotiations like this, it's not -- it is typical that there will be a dialogue between congressional leaders at the negotiating table, which will be run out of the Department of State. We don't anticipate now that these negotiations will lead to the status of a formal treaty which would then bring us to formal negotiations or formal inputs from the Congress.

Q Is the purpose of avoiding the treaty avoiding congressional input?

GENERAL LUTE: No, as I said, we have about a hundred agreements similar to the one envisioned for the U.S. and Iraq already in place, and the vast majority of those are below the level of a treaty.

Lute said the White House intends to conclude negotiations on an enduring security guarantee with the Maliki government in July. Permanent military bases and residual troop levels will be specified in the final accord, he said.

Interesting how Georgie is really trying to sink our feet into cement shoes in Iraq. Kinda like making sure the inevitable mess and retreat will be blamed on someone years down the line...

How are our friends in India doing?

Apparently some Indians dislike the clause in the newest nuclear treaty that lets the U.S. dictate how India can be run. How strange:

NEW DELHI (AP) -- The United States gave India nearly everything it wanted in a landmark nuclear energy deal, but that may not be enough for a vocal chorus of Indian critics.

A wave of opposition has left India's government reeling and raised serious doubts about the deal's future. Critics argue the agreement could undermine India's cherished nuclear weapons program and allow the U.S. to dictate Indian foreign policy.

Leading the charge are the communist allies of India's prime minister, and beneath their arguments many here see a deeper objection - they don't want New Delhi drawn closer to Washington under any circumstances.

For both countries, the stakes are enormous.

I believe Bush was counting on this treaty to show he's gotten at least one good thing done....

And then there's the pesky one bomb a day thing:

HYDERABAD, India (AP) -- India blamed Islamic militants based in Pakistan and Bangladesh for twin bombings that killed at least 42 people in the south, and a top government official acknowledged that his country was struggling to stop terror attacks.

Well, that changes everything! Time to get rid of civil rights and freedoms and start a fascist society! At least that would be Bush's recommendation....