Glenn Greenwald appeared last Friday on an online interview with Bill Moyers. I strongly recommend that you watch the entire clip, viewable here. Glenn is an extremely articulate and persuasive man who, with lawyerly precision (duh, he's a former constitutional lawyer), argues how both the Bush and Obama administrations have circumvented the rule of law as it pertains to detainee abuse.

On the heels of that interview, Greenwald today presents the rulings of the Second Circuit Court of Appeals in the Arar v. Ashcroft case. In a stunning 7-4 decision, the court upheld a lower court ruling dismissing in its entirety a lawsuit brought by Maher Arar, a dual Canadian/Syrian citizen, against the US government. In 2002, Arar was returning home to Canada from a vacation when he was detained during a stopover at JFK. He was accused of being a terrorist, held for two weeks without charge or any communication with counsel or even family, and then rendered to Syria where he was imprisoned for 10 months and brutally tortured. The Greenwald piece contains a dissenting judge's recounting of Arar's ordeal.

The Canadian Prime Minister, the conservative Brian Harper, publicly apologized to Arar for the role Canada played in these events, and the government awarded him $9 million in compensation. On top of that the Canadian government publicly disclosed what happened to Arar and concluded that there was no evidence to suggest that Arar had been involved in any terrorist activity whatsoever.

Contrast that with the utter refusal of the US government even to acknowledge publicly what it did or admit any wrongdoing. In its arguments the government, under the jurisdiction of Attorney General Eric Holder (this is not John Ashcroft or Alberto Gonzalez, mind you, but Obama's AG), argued that "state secrets" prevented the courts from having any jurisdiction over the events of the case. The appeals court agreed, saying that essentially Arar had no right to sue the federal government over what happened to him. Read the whole Greenwald piece to get a flavor of just what kind of legal hoops Arar was told to jump through.

Excuse me, is this the same Barack Obama for whom I voted last year? Is this same Barack Obama arguing that he, as president, should be above the law when it comes to national security? What, did Dick Cheney give him a DVD box-set of the first three seasons of 24 as a goodbye gift?

Greenwald asserts that this decision reflects the character of this country. Appeals court judge Guido Calabresi, in his dissent, wrote, "When the history of this distinguished court is written, today's majority decision will be viewed with dismay." Harper's Scott Horton suggests that this decision will go down in history with as much impact as the Dred Scott decision in the 19th century which got the ball rolling to end slavery in America.

Friends, welcome to 21st century American justice. This is a place where powerful people have made sure that our laws are reserved for ordinary people only. A place where a president who campaigned on the idea of transparency holds fast to the idea that secrecy as defined by the most legally corrupt regime in US history somehow has solid legal footing, even if it isn't expressed in the Constitution. A place where judges renders themselves supine to the executive branch instead of acting as a vigorous check against executive overreach (and, in the case of Bush/Cheney, outright criminal acts).

However, my greatest disgust is reserved for the American public, who, in the pursuit of material comforts and stress-free lifestyles, has turned "of the people, by the people, for the people" into an abstraction -- a farce, even. We are the laziest citizens of the most powerful country on earth. And our power grew because of hands-on citizenship, shared sacrifice, and a firm belief in the Constitution. Today, people speak about "my rights," "my health care," as if the very idea of togetherness is reserved only for political campaigns (or worse, churches).

Sad to say that the generation of baby boomers to which I belong is a mass of self-centered, petulant children.