It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Alberto Gonzales: "What I've Learned.

page: 1

log in


posted on Dec, 12 2009 @ 11:22 AM
The new issue of Esquire just arrived, and among the articles and features they have a bit called "What I've Learned".

This is usually a small, one page piece that features pearls from someone notable within society, entertainment and/ or politics.

This months "year end" issue, features several of these pieces, but one that really caught my eye, and I really didn't expect, was from Alberto Gonzales, the Former Bush administration official who was mired in contraversy and who's actions and conduct remain "under investigation" regardless of his claim to the contrary in this piece.

You may feel differently, but I think this piece gives us a peek at something not usually seen, not the standard "boiler-plate" rhetoric. I was surprised, and think you will be too, at this small peek into the psyche of this very controversial person.

What do you see...?

Some excerpts:

I guess I would use my son's word: cool. It was cool to work in the White House.

I used the word quaint: in referring to provisions in the Geneva Conventions that require the signatories to provide the prisoners of war privileges like commissary privileges, scientific instruments, athletic uniforms. I think those provisions are quaint. I did not say nor did I intend to say that the basic principles of the Geneva Conventions in providing for humane treatment were quaint. So if I had to do it again, what I would not do is use the word quaint and the Geneva Conventions in the same sentence.

Putting my lawyer hat aside,: the notion that we'd have to get legalistic about torture, yeah, can be offensive to me. It's inconsistent with American values. But as a lawyer — as a lawyer — you have to try to put meaning to the words passed by Congress.

We should have abandoned: the idea of removing the U. S. attorneys once the Democrats took the Senate. Because at that point we could really not count on Republicans to cut off investigations or help us at all with investigations. We didn't see that at the Department of Justice. Nor did the White House see that. Karl didn't see it. If we could do something over again, that would be it.

I don't see the Alberto Gonzales that we're use to seeing, I see a guy names "Al", with maybe a few more inner demons than I would have expected, I see insecurity and self doubt. I see something, something.

What do you see...?

Source Article

new topics

log in