Report: Bush Administration Released Two Al Qaeda Leaders Behind NW 253 Terror Plot

US News • Views: 10,957

ABC News has a report that two of the Al Qaeda leaders behind the Christmas Day attack plot were released from Guantanamo Bay in 2007, and handed over to Saudi Arabia.

Where they underwent “art therapy,” and then were set free.

Our friends, the Saudis.

Two of the four leaders allegedly behind the al Qaeda plot to blow up a Northwest Airlines passenger jet over Detroit were released by the U.S. from the Guantanamo prison in November, 2007, according to American officials and Department of Defense documents. Al Qaeda claimed responsibility for the Northwest bombing in a Monday statement that vowed more attacks on Americans.

American officials agreed to send the two terrorists from Guantanamo to Saudi Arabia where they entered into an “art therapy rehabilitation program” and were set free, according to U.S. and Saudi officials.

Guantanamo prisoner #333, Muhamad Attik al-Harbi, and prisoner #372, Said Ali Shari, were sent to Saudi Arabia on Nov. 9, 2007, according to the Defense Department log of detainees who were released from American custody. Al-Harbi has since changed his name to Muhamad al-Awfi.

Please note: in 2007, the President of the United States was George W. Bush.

UPDATE at 12/28/09 5:37:00 pm:

I saw this coming over two years ago: Video: Saudi Terrorist Rehab.

Our friends the Saudis claim to be rehabilitating Islamic terrorists released from Guantanamo Bay, and here’s a clip from UK TV promoting that claim. (Do I sound skeptical?)

Here we see some of these poor misunderstood terrorists being rehabilitated with the magical healing power of art:

Youtube Video

UPDATE at 12/28/09 6:03:37 pm:

I’ve been undecided on the issue of trying Gitmo detainees for a long time — but I’m now in favor of trying the Gitmo detainees in civilian court, throwing the book at them, and locking them up after they’ve been given due process, and convicted, and no one can complain any more.

And if they aren’t convicted, it’s because we didn’t have enough evidence to convict them.

I have a lot more faith in the American criminal justice system than I do in Saudi Arabia’s “art therapy” program.

Jump to bottom

628 comments
1 Ojoe  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 5:17:21pm

All we are saying, is give peace a chance

////

2 Dark_Falcon  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 5:18:56pm

Bush gave in to the Saudis for more often than he should have. We need to free ourselves from this bunch of oil ticks. To tie topics together: This is another reason we need an alternative to petroleum.

3 Randall Gross  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 5:19:35pm

Like I said last thread:

WTF?! Everyone knows that art therapy always cures terrorism, what do you think went wrong?
///

4 erraticsphinx  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 5:20:25pm

Worry not, this will all be Obama's fault somehow. Peter King and Pete Hoekstra are on it.

5 Gretchen G.Tiger  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 5:21:27pm

The answer is clear: Close Gitmo, ship them all to Illinois.

6 erraticsphinx  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 5:22:03pm

re: #5 ggt

At least that won't entail releasing them to art therapy.

7 Dark_Falcon  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 5:22:16pm

re: #5 ggt

The answer is clear: Close Gitmo, ship them all to Illinois.

That one doesn't need a /sarc tag.

8 Fat Bastard Vegetarian  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 5:22:51pm

Open Gitmo!

9 MandyManners  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 5:22:53pm
In its Monday statement claiming responsibility for the Northwest bombing, Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula called bombing suspect Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab a "hero" and a "martyr" and lauded him for beating U.S. intelligence.

I thought one had to be dead in order to be a martyr.

10 Big Steve  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 5:23:06pm

I don't know what to make of this. While it was rarely reported, the Bush administration had an active program of release of Gitmo prisoners. They never just locked them up and threw away the key. There was review and when there really wasn't a lot of evidence they were released. Had Bush just held them all indefinitely the braying would have been even worse.

When one of these events happens such as this attempted bombing or the Fort Hood attack, everyone wants to find some person who fucked up and then nail them to the wall. Then we all go off believing that the problem was solved.

In reality, the only way to protect ourselves is to be proactive on controls and not just to make changes after an event has happened. For example, periodically DHS should just change the airline check in procedure on some random basis. What we have been doing is making changes after events, going great guns to enforce for a while, then falling back into complacency.

11 Ojoe  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 5:23:11pm

re: #3 Thanos

It is the grave that certainly prevents relapses like this.

Oh well

12 What, me worry?  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 5:23:17pm

Art therapy? Would that be Bush with blue eyeshadow and lipstick?

13 Charles Johnson  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 5:23:26pm

re: #5 ggt

The answer is clear: Close Gitmo, ship them all to Illinois.

At least if we try them, they might not end up in Saudi Arabia taking "art therapy" before being released.

Seriously -- this story is beyond disgusting. I knew Bush was too close to the Saudis, but this really brings it home.

14 Dark_Falcon  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 5:23:30pm

re: #4 erraticsphinx

Worry not, this will all be Obama's fault somehow. Peter King and Pete Hoekstra are on it.

Actually, no. Just this once, I'm going to Blame Bush. If these guys were let go in 2007, then George W. Bush indeed must shoulder some of the blame.

15 Dark_Falcon  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 5:23:57pm

re: #12 marjoriemoon

Art therapy? Would that be Bush with blue eyeshadow and lipstick?

SMACK!

16 The Shadow Do  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 5:24:06pm

Repost to fresh thread:

Anyone have more current statistics? I read somewhere recently that the percentage of recidivists in this population has been going up - not surprising as time passes more and more will be found back in the murderers mix.

NY Times: Later Terror Link Cited for 1 in 7 Freed Detainees

We should be slowing up this release process since it obviously is not working, instead it is being accelerated. This will bite us and bite us bad.

17 Velvet Elvis  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 5:24:17pm

It's Saudi art therapy so the art can't have any depictions of people or animals in it. Just tile mosaics. I bet if they'd been able to draw pictures of their mean mother and fathers like in western art therapy things would have turned out better.

18 Big Steve  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 5:24:22pm

re: #9 MandyManners

I thought one had to be dead in order to be a martyr.

Well he did sacrifice his testicles for the cause.....maybe nads are already receiving their virgins in paradise.

19 lawhawk  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 5:24:22pm

It was bad when Bush was releasing them to "rehabilitation facilities" in Saudi Arabia and/or Yemen (as several others were). Obama and his fellow Democrats were pushing for that to be accelerated; now when the Democrats are in a position to close, they've tried accelerating the moving of the detainees to close Gitmo entirely.


Here's more on the background of the program release under Bush. More background on those named here.

If anything, this remains a stupendously bad idea and shows that the idea of reforming these jihadis is a foolhardy one.

20 diamonda2u  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 5:24:23pm

re: #6 erraticsphinx

What he said!

21 Velvet Elvis  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 5:25:44pm

re: #9 MandyManners

I thought one had to be dead in order to be a martyr.

he martyred his nutsack.

22 jaunte  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 5:25:50pm
Al-Harbi has since changed his name to Muhamad al-Awfi.


Does anyone know if that change carries any special symbolism?

23 SteveMcG  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 5:25:54pm

I don't think it wass a matter of Bush being close to the Saudis. I think that with the program of torture and abuse and the unreliable results, they couldn't tell the good guys from the bad guys. At some point, they really didn't know who they were holding.

24 Randall Gross  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 5:25:56pm

I suspect this is true but on the other hand Ross has been known to "stretch" things on occasion. Hoping for further confirmation.

25 Canadhimmis  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 5:27:13pm

Please note: in 2007, the President of the United States was George W. Bush.

Please also note: in 2007, it was leftists and Democrats that were pressuring to release terrorists held at Guantanamo.

Please also note: in 2007, it was leftists and Democrats that were pressuring George Bush to close the Guantanamo facility.

26 SanFranciscoZionist  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 5:27:57pm

re: #9 MandyManners

I thought one had to be dead in order to be a martyr.

Perhaps having your testicles grilled also counts.

27 Dark_Falcon  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 5:28:26pm

re: #18 Big Steve

Well he did sacrifice his testicles for the cause...maybe nads are already receiving their virgins in paradise.

Well that does qualify him for a Darwin Award, so we can say to him:

DARWIN AKBAR!

(Just wanted to bring out that old phrase again.)

28 John Neverbend  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 5:28:32pm

re: #10 Big Steve

In reality, the only way to protect ourselves is to be proactive on controls and not just to make changes after an event has happened. For example, periodically DHS should just change the airline check in procedure on some random basis. What we have been doing is making changes after events, going great guns to enforce for a while, then falling back into complacency.

If there are further attempts at "martyrdom", particularly if they're successful, I see no alternative but to carry out radical but well thought-out reform of pre-flight security. This will inevitably impact flights, reducing their frequency and making air travel even less convenient. However, if it saves lives, it's worth it.

29 Bloodnok  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 5:30:00pm

As usual LGF was all over this in 2007.

[Link: littlegreenfootballs.com...]

30 erraticsphinx  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 5:30:03pm

Maybe somebody has already noticed:

Was that an ugly pair of bomb underpants or what? How embarrassing.

I mean, you're up for 72 virgins, heaven, the whole deal.....and you wear....frilly briefs.

Come on, he lived in a 4 million dollar apartment, but can't swing over to Macy's for decent underwear.

Sad.
/

31 The Shadow Do  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 5:30:15pm

How many times have we heard the refrain from the left that most of these guys in Gitmo were just innocents swept up, turned in for personal vendetta reasons by neighbors, etc.

Blame all around for anyone advocating anything but the toughest measures in processing these captives.

32 Charles Johnson  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 5:30:36pm

re: #23 SteveMcG

I don't think it wass a matter of Bush being close to the Saudis. I think that with the program of torture and abuse and the unreliable results, they couldn't tell the good guys from the bad guys. At some point, they really didn't know who they were holding.

Come on. If you don't believe GW Bush was deep in the Saudis' pockets, you weren't paying attention. This is just the latest confirmation of something that's been dismayingly clear for a long time.

33 Gretchen G.Tiger  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 5:30:39pm

re: #13 Charles

At least if we try them, they might not end up in Saudi Arabia taking "art therapy" before being released.

Seriously -- this story is beyond disgusting. I knew Bush was too close to the Saudis, but this really brings it home.

I'm trying really hard to remain open on this subject. I don't know why they can't stay in GITMO. I don't want them in Illinois --of all places. Not just because it is my State. Since all our Governors end up in prison, I just see it as another political ruse that won't solve anything except in Illinois Political wet dreams.

34 Velvet Elvis  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 5:30:44pm

re: #10 Big Steve

I don't know what to make of this. While it was rarely reported, the Bush administration had an active program of release of Gitmo prisoners. They never just locked them up and threw away the key. There was review and when there really wasn't a lot of evidence they were released. Had Bush just held them all indefinitely the braying would have been even worse.

Of course the CIA was never very forthcoming with what intelligence they had on prisoners so reviews were often made without all information being presented. It's the same problem of different agencies not wanting to share intelligence with each other that led to 9/11.

35 SteveMcG  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 5:31:22pm

re: #28 John Neverbend

Problem is, it's hard to tell whether you've actually saved lives. No system is foolproof and the absense of attacks doesn't mean your current system is working. The most recent attempts may simply be a result of some attempt by Al Qaeda to gain some sort of initiative. Perhaps to strengthen the neocons' political position.

36 lawhawk  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 5:32:13pm

List of detainees transferred and when.

37 Vicious Babushka  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 5:32:24pm
Saudi officials concede its program has had its "failures" but insist that, overall, the effort has helped return potential terrorists to a meaningful life.

One program gives the former detainees paints and crayons as part of the rehabilitation regimen.

What. The. Fuck.

38 SteveMcG  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 5:32:55pm

re: #32 Charles

I'm sure he was in real deep. I think the operations at Gitmo, Abu Ghraib and Bagram did more harm than good, in an intelligence perspective.

39 Dark_Falcon  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 5:32:57pm

re: #30 erraticsphinx

Maybe somebody has already noticed:

Was that an ugly pair of bomb underpants or what? How embarrassing.

I mean, you're up for 72 virgins, heaven, the whole deal...and you wear...frilly briefs.

Come on, he lived in a 4 million dollar apartment, but can't swing over to Macy's for decent underwear.

Sad.
/

Fuck Macy's.

/I'm still pissed that they made all Marshall Field's into Macy's.

40 The Shadow Do  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 5:33:09pm

re: #28 John Neverbend

If there are further attempts at "martyrdom", particularly if they're successful, I see no alternative but to carry out radical but well thought-out reform of pre-flight security. This will inevitably impact flights, reducing their frequency and making air travel even less convenient. However, if it saves lives, it's worth it.

Not necessarily, target those who fit the profile more diligently, use the electronic prescreening tools already in play more effectively, and let granny get on the plane damn it.

41 SanFranciscoZionist  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 5:33:11pm

re: #23 SteveMcG

I don't think it wass a matter of Bush being close to the Saudis. I think that with the program of torture and abuse and the unreliable results, they couldn't tell the good guys from the bad guys. At some point, they really didn't know who they were holding.

I say both. I think they scooped up an awful lot of people, had very vague information back. I will say though, if you were a Saudi in Afghanistan, I'm gonna bet you're a LOT more likely to be a problem child than, say, if you're a Dari-speaking shepherd who joined the Taliban because your uncle said to. And yet, if you're Saudi, you have someone who will call the President and offer to rehab you.

42 Randall Gross  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 5:33:22pm

Here's some more info from an intel follower, Warning: I'm not sure it's the same Al Awfi:
[Link: islamandinsurgencyinyemen.blogspot.com...]

43 Gretchen G.Tiger  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 5:33:32pm

re: #32 Charles

Come on. If you don't believe GW Bush was deep in the Saudis' pockets, you weren't paying attention. This is just the latest confirmation of something that's been dismayingly clear for a long time.

It seems to be a Presidential Habit.

44 Gretchen G.Tiger  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 5:34:49pm

gotta switch computers.

bbiab

45 SanFranciscoZionist  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 5:35:10pm

re: #25 Canadhimmis

Please note: in 2007, the President of the United States was George W. Bush.

Please also note: in 2007, it was leftists and Democrats that were pressuring to release terrorists held at Guantanamo.

Please also note: in 2007, it was leftists and Democrats that were pressuring George Bush to close the Guantanamo facility.

So, after the Republicans take back Congress in 2010, we can blame all of Obama's missteps on how they pressured him? Cool. Will make a note of that.

46 SteveMcG  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 5:36:02pm

Also, the Saudis royal family should have their own deathly fear of Al Qeada. I don't think they would try real hard to get back anybody they think is a security risk.

47 Vicious Babushka  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 5:36:05pm

I've been CSS'ing all day, trying to replace the nested HTML tables on my website with nice, new <div> tags.

I have the header all stretched across the top, the left sidebar with the menu items on the left, the right sidebar with the Google search tool and the Paypal Donate tool on the left,

And the main contents BELOW the sidebars, on top of the footer.

Gah. Don't have the hang of this yet.

48 CommonCents  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 5:36:29pm

re: #32 Charles

Come on. If you don't believe GW Bush was deep in the Saudis' pockets, you weren't paying attention. This is just the latest confirmation of something that's been dismayingly clear for a long time.

If you don't believe that every President since FDR is in deep with the Saudis, you aren't paying attention. I'll give an exception to the one I dislike the most, Jimmah, but they played him like a cheap violin because he didn't toe the line.

49 CommonCents  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 5:37:53pm

re: #47 Alouette

It's an art that takes practice. But once you get the hang of it, it is very helpful.

50 sattv4u2  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 5:38:32pm

how about this for a plan

You get picked up terrorizing and/or plotting terror against the USA, or you're cuaght on the field of battle trying to kill US troops you go to someplace like ,,, oh,, say a military prison on an island about 90 miles off the coast of Florida for the rest of your natural life!

No getting sent to a "neutral' or "freindly" country. No getting sent to a prison in any US state that starts with any initial beteeen A and W

51 John Neverbend  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 5:39:09pm

re: #35 SteveMcG

Problem is, it's hard to tell whether you've actually saved lives. No system is foolproof and the absense of attacks doesn't mean your current system is working. The most recent attempts may simply be a result of some attempt by Al Qaeda to gain some sort of initiative. Perhaps to strengthen the neocons' political position.

Yes, nothing is foolproof, although I would consider it fair to argue that if, as a result of the new measures, whatever they are, there are no further attacks after a continuous period of a few years, the measures were worth putting in place. The problem is that I don't know what the measures would have to be. There are some limits as to how far one could copy the example of El-Al which works well but in a very narrow situation.

52 SanFranciscoZionist  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 5:39:20pm

re: #27 Dark_Falcon

Well that does qualify him for a Darwin Award, so we can say to him:

DARWIN AKBAR!

(Just wanted to bring out that old phrase again.)

The early medieval Irish Christians had what I can only describe as 'martyr envy'--the conversion of the island was so relaxed that no one got fed to lions or otherwise colorfully murdered--so they came up with concepts of what they called the 'white' or bloodless martyrdom, where you left home to go preach the Gospels, or isolated yourself from society.

I don't know if any of them removed their testicles, although Origen legendarily did ("How could Origen be a Father of the Church, and him with no knackers on him? Tell me that.") Story is that St. Kevin tried to drown his ex to preserve his chastity, but she managed to talk him into a sort of his'n'hers hermit arrangement, with Lake Glendaloch between them to preserve decency.

Martyrdom is complicated, that's all I have to say.

53 Randall Gross  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 5:39:22pm

You might want to read some of Gregory's more recent posts too, Abu M swears by him when it comes to Yemen and Saudi Arabia...

[Link: islamandinsurgencyinyemen.blogspot.com...]

54 SteveMcG  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 5:39:34pm

re: #48 CommonCents

It isn't just the President who's in their pocket. We owe our economy to them. Remember when OPEC took offense to our position with Isreal in the 1970's Jusat because we aren't the ones buying their oil doesn't mean we aren't at their mercy. Whenever I would make the argument to the people who think there's no oil problem, they just blow that off. There is a political price that comes even with oil we don't buy.

55 captdiggs  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 5:39:35pm

re: #32 Charles

US transfers 12 Gitmo detainees to home countries
(AP) – Dec 20, 2009
[Link: www.google.com...]


I guess we'll have to see if any of them come back to haunt.
Only those can't be blamed on Bush.

56 metrolibertarian  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 5:40:22pm

re: #50 sattv4u2

how about this for a plan

You get picked up terrorizing and/or plotting terror against the USA, or you're cuaght on the field of battle trying to kill US troops you go to someplace like ,,, oh,, say a military prison on an island about 90 miles off the coast of Florida for the rest of your natural life!

Does that include lawful combatants?

57 ryannon  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 5:40:27pm

re: #30 erraticsphinx

Maybe somebody has already noticed:

Was that an ugly pair of bomb underpants or what? How embarrassing.

I mean, you're up for 72 virgins, heaven, the whole deal...and you wear...frilly briefs.

Come on, he lived in a 4 million dollar apartment, but can't swing over to Macy's for decent underwear.

Sad.
/


That would be Harrods.

His apartment was in London.

58 John Neverbend  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 5:40:54pm

re: #40 The Shadow Do

Not necessarily, target those who fit the profile more diligently, use the electronic prescreening tools already in play more effectively, and let granny get on the plane damn it.

I think that more than a few would consider that to be radical. It's certainly well thought out.

59 Big Steve  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 5:41:19pm

re: #13 Charles

At least if we try them, they might not end up in Saudi Arabia taking "art therapy" before being released.

Seriously -- this story is beyond disgusting. I knew Bush was too close to the Saudis, but this really brings it home.

Just some data.....analyzed from Gitmo Detainees

Number of Detainees

Country # % of Total
Saudi Arabia 111 23%
Yemen 86 18%
Afghanistan 78 16%
Pakistan 65 13%
Morocco 18 4%
China 15 3%


Then of those released or repatriated.....

Country # Released or Repatriated % of Total
Pakistan 21 30%
Saudi Arabia 14 20%
Afghanistan 9 13%
France 5 7%
Kuwait 5 7%
United Kingdom 5 7%


The numbers don't support a statistical favoring of Saudis. In fact if there was a favoring it appears that Europeans got the highest release percentages in comparison to how many were held.

60 erraticsphinx  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 5:41:27pm

re: #57 ryannon

I was hoping nobody would notice that ;)

61 Charles Johnson  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 5:41:30pm

re: #48 CommonCents

If you don't believe that every President since FDR is in deep with the Saudis, you aren't paying attention.

Well, since I've said exactly that on numerous occasions, I feel fairly confident that I've been paying attention.

62 sattv4u2  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 5:41:43pm

re: #56 metrolibertarian

Does that include lawful combatants?

in that we aren't at war with any nation state. please define a "lawful combatant"

63 ryannon  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 5:42:04pm

re: #50 sattv4u2

how about this for a plan

You get picked up terrorizing and/or plotting terror against the USA, or you're cuaght on the field of battle trying to kill US troops you go to someplace like ,,, oh,, say a military prison on an island about 90 miles off the coast of Florida for the rest of your natural life!

No getting sent to a "neutral' or "freindly" country. No getting sent to a prison in any US state that starts with any initial beteeen A and W

What about art therapy?

64 Dark_Falcon  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 5:42:07pm

re: #50 sattv4u2

how about this for a plan

You get picked up terrorizing and/or plotting terror against the USA, or you're cuaght on the field of battle trying to kill US troops you go to someplace like ,,, oh,, say a military prison on an island about 90 miles off the coast of Florida for the rest of your natural life!

No getting sent to a "neutral' or "friendly" country. No getting sent to a prison in any US state that starts with any initial between A and W

Works for me.

65 sattv4u2  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 5:42:39pm

re: #63 ryannon

What about art therapy?

I would have tried midnight basketball

66 SteveMcG  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 5:43:00pm

re: #51 John Neverbend

I would make the argument that the absense of additional terror attacks here after 9/11 lies in the fact that GWB gave Al Qeada everything they wanted and more. They didn't need to mount any additional attacks over here. If you were OBL, things went very well for you during the Bush administration. Now, with a new administration, maybe he has to come up with a new strategy, and that would mean more attacks.

67 metrolibertarian  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 5:43:08pm

re: #62 sattv4u2

in that we aren't at war with any nation state. please define a "lawful combatant"

You said "here's a plan." I assumed it meant in the future too, or is only applicable to the perpetual war on a tactic?

68 Dark_Falcon  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 5:43:24pm

re: #63 ryannon

What about art therapy?

We can teach them to pound sand paintings up their asses.

//

69 Velvet Elvis  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 5:43:57pm

re: #55 captdiggs

US transfers 12 Gitmo detainees to home countries
(AP) – Dec 20, 2009
[Link: www.google.com...]

I guess we'll have to see if any of them come back to haunt.
Only those can't be blamed on Bush.

They can if the Bush administration fucked up the chain of custody so badly there's no evidence on which to hold them no way to ever bring them to trial. There are three classes of people in Gitmo right now.

1. Those who will be tried and found guilty
2. Those who will be tried and found innocent
3. Those for whom there is not sufficient grounds to bring them to trial.

All people in class 3 are there because someone fucked up somewhere, most likely under the Bush administration.

70 sattv4u2  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 5:44:11pm

re: #63 ryannon

re: #65 sattv4u2

I would have tried midnight basketball

THAT worked real well!
[Link: en.wikipedia.org...]

(btw ,, a failed initiative of GHWBush)

71 Bagua  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 5:44:17pm

If 1 in 7 Gitmo "suspects" release prove to be terrorists engaged in mass murder, can we, as a free and fair society accept that all 7 should remain permanently removed from society on less than solid evidence?

Was Bush not pressured to release or transfer Gitmo detainees by the MSM, Democrats, the EU, the UN, etc. etc.? Surely Bush was greatfull to the Saudis for taking whatever prisons they did. It is the Saudis who have betrayed America by releasing these terrorists, not Bush.

Now we find two of those rightfully detained are trying to massacre our civilians?

My view is that we must expand a Gitmo type detention center. Authorize the President to order the permanent detention of suspected terrorists. Maintain the entire program as top secret and not open to examination. Never again should a terrorist suspect be released or transferred to another country.

72 The Shadow Do  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 5:44:37pm

re: #50 sattv4u2

how about this for a plan

You get picked up terrorizing and/or plotting terror against the USA, or you're cuaght on the field of battle trying to kill US troops you go to someplace like ,,, oh,, say a military prison on an island about 90 miles off the coast of Florida for the rest of your natural life!

No getting sent to a "neutral' or "freindly" country. No getting sent to a prison in any US state that starts with any initial beteeen A and W

Awfully extreme inasmuch as we can reliably rehabilitate these chaps with finger paints and woodcarving lessons I'm told.

/Actually I do like the idea of a clear set of consequences spelled out in advance; it would certainly clear the air a good deal.

73 erraticsphinx  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 5:45:23pm

re: #71 Bagua

The "pressure" excuse is incredibly lame. This is almost entirely on Bush.

74 sattv4u2  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 5:46:18pm

re: #67 metrolibertarian

You said "here's a plan." I assumed it meant in the future too, or is only applicable to the perpetual war on a tactic?

I see sarcasm is totally wasted on you

IN that thats what WAS done (taking those people to a "military prison on an island about 90 miles off the coast of Florida") and the subject of this thread is the bad outcome of the REALEASE of said prisoners ,,,,,

{sigh}

75 tradewind  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 5:46:52pm

Yeah, and we armed Saddam too.
And Iran has weapons we let them capture.
And no one would have the nuke-u-lar bomb but for us.
The point is, we shouldn't let what was then become an excuse for repeating and worsening a mistake.
/Not to mention the most important thing... it just enables those BDS addicts struggling in rehab, and inhibits their recovery.///
:)

76 Charles Johnson  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 5:47:04pm

re: #71 Bagua

Was Bush not pressured to release or transfer Gitmo detainees by the MSM, Democrats, the EU, the UN, etc. etc.? Surely Bush was greatfull to the Saudis for taking whatever prisons they did. It is the Saudis who have betrayed America by releasing these terrorists, not Bush.

I don't know about you, but I expect an elected President of the United States to resist pressure to do something he knows is not right.

I'm no more willing to accept that as an excuse than I am to excuse Sarah Palin for quitting because she was being "pressured."

77 captdiggs  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 5:47:49pm

re: #69 Conservative Moonbat

They can if the Bush administration fucked up the chain of custody so badly there's no evidence on which to hold them no way to ever bring them to trial. There are three classes of people in Gitmo right now.

1. Those who will be tried and found guilty
2. Those who will be tried and found innocent
3. Those for whom there is not sufficient grounds to bring them to trial.

All people in class 3 are there because someone fucked up somewhere, most likely under the Bush administration.

Sorry, I don't buy the whole "they're entitled to the rights of a US citizen " thing.

They should be classified as prisoners of war ( and even that's generous) who are held until the war concludes...which means indefinitely.

78 John Neverbend  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 5:48:10pm

re: #66 SteveMcG

I would make the argument that the absense of additional terror attacks here after 9/11 lies in the fact that GWB gave Al Qeada everything they wanted and more. They didn't need to mount any additional attacks over here. If you were OBL, things went very well for you during the Bush administration. Now, with a new administration, maybe he has to come up with a new strategy, and that would mean more attacks.

If that's the case, it doesn't militate against the need for dramatic changes in security. Rather, it re-opens the alternative strategy of giving Al Qaeda everything they continue to want and more, something that I can't say I favour.

79 Velvet Elvis  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 5:48:15pm

re: #71 Bagua

If 1 in 7 Gitmo "suspects" release prove to be terrorists engaged in mass murder, can we, as a free and fair society accept that all 7 should remain permanently removed from society on less than solid evidence?

Was Bush not pressured to release or transfer Gitmo detainees by the MSM, Democrats, the EU, the UN, etc. etc.? Surely Bush was greatfull to the Saudis for taking whatever prisons they did. It is the Saudis who have betrayed America by releasing these terrorists, not Bush.

Now we find two of those rightfully detained are trying to massacre our civilians?

My view is that we must expand a Gitmo type detention center. Authorize the President to order the permanent detention of suspected terrorists. Maintain the entire program as top secret and not open to examination. Never again should a terrorist suspect be released or transferred to another country.

What we need to do is provide proper documentation and witness statements and that kind of thing so these people can be brought to trial and won't have to be let go due to lack of evidence.

80 Gretchen G.Tiger  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 5:48:27pm

re: #69 Conservative Moonbat

They can if the Bush administration fucked up the chain of custody so badly there's no evidence on which to hold them no way to ever bring them to trial. There are three classes of people in Gitmo right now.

1. Those who will be tried and found guilty
2. Those who will be tried and found innocent
3. Those for whom there is not sufficient grounds to bring them to trial.

All people in class 3 are there because someone fucked up somewhere, most likely under the Bush administration.

Since Bush was the only post 9/11 POTUS 'til now, it is reasonable to expect all fuck-ups furing that time period will be blamed on him. We really don't have another adminstration to compare with.

81 MandyManners  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 5:48:43pm

How many detainees were released during the Bush Administration that were not repatriated to Saudi Arabia?

82 Big Steve  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 5:48:54pm

This is but a single report....that Gitmo released prisoners were behind this. Shouldn't we call a 24 hr rule on this before we go all Bush Derangement on this?

83 metrolibertarian  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 5:49:24pm

re: #74 sattv4u2

I see sarcasm is totally wasted on you

IN that thats what WAS done (taking those people to a "military prison on an island about 90 miles off the coast of Florida") and the subject of this thread is the bad outcome of the REALEASE of said prisoners ,,,

{sigh}

I didn't realize you were being sarcastic. After a day of listening and reading various commentaries on this whole situation, and seeing things far more extreme than your sarcastic post stated, it gets hard to differentiate between the joshingly extreme and the insane Pamela Geller "kill all the [bigoted word]s" genuine extreme.

84 Randall Gross  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 5:49:35pm

More Al Awfi

For those of you interested in more on the confessions of Muhammad al-'Awfi, and judging from my in-box there are a number of you, should all check out this transcript from al-Arabiyya's weekly program The Industry of Death.

The program features a number of clips of al-'Awfi's confessions interspersed with commentary and analysis from Faris bin Hazam a journalist and frequent guest on al-Arabiyya, who follows jihadi groups as well as Doctor Ali al-Nafisa, a member of Saudi's Rehab committee.

85 The Shadow Do  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 5:49:46pm

re: #79 Conservative Moonbat

What we need to do is provide proper documentation and witness statements and that kind of thing so these people can be brought to trial and won't have to be let go due to lack of evidence.

OMG

86 Charles Johnson  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 5:50:26pm

re: #82 Big Steve

This is but a single report...that Gitmo released prisoners were behind this. Shouldn't we call a 24 hr rule on this before we go all Bush Derangement on this?

It looks pretty solid to me. ABC News is not likely to run something like this unless they're sure of it.

87 sattv4u2  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 5:50:35pm

re: #83 metrolibertarian

I didn't realize you were being sarcastic. After a day of listening and reading various commentaries on this whole situation, and seeing things far more extreme than your sarcastic post stated, it gets hard to differentiate between the joshingly extreme and the insane Pamela Geller "kill all the [bigoted word]s" genuine extreme.

The tip off MAY have been that the "plan" was THE very thing that was beimg done!

88 Velvet Elvis  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 5:50:46pm

re: #77 captdiggs

Sorry, I don't buy the whole "they're entitled to the rights of a US citizen " thing.

They should be classified as prisoners of war ( and even that's generous) who are held until the war concludes...which means indefinitely.

Thus far the courts have not agreed with you.

89 Big Steve  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 5:50:50pm

re: #81 MandyManners

How many detainees were released during the Bush Administration that were not repatriated to Saudi Arabia?

See my #59

90 Spare O'Lake  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 5:51:12pm

Blame Bush for an Islamofascist terror attack.
Pathetic.
Just pathetic.

91 Dark_Falcon  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 5:51:26pm

re: #73 erraticsphinx

The "pressure" excuse is incredibly lame. This is almost entirely on Bush.

No, its not. The international left put pressure on the US. George W, in an attempt to demonstrate America's benevolence, released the terrorists to the Saudis.

92 sattv4u2  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 5:51:37pm

re: #83 metrolibertarian

HOWEVER,, youy never did answer #62

[Link: littlegreenfootballs.com...]

93 Randall Gross  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 5:51:52pm

re: #86 Charles

It looks pretty solid to me. ABC News is not likely to run something like this unless they're sure of it.

From what I'm seeing the release is definitely real, what's missing is the tie to the current terror attack, like I've said Ross has been known to be factual, but willing to stretch the facts to extreme on occasion.

94 The Shadow Do  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 5:52:25pm

re: #88 Conservative Moonbat

Thus far the courts have not agreed with you.

The courts approved the use of military tribunals. It is the current administration that prefers to handle as you endorse.

95 Nightlight  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 5:52:33pm

Where in the article is there evidence linking those 2 released from Gitmo to the panty bomber? I read it twice and I just don't see it.

96 Randall Gross  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 5:52:56pm

re: #93 Thanos

From what I'm seeing the release is definitely real, what's missing is the tie to the current terror attack, like I've said Ross has been known to be factual, but willing to stretch the facts to extreme on occasion.

The reference to "officials and Documents" however makes me think he's correct this time.

97 Gus  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 5:52:59pm

OK, just watched the video. They have one terrorist there that killed 12 civilians in Iraq. He's free and claims that he was tricked into driving the truck bomb and that he is now cured.

The premise of the video: curing terrorists.

I need a stiff drink.

98 HelloDare  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 5:53:41pm

re: #42 Thanos

Here's some more info from an intel follower, Warning: I'm not sure it's the same Al Awfi:
[Link: islamandinsurgencyinyemen.blogspot.com...]

So Bush was also deep in the pockets of Afghanistan, Algeria, Australia, Bahrain, Egypt, Kuwait, Mauritania, Morocco, Pakistan, Qatar, Somalialand, Tajikistan, the UK and Yemen.

And based on December 20 releases, Obama is in the pockets of Afghanistan, Somalia and Yemen.

99 SteveMcG  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 5:53:41pm

re: #78 John Neverbend

I'm arguing that now is the time to expect more terrorist attacks, not less. Supporters of the last administration used to enjoy boasting that Genius W Bush's strategy to fight them over there instead of here but ignored the fact that we had almost a quarter of a million troops "over there" to fight a very small band of terrorists. We probably would have suffered less if we had just changed security procedures and intelligence operations, and we probably would have waged a more effective campaign, too. But instead we had a weak President pulled around by an incompetent VP.

100 MandyManners  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 5:54:14pm

re: #59 Big Steve

THANKS! My Google-Fu sucks tonight.

101 tradewind  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 5:54:20pm

re: #66 SteveMcG
Then your argument would fail when you investigated the number of thwarted attacks uncovered and stopped during the Bush administration, in large part thanks to measures made possible by that heinous, intrusive, and un-American Patriot Act.
/heavy sarc re the Patriot Act part/
It has been said that for every stopped attack of which the public was made aware, there were many more never publicized. I don't even want to know... there's enough out there as it is.

102 sattv4u2  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 5:54:34pm

re: #97 Gus 802

The premise of the video: curing terrorists.

Is it the same way one CURES a HAM!?!?!

I need a stiff drink.

While you're up, i'll have a Vodka Martini, with olives

103 tradewind  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 5:54:58pm

re: #86 Charles
Now if it was CBS.....

104 Gus  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 5:55:01pm

re: #102 sattv4u2

The premise of the video: curing terrorists.

Is it the same way one CURES a HAM!?!?!

I need a stiff drink.

While you're up, i'll have a Vodka Martini, with olives

Shaken or stirred?

105 Charles Johnson  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 5:55:19pm

re: #97 Gus 802

OK, just watched the video. They have one terrorist there that killed 12 civilians in Iraq. He's free and claims that he was tricked into driving the truck bomb and that he is now cured.

The premise of the video: curing terrorists.

I need a stiff drink.

I remember posting that video two years ago, and thinking: "this is going to come back on us, big time."

Looks like it just did. Luckily, it didn't result in mass murder -- but that wasn't for lack of trying.

106 sattv4u2  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 5:55:27pm

re: #104 Gus 802

Shaken or stirred?

the ham, or the martini!?!?!

107 metrolibertarian  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 5:55:42pm

re: #92 sattv4u2

Fighter representing a nation state, and I would argue any underground resistance to an unprovoked/genuinely illegal invasion (so like Armie Krajowa in Poland after the Nazis came in). It was just that your post was fairly general, and if it's simply "anyone on the battle field trying to kill our soldiers" or however it was put, it basically would include any nation's army ever, which would be a flat out ridiculous policy for any country to have (but funnily enough, the idiot pundit class on channels like Fox News actually seem to advocate the idea to some degree).

108 Bagua  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 5:56:02pm

re: #76 Charles

I don't know about you, but I expect an elected President of the United States to resist pressure to do something he knows is not right.

I'm no more willing to accept that as an excuse than I am to excuse Sarah Palin for quitting because she was being "pressured."

I agree. No terrorist should every be released by any president. There is no excuse. We know the Saudis and others like them are subject to corruption, double dealing and worse.

These two are among several who have been released and then engaged in terrorism. We do not know what the evidence against them was, or how well it would have stood up in court. We do know that releasing them was a tragic and despicable error.

This near atrocity is a powerful argument for keeping a Gitmo type facility open and permanently detaining all suspected terrorists.

109 sattv4u2  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 5:56:05pm

re: #104 Gus 802

Shaken or stirred?

re: #106 sattv4u2

the ham, or the martini!?!?!

or the terrorist!?!?!?!

110 John Neverbend  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 5:56:06pm

re: #99 SteveMcG

I'm arguing that now is the time to expect more terrorist attacks, not less. Supporters of the last administration used to enjoy boasting that Genius W Bush's strategy to fight them over there instead of here but ignored the fact that we had almost a quarter of a million troops "over there" to fight a very small band of terrorists. We probably would have suffered less if we had just changed security procedures and intelligence operations, and we probably would have waged a more effective campaign, too. But instead we had a weak President pulled around by an incompetent VP.

You may be right about the increase in attacks, and that's precisely why I would like to see much more serious pre-flight security procedures put in place as soon as possible.

111 MandyManners  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 5:56:29pm

re: #59 Big Steve

Just some data...analyzed from Gitmo Detainees

Number of Detainees

Country # % of Total
Saudi Arabia 111 23%
Yemen 86 18%
Afghanistan 78 16%
Pakistan 65 13%
Morocco 18 4%
China 15 3%


Then of those released or repatriated...

Country # Released or Repatriated % of Total
Pakistan 21 30%
Saudi Arabia 14 20%
Afghanistan 9 13%
France 5 7%
Kuwait 5 7%
United Kingdom 5 7%


The numbers don't support a statistical favoring of Saudis. In fact if there was a favoring it appears that Europeans got the highest release percentages in comparison to how many were held.

So we got 111 Saudis but released only 14?

112 Girth  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 5:57:15pm

re: #97 Gus 802

OK, just watched the video. They have one terrorist there that killed 12 civilians in Iraq. He's free and claims that he was tricked into driving the truck bomb and that he is now cured.

The premise of the video: curing terrorists.

I need a stiff drink.

Next thing you're gonna tell me is that you can cure teh ghey.

113 Canadhimmis  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 5:57:16pm

re: #81 MandyManners

How many detainees were released during the Bush Administration that were not repatriated to Saudi Arabia?

This is definitely bordering on Mooresque levels of BDS conspiracy theory.

Big Steve at #59 provides the actual statistics:

Number of Detainees

Country # % of Total
Saudi Arabia 111 23%
Yemen 86 18%
Afghanistan 78 16%
Pakistan 65 13%
Morocco 18 4%
China 15 3%


Then of those released or repatriated...

Country # Released or Repatriated % of Total
Pakistan 21 30%
Saudi Arabia 14 20%
Afghanistan 9 13%
France 5 7%
Kuwait 5 7%
United Kingdom 5 7%

114 HelloDare  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 5:57:20pm

Damn, wrong link. I meant this for post #98
[Link: www.globalsecurity.org...]

115 brookly red  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 5:57:40pm

re: #111 MandyManners

So we got 111 Saudis but released only 14?

some are better connected than others.

116 Gus  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 5:58:12pm

re: #105 Charles

I remember posting that video two years ago, and thinking: "this is going to come back on us, big time."

Looks like it just did. Luckily, it didn't result in mass murder -- but that wasn't for lack of trying.

Almost looks like a scam. I bet some of those consultants were payed a rather hefty salary. I wonder if they tried aromatherapy on them.

Who produced that video? Seems to have a propaganda quality about it.

117 Randall Gross  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 5:58:21pm

Now that everyone's vented, I'm going to point out the obvious, since I'm always master of the obvious.

It's probable that there were trades involved in these releases.

118 wee fury  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 5:58:28pm

re: #111 MandyManners

It is a Wiki source. Iffy.

119 Dark_Falcon  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 5:59:11pm

re: #109 sattv4u2

or the terrorist!?!?!?!

The martini: Stirred.

The terrorist: Waterboarded.

120 MandyManners  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 5:59:28pm

re: #95 Nightlight

Where in the article is there evidence linking those 2 released from Gitmo to the panty bomber? I read it twice and I just don't see it.

First paragraph:

Two of the four leaders allegedly behind the al Qaeda plot to blow up a Northwest Airlines passenger jet over Detroit were released by the U.S. from the Guantanamo prison in November, 2007, according to American officials and Department of Defense documents. Al Qaeda claimed responsibility for the Northwest bombing in a Monday statement that vowed more attacks on Americans.

121 Charles Johnson  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 5:59:54pm

I'm now in favor of trying the Gitmo detainees in civilian court, throwing the book at them, and locking them up after they've been given due process, and convicted, and no one can complain any more.

And if they aren't convicted, it's because we didn't have enough evidence to convict them.

I have a lot more faith in the American criminal justice system than I do in Saudi Arabia's "art therapy" program.

122 Decatur Deb  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 6:00:04pm

re: #108 Bagua

I agree. No terrorist should every be released by any president. There is no excuse. (snip).

Shouldn't there be a transparent process to prove a detainee is a terrorist, and not some jerk buying at the wrong falafel stand?

123 SteveMcG  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 6:00:04pm

re: #101 tradewind

I can't tell you some things I know about some of those thwarted attacks. There are some I have info on and some I don't. There is some belief that some were not serious and I find those arguments credible. I don't know, but I don't think the administration took strategic gaming very seriously.

124 Gus  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 6:00:22pm

re: #109 sattv4u2

or the terrorist!?!?!?!

The martini!

Of course. Maybe we can try shaker therapy on the terrorists. /

125 erraticsphinx  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 6:00:58pm

The responsibility for their release rests with the administration in power at that time. They made the decision, "pressure" from the Left didn't stop Bush from doing a whole of other things.

Maybe it was "pressure" from Saudi Arabia in this case.

126 MandyManners  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 6:01:00pm

re: #118 wee fury

It is a Wiki source. Iffy.

Is the article not backed by evidence in the footnotes?

127 Velvet Elvis  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 6:01:06pm

re: #94 The Shadow Do

The courts approved the use of military tribunals. It is the current administration that prefers to handle as you endorse.

I don't object to military tribunals if run right, meaning the defense gets access to the same evidence as the prosecution.

Thus far tribunals have produced only what, one verdict? The Australian guy?

I seem to recall a steady stream of judges and lawyers quitting in protest because they were so blatantly unfair.

128 Gretchen G.Tiger  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 6:01:15pm

re: #108 Bagua

I agree. No terrorist should every be released by any president. There is no excuse. We know the Saudis and others like them are subject to corruption, double dealing and worse.

These two are among several who have been released and then engaged in terrorism. We do not know what the evidence against them was, or how well it would have stood up in court. We do know that releasing them was a tragic and despicable error.

This near atrocity is a powerful argument for keeping a Gitmo type facility open and permanently detaining all suspected terrorists.

I remember the argument for release was that *some* of the detainees were children. Meaning they were legally minors. Where are they now? Are they suppossed children involved in subsequent attacks.

I also remember reports of American troops encountering released detainees on the ground in Iraq.

We've heard thanks to Michael Moore that they get better heath care than the average American.

GITMO is a political tool at this point. One side wants to close GITMO others want to keep it going forever. The sides seem to keep switching depending on the political winds.

I have little faith in any politician right now.

129 Existential_Donuts  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 6:01:37pm

re: #90 Spare O'Lake

Blame Bush for an Islamofascist terror attack.
Pathetic.
Just pathetic.

Explain

130 tradewind  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 6:02:00pm

re: #81 MandyManners
Don't know, but damned if every time I picked up a newspaper , it seemed I was reading about some gitmo releasee who had rejoined his comrades in the caves of Khandahar or someplace else and was back to full jihadi strength in no time.
Never did I see a report of a success story where the pudding and prayer rugs we gave them in prison inspired them to return to their country as changed men ready to build houses for the homeless.
:)

131 sattv4u2  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 6:02:01pm

re: #107 metrolibertarian

Fighter representing a nation state

What nation state are we at war with?

and I would argue any underground resistance to an unprovoked/genuinely illegal invasion

Can't answer that question until you answer the one before it. In that a "resistence" (like your Polnad example) would have been representative of the legit gov't of that state prior to it's being invaded, are you saying that Al Q was the legit rep of Iraq or Afghanastan? you really want to (try) to say that!?!?!

132 captdiggs  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 6:02:03pm

re: #111 MandyManners

So we got 111 Saudis but released only 14?

Much as there is a rush by some to heap blame on Bush, the fact is that any release of Gitmo prisoners is the result of evaluations done at Gitmo by people other than the president. That includes the ones that Obama has released. They go by the report and the recommendation received.

The only way Bush or Obama can be completely safe from such criticism of release is to not release any...but that's another story.

133 Killgore Trout  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 6:02:14pm

re: #117 Thanos

Now that everyone's vented, I'm going to point out the obvious, since I'm always master of the obvious.

It's probable that there were trades involved in these releases.

It's possible but I think Bush painted himself into a corner with Gitmo. It was a nice experiment in transparency but there were too many legal issues involved. We simply couldn't hold people there forever and making a legal case against them was too problematic. It was a nice experiment but they should have been put in secret black sites where they could be held indefinitely without public scrutiny.

134 sattv4u2  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 6:02:44pm

re: #124 Gus 802

The martini!

Of course. Maybe we can try shaker therapy on the terrorists. /

Or QUAKER therapy!

Guys ,,,, we're leaving GITMO and going to Penn Dutch country!!

135 MandyManners  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 6:03:11pm

re: #118 wee fury

It is a Wiki source. Iffy.

This list of Guantánamo detainees is compiled from various sources. It lists the known identities of detainees at the Guantanamo Bay detainment camp in Cuba. In official documents, the Department of Defense (DoD) continues to make intermittent efforts to redact detainee's names, and has not published an official list of detainees (As of September 2005[update]). On April 19, 2006, the DoD released a list with 558 names in what appears to be a fax or other scanned image.[1] Associated Press published the list in more accessible text form [2]. Not all of these names have been copied to this page yet. Since there is no further commentary from the DoD, it is unclear whether this list is official. It is called official by the Associated Press.

The Washington Post maintains a list of the detainees known or suspected to have been held in Guantánamo Bay.[3]

The United States has long maintained camps at Guantánamo Bay for attempted illegal immigrants captured while trying to get to the United States, usually from Cuba, Haiti, or the Dominican Republic.

On March 3, 2006 the DoD partially complied with a court order to release the names of the remaining Guantánamo detainees. The court order required the DoD to release the names of all the detainees.[4] Initially, the DoD only released 317 names. On April 19, 2006, the DoD released a list with 558 names.

136 wee fury  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 6:03:39pm

re: #126 MandyManners

Am wading through footnotes.

137 Lee Coller  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 6:03:48pm

"Art Therapy"?

Sounds like something a psychology professor at an ivy league school would come up with.

138 tradewind  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 6:04:10pm

re: #105 Charles
I hope you are right... I am afraid they're not done.
Did this seem like a really quick claim of responsibility by Al Q? And they're proud of a botched attempt and bragging that more are on the way? Not good.

139 Mark Pennington  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 6:04:12pm

Man, I fall asleep on the couch and miss everything. This story certainly took an unexpected turn....

140 MandyManners  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 6:04:24pm

re: #133 Killgore Trout

It's possible but I think Bush painted himself into a corner with Gitmo. It was a nice experiment in transparency but there were too many legal issues involved. We simply couldn't hold people there forever and making a legal case against them was too problematic. It was a nice experiment but they should have been put in secret black sites where they could be held indefinitely without public scrutiny.

NO KIMCHI FOR YOU!

141 MandyManners  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 6:04:45pm

re: #136 wee fury

Am wading through footnotes.

Braver than I!

142 Bagua  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 6:04:50pm

re: #91 Dark_Falcon

No, its not. The international left put pressure on the US. George W, in an attempt to demonstrate America's benevolence, released the terrorists to the Saudis.

Anyone not aware of the international spectacle of demonisation of Bush over Guantanamo Bay is either willfully blind or has their thinking distorted by bias.

Whether one agrees the criticism was valid or not, it is undeniable that a major international controversy has been made over the orange suited Gitmo detainees and the two or three arch terrorists water-boarded.

It is doubtful that the US has direct evidence or witnesses against these two that would have held up in US courts. Those people were not released.

143 Randall Gross  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 6:05:06pm

re: #133 Killgore Trout

It's possible but I think Bush painted himself into a corner with Gitmo. It was a nice experiment in transparency but there were too many legal issues involved. We simply couldn't hold people there forever and making a legal case against them was too problematic. It was a nice experiment but they should have been put in secret black sites where they could be held indefinitely without public scrutiny.

I'm going to say the Republican controlled congress helped. They tried for military tribunal enabling legislation in '06 but it was hackneyed legislation that went down in flames in court. Had they ignored politics and done it right most of the trials would have been over by now.

144 Charles Johnson  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 6:05:33pm

re: #133 Killgore Trout

It was a nice experiment but they should have been put in secret black sites where they could be held indefinitely without public scrutiny.

In the Internet age, I don't think it's really possible to have "secret black sites" any more.

145 The Shadow Do  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 6:05:44pm

re: #127 Conservative Moonbat

I don't object to military tribunals if run right, meaning the defense gets access to the same evidence as the prosecution.

Thus far tribunals have produced only what, one verdict? The Australian guy?

I seem to recall a steady stream of judges and lawyers quitting in protest because they were so blatantly unfair.

No credible statistics on tribunals since almost none have been carried out. This is because those with legal stakes in the game fought the concept tooth and claw to win the US courts venue.

I do know that military justice system is very credible when processing their own.

146 Randall Gross  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 6:06:31pm

re: #144 Charles

In the Internet age, I don't think it's really possible to have "secret black sites" any more.

Except in off net countries, like North Korea, and Iran has just gone dark...

147 Girth  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 6:06:37pm

re: #143 Thanos

I'm going to say the Republican controlled congress helped. They tried for military tribunal enabling legislation in '06 but it was hackneyed legislation that went down in flames in court. Had they ignored politics and done it right most of the trials would have been over by now.

Congress screwed this pooch. Absolutely.

148 tradewind  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 6:06:42pm

re: #133 Killgore Trout
Gitmo is a model containment facility as far as conditions and treatment go, according to impartial observers. It could indeed just stay there, with those detainees, for as long as it needs to stay operative. Individual cases could still be examined, but closing it may not be the best thing.
And from the looks of it, it may not even be happening any time soon.

149 SteveMcG  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 6:06:45pm

re: #143 Thanos

It was always about politics. I can live with that, politics is inevitable. Unfortunately, it was the stupid leading the cowards.

150 Decatur Deb  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 6:07:48pm

re: #144 Charles

In the Internet age, I don't think it's really possible to have "secret black sites" any more.

Possible or not, America presents itself to the world as "black-site-prison-free".

151 SteveMcG  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 6:07:52pm

re: #149 SteveMcG

No offense, Charles.

152 captdiggs  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 6:07:59pm

re: #121 Charles

I'm now in favor of trying the Gitmo detainees in civilian court, throwing the book at them, and locking them up after they've been given due process, and convicted, and no one can complain any more.

And if they aren't convicted, it's because we didn't have enough evidence to convict them.

That will probably mean most if not all should/will go free under our system.
You can start with Miranda rights, the failure of a right to a speedy trial, the handling and chain of custody of evidence, etc.
Because US Soldiers and Marines are not schooled in the proper arrest procedures of those caught on the battlefield.
If these prisoners are going to be held to US standards of criminal justice it's unlikely they can be convicted.

153 Dark_Falcon  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 6:08:23pm

re: #143 Thanos

I'm going to say the Republican controlled congress helped. They tried for military tribunal enabling legislation in '06 but it was hackneyed legislation that went down in flames in court. Had they ignored politics and done it right most of the trials would have been over by now.

Give the Democrats their share of blame too. The GOP needs Dem votes to get the bill trough the Senate.

154 Existential_Donuts  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 6:09:06pm

The larger point, as I see it, is that this is WHY we shouldn't torture or jail people without charges in this country. This will continue to bite us in the ass for generations, the Bush doctrine seemed to only make things worse.

We are debating the heat of the flames instead of trying to put out the fire.

155 Randall Gross  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 6:09:43pm

re: #153 Dark_Falcon

Give the Democrats their share of blame too. The GOP needs Dem votes to get the bill trough the Senate.

Sorry, R"s had a majority at the time, they should have been able to get it done.

156 Killgore Trout  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 6:09:58pm

re: #144 Charles

In the Internet age, I don't think it's really possible to have "secret black sites" any more.


I'm pretty sure we're still using them. Even under Obama. They are very practical and it's not really that difficult. Sometimes they're in foreign countries but we have them on US soil too.

157 sandbox  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 6:10:24pm

re: #148 tradewind

Agree. I still don't know why we're closing GITMO. There will continue to be more prisoners of war with radical isalm picked up on the battle field. Where will we send them.?

158 John Neverbend  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 6:10:25pm

re: #138 tradewind

I hope you are right... I am afraid they're not done.
Did this seem like a really quick claim of responsibility by Al Q? And they're proud of a botched attempt and bragging that more are on the way? Not good.

Seriously, are TSA planning on checking the lining of every passenger's underwear? If not, unless by some grace there's a critical design flaw in the "underwear bomb", we may not be so lucky next time, and the time after that, and the time after that....and so on.

159 sattv4u2  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 6:10:41pm

re: #156 Killgore Trout

I'm pretty sure we're still using them. Even under Obama. They are very practical and it's not really that difficult. Sometimes they're in foreign countries but we have them on US soil too.

Area 51!

NOT just for space aliens anymore!

160 SanFranciscoZionist  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 6:11:32pm

re: #90 Spare O'Lake

Blame Bush for an Islamofascist terror attack.
Pathetic.
Just pathetic.

I certainly don't blame him, but we're seeing some of the mistakes of his administration come home to roost, and we'd damn well better learn from them.

161 Bagua  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 6:11:44pm

Does anyone know what the evidence against these two were and whether it would stand up in American Civil court?

As such a small percentage of the detainees have been released or transferred to other countries is it because the evidence against them wouldn't stand up in American Civil court?

I find it hard to believe we would release anyone we had solid evidence on.

162 Randall Gross  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 6:12:20pm

re: #156 Killgore Trout

Fema camps?

163 Dark_Falcon  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 6:12:32pm

re: #152 captdiggs

That will probably mean most if not all should/will go free under our system.
You can start with Miranda rights, the failure of a right to a speedy trial, the handling and chain of custody of evidence, etc.
Because US Soldiers and Marines are not schooled in the proper arrest procedures of those caught on the battlefield.
If these prisoners are going to be held to US standards of criminal justice it's unlikely they can be convicted.

I agree. Trials are unwise in most cases. They should be imprisoned as enemy combatants until the conflict ends. If it does not end, they do not get released.

164 Gretchen G.Tiger  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 6:13:00pm

re: #162 Thanos

Fema camps?

with requisite trailers?

165 What, me worry?  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 6:13:28pm

re: #152 captdiggs

That will probably mean most if not all should/will go free under our system.
You can start with Miranda rights, the failure of a right to a speedy trial, the handling and chain of custody of evidence, etc.
Because US Soldiers and Marines are not schooled in the proper arrest procedures of those caught on the battlefield.
If these prisoners are going to be held to US standards of criminal justice it's unlikely they can be convicted.

I don't think that's true. I believe approx 200 have been tried in civilian courts and they sit in our Supermax prisons today including the blind sheik

166 Dark_Falcon  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 6:13:34pm

re: #155 Thanos

Sorry, R"s had a majority at the time, they should have been able to get it done.

It takes 60 votes to put a normal bill through the Senate, and we did not have 60 Republicans at the time.

167 sattv4u2  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 6:14:00pm

re: #160 SanFranciscoZionist

I certainly don't blame him, but we're seeing some of the mistakes of his administration come home to roost, and we'd damn well better learn from them.

Agreed. but I still give him credit. We've seen some of the successes of it also. How many plots have been foiled due to different aspects of the Patriot Act
Post 9/11 was 100% unchatered territory.

168 Girth  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 6:14:43pm

re: #166 Dark_Falcon

It takes 60 votes to put a normal bill through the Senate, and we did not have 60 Republicans at the time.

Not everything gets filibustered.

169 sattv4u2  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 6:14:53pm

re: #164 ggt

with requisite trailers?

Maybe Nagin can be in charge of the buses

(((oh ,, wait ,,, that was an earlier thread,, nevahmind!!)

170 Gus  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 6:15:02pm

What a hoot. I said the video seemed like propaganda. It's a "Wide Angle" PBS report by Nancy Durham.

Extended version here.

Youtube Video
171 Gretchen G.Tiger  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 6:15:20pm

We had a Republican in the WH and a Democrat controlled Congress. result:
Gridlock.

In 2010, it will start again in reverse. Democrat in the WH and Republican controlled Congress.

Welcome to American Politics.

172 jaunte  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 6:15:28pm

re: #156 Killgore Trout

I'm pretty sure we're still using them. Even under Obama. They are very practical and it's not really that difficult. Sometimes they're in foreign countries but we have them on US soil too.

Or under it. For instance, there's a 1400 acre salt mine 1,200 feet under Detroit.

173 Existential_Donuts  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 6:15:52pm

re: #171 ggt

We had a Republican in the WH and a Democrat controlled Congress. result:
Gridlock.

In 2010, it will start again in reverse. Democrat in the WH and Republican controlled Congress.

Welcome to American Politics.

And that's just how the corporations like it.

174 Randall Gross  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 6:16:03pm

re: #166 Dark_Falcon

No, but there were enough conservative and security minded Dems to get that through with some willingness to compromise on some things. Instead the conservative edge of the party demagogued and undermined the real effort, and what came out was too flawed to stand.

175 sattv4u2  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 6:16:11pm

re: #165 marjoriemoon

I don't think that's true. I believe approx 200 have been tried in civilian courts and they sit in our Supermax prisons today including the blind sheik

The blind sheik was living in the US at the time he commiitted a crime in the US
no comparison to someone trying to blow up a HUMVEE in Iraq/ Afghanastan

176 Charles Johnson  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 6:16:22pm

re: #152 captdiggs

That will probably mean most if not all should/will go free under our system.
You can start with Miranda rights, the failure of a right to a speedy trial, the handling and chain of custody of evidence, etc.
Because US Soldiers and Marines are not schooled in the proper arrest procedures of those caught on the battlefield.
If these prisoners are going to be held to US standards of criminal justice it's unlikely they can be convicted.

I guess you missed the part where we're already releasing these people without any kind of trial.

I repeat -- put them on trial. At least then we can say we didn't just hand them over to the Saudis' "art therapy" program.

177 SteveMcG  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 6:16:24pm

JFnC, NCIS just ended and now there's wrestlingre: #171 ggt

I'd rather have gridlock than one party rule.

178 sandbox  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 6:16:33pm

re: #152 captdiggs

Yes the civilian trials for terrorists is a mistake.
Prediction: This will hurt democratic Congressional candidates in 2010. If we assume that all the Rs are opposed, then each democratic candidate will be asked their position on moving the trials and venue. If they say they agree with Pres. Obama and Director Holder, then they will be taking an unpopular position. If they oppose the trials then they have to disagree with the President of their own party. Bad decision.

179 Gretchen G.Tiger  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 6:16:45pm

re: #172 jaunte

Or under it. For instance, there's a 1400 acre salt mine 1,200 feet under Detroit.

shhhhhh!

That's the back-up sekrit LGF bunker site.

180 Sharmuta  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 6:16:46pm
I've been undecided on the issue of trying Gitmo detainees for a long time — but I’m now in favor of trying the Gitmo detainees in civilian court, throwing the book at them, and locking them up after they’ve been given due process, and convicted, and no one can complain any more.

And if they aren’t convicted, it’s because we didn’t have enough evidence to convict them.

I don't know, Charles. I have a feeling the KSM trial might change your mind when it devolves into a circus. Then there are the consequences of al-qaeda getting discovery.

181 jaunte  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 6:17:20pm

re: #179 ggt

Oops.

182 MtnCat  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 6:17:28pm

As a military veteran, I'd like to offer some caveats. As to keeping terrorists in a special place, remember the Nazis on official Auschwitz prisoner letters referred to them as being in "protective custody". Should we go there? Sometimes I think terrorists should be treated as non-uniformed partisans and summarily executed, yet what about their intelligence value? Can you obtain that from suicidal people without torture? I don't want them tried as criminals because they are more than that and frankly don't deserve those rights and yet I would like to hold true to some semblance of Enlightenment values. I doubt the current crop can be rehabilitated, their children, maybe.

183 Gretchen G.Tiger  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 6:17:33pm

re: #173 Existential_Donuts

And that's just how the corporations like it.

eeeeeeeeeeeeevil everywhere

/

184 Velvet Elvis  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 6:17:40pm

re: #121 Charles

I'm now in favor of trying the Gitmo detainees in civilian court, throwing the book at them, and locking them up after they've been given due process, and convicted, and no one can complain any more.

And if they aren't convicted, it's because we didn't have enough evidence to convict them.

I have a lot more faith in the American criminal justice system than I do in Saudi Arabia's "art therapy" program.

I agree. It sounds like a lot of people are being let go who would be found guilty if brought to trial. If they can't be brought to trial due to fuckups on our part, then the people responsible for those fuckups should be brought to trial because their negligence lead to terrorists being released back into the world. (No, I'm not saying "Try Bush and Cheny.")

185 Sharmuta  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 6:17:57pm

re: #176 Charles

I guess you missed the part where we're already releasing these people without any kind of trial.

I repeat -- put them on trial. At least then we can say we didn't just hand them over to the Saudi's "art therapy" program.

I agree- but with a military trial.

186 rwmofo  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 6:18:01pm

The notion that ABC News wants to blame Bush for this isn't surprising. Even one of their own reporters went to great lengths to illustrate how ABC repeatedly leaned so far left they went off the rails.

187 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 6:18:02pm
I’ve been undecided on the issue of trying Gitmo detainees for a long time — but I’m now in favor of trying the Gitmo detainees in civilian court, throwing the book at them, and locking them up after they’ve been given due process, and convicted, and no one can complain any more.

I was told I should be "ashamed of myself" in the comments for believing exactly this.

188 Existential_Donuts  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 6:18:03pm

re: #176 Charles

I guess you missed the part where we're already releasing these people without any kind of trial.

I repeat -- put them on trial. At least then we can say we didn't just hand them over to the Saudi's "art therapy" program.

People seem to have no faith in our criminal legal system, they would rather literally lock people away forever instead of stand them up before our laws. I don't even know how to react to that sort of mindset.

189 captdiggs  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 6:18:04pm

re: #165 marjoriemoon

You are referring to those caught in terror plots within the US (or on the way to the US as the past shoe bomber and current "underwear" bomber).
Gitmo prisoners are those caught overseas. Many, by combat forces.

190 solomonpanting  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 6:18:05pm

re: #133 Killgore Trout

It was a nice experiment but they should have been put in secret black sites where they could be held indefinitely without public scrutiny.

At least now in civilian custody with typical legal representation we never again have to worry about "interrogating" a terrorist to find out what he knows, who he knows, where any bad guys are, what methods might be used, where other terror cells are, who their contacts are or any other useless information.

191 SanFranciscoZionist  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 6:18:15pm

re: #167 sattv4u2

Agreed. but I still give him credit. We've seen some of the successes of it also. How many plots have been foiled due to different aspects of the Patriot Act
Post 9/11 was 100% unchatered territory.

True enough. There was a steep learning curve.

192 sattv4u2  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 6:18:23pm

re: #180 Sharmuta

I don't know, Charles. I have a feeling the KSM trial might change your mind when it devolves into a circus. Then there are the consequences of al-qaeda getting discovery.

Absolutly,
Can you say CAN OF WORMS!!

193 Randall Gross  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 6:18:44pm

re: #178 sandbox

So justice in the US under our constitution can't work, and you are already looking for an angle in a terror attack to further partisan ends rather than convict some terrorists and put them away.

/ am I paraphrasing you wrong here?

194 Sharmuta  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 6:18:46pm

re: #184 Conservative Moonbat

I agree. It sounds like a lot of people are being let go who would be found guilty if brought to trial. If they can't be brought to trial due to fuckups on our part, then the people responsible for those fuckups should be brought to trial because their negligence lead to terrorists being released back into the world. (No, I'm not saying "Try Bush and Cheny.")

So you are going to bring soldiers up on charges?! Why- because they're not law enforcement?

195 Dark_Falcon  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 6:19:31pm

re: #178 sandbox

Yes the civilian trials for terrorists is a mistake.
Prediction: This will hurt democratic Congressional candidates in 2010. If we assume that all the Rs are opposed, then each democratic candidate will be asked their position on moving the trials and venue. If they say they agree with Pres. Obama and Director Holder, then they will be taking an unpopular position. If they oppose the trials then they have to disagree with the President of their own party. Bad decision.

Good idea. Put the Dems on the horns of a PR dilemma. Drive up their negatives. That strikes me as a good solid tactic.

196 sattv4u2  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 6:20:05pm

re: #189 captdiggs

gmta ,,, (see 175)

197 Bagua  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 6:20:06pm

re: #122 Decatur Deb

Shouldn't there be a transparent process to prove a detainee is a terrorist, and not some jerk buying at the wrong falafel stand?

It depends on who one trusts. If we must release all those who can not be convicted in Civilian court under rules of evidence, then no doubt all of those already released would have been released, and many more now in custody will also be released.

We know several have already been proven active terrorists. This policy will mean even more are released and make the US reluctant to hold terrorist suspects in the future without strong evidence.

We will just have to learn to live with our Airlines being blowup or stop flying at all. Sure thousands of innocents will likely die in these atrocities, but at least we will know that the terrorists got all the rights due an American citizen.

198 SteveMcG  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 6:20:13pm

re: #182 MtnCat

Summary executions are great. Ask the Gestapo. How'd that policy work out for them? Besides, not everybody getting picked up is a terrorist. Not all of the fingers pointing at them are our friends'.

199 sandbox  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 6:20:24pm

re: #193 Thanos

I am looking to keep the jihadis in the military court system.

200 What, me worry?  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 6:20:37pm

re: #175 sattv4u2

The blind sheik was living in the US at the time he commiitted a crime in the US
no comparison to someone trying to blow up a HUMVEE in Iraq/ Afghanastan

Take a look at these names and their crimes. This is just one Supermax.

[Link: en.wikipedia.org...]

You know, of course, these people have worldwide connections. The West is their target.

I'm ok doing it here.

201 Sharmuta  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 6:20:52pm

Yay! Booze is here!

202 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 6:20:52pm

re: #180 Sharmuta

I don't know, Charles. I have a feeling the KSM trial might change your mind when it devolves into a circus. Then there are the consequences of al-qaeda getting discovery.

and what if it doesn't become a circus? What's the yardstick by which we measure whether it's become a circus? There will be lots of media attention, of course, but that doesn't preclude due process. We have essentially hot and cold running media these days, any noteworthy trial will have massive coverage.

203 Gretchen G.Tiger  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 6:21:46pm

re: #193 Thanos

So justice in the US under our constitution can't work, and you are already looking for an angle in a terror attack to further partisan ends rather than convict some terrorists and put them away.

/ am I paraphrasing you wrong here?

The US Constitution was designed for civilians in a country without a standing army. Not for war/military situations.

One could easily argue at killing on a battlefield is pre-meditated murder. Do you think that would be a correct verdict?

204 Four More Tears  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 6:22:31pm

re: #202 WindUpBird

and what if it doesn't become a circus? What's the yardstick by which we measure whether it's become a circus? There will be lots of media attention, of course, but that doesn't preclude due process. We have essentially hot and cold running media these days, any noteworthy trial will have massive coverage.

This won't get half as much attention as the OJ trial. I'll bet money on that.

205 SanFranciscoZionist  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 6:22:36pm

re: #189 captdiggs

You are referring to those caught in terror plots within the US (or on the way to the US as the past shoe bomber and current "underwear" bomber).
Gitmo prisoners are those caught overseas. Many, by combat forces.

Somewhere between the picture of a prison overflowing with fourteen-year-old Afghan schoolboys crying themselves to sleep and night given to me by the left, and a prison full of implacable, psychotic califist terrorists given to me by the right, must lie to the truth of who the hell actually is or was at Gitmo.

206 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 6:22:37pm

re: #171 ggt

We had a Republican in the WH and a Democrat controlled Congress. result:
Gridlock.

In 2010, it will start again in reverse. Democrat in the WH and Republican controlled Congress.

Welcome to American Politics.

Republicans controlling the house and senate in 2010? I don't see that happening. The GOP will gain seats, but I don't think they'll gain enough to flip the house and the senate.

207 What, me worry?  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 6:22:46pm

re: #189 captdiggs

You are referring to those caught in terror plots within the US (or on the way to the US as the past shoe bomber and current "underwear" bomber).
Gitmo prisoners are those caught overseas. Many, by combat forces.

But we have a pretty good history of prosecuting these people. I'm not sure what the difference is between bombing the WTC or trying to kill our soliders in Iraq. In fact, blowing up a civilian center is much worse.

208 Existential_Donuts  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 6:23:08pm

re: #202 WindUpBird

and what if it doesn't become a circus? What's the yardstick by which we measure whether it's become a circus? There will be lots of media attention, of course, but that doesn't preclude due process. We have essentially hot and cold running media these days, any noteworthy trial will have massive coverage.


It will be a labeled a circus by the political opponents regardless of the reality. I have a feeling that security will be so tight that the circus atmosphere won't be anywhere near the courthouse.

209 jaunte  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 6:23:22pm

re: #194 Sharmuta

So you are going to bring soldiers up on charges?! Why- because they're not law enforcement?

It may create an insoluble problem in prosecuting trials when the rules have shifted from military action to police/law enforcement after someone is captured.

210 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 6:23:30pm

re: #204 JasonA

This won't get half as much attention as the OJ trial. I'll bet money on that.

ABSOLUTELY AGREED

The OJ trial was one of those things that I don't know if we'll see again, the entire country fovused on one trial like that, for so long, with so many bizarre twists. It was like the entire country was a campy Law and Order episode.

211 Gretchen G.Tiger  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 6:23:50pm

ahhhhhhhh, I gotta go.

have a great evening all.

212 SteveMcG  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 6:24:19pm

re: #203 ggt

You are forgetting that a trial is about findings of fact, not law. How do you know your suspect is the murderer? Perhaps he was taking cover during a crossfire and got picked up after it was over. Or do you just want somebody to hang, guilty or not?

213 sattv4u2  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 6:24:30pm

re: #200 marjoriemoon

Ask our Attorney General, as Senator Graham did, if a soldier were to caspture Osama bin Laden today, would OBL be read his miranda rights!?!?!
I beleive Holders answer was a series of 'ummmmssss,,, uuuhhhhhss,,, and eeeerrrrrsss

214 sandbox  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 6:24:33pm

re: #195 Dark_Falcon

I am simply pointing that not only is this decision foolish, as poster Bagua above, is pointing out (without much refutation), but it is politically idiotic as well. This plays into the Democrats perceived weakness on national security issues.

215 captdiggs  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 6:24:56pm

re: #176 Charles

I guess you missed the part where we're already releasing these people without any kind of trial.

I repeat -- put them on trial. At least then we can say we didn't just hand them over to the Saudis' "art therapy" program.

A civilian trial under US rules of procedure will get them released, if they get the same standard as a US citizen.
Watch and see what their lawyers do.

And if this is just a show trial with a forgone conclusion, then it really isn't a fair trial under our Constitutional standards.

216 Bagua  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 6:25:29pm

re: #182 MtnCat

remember the Nazis on official Auschwitz prisoner letters referred to them as being in "protective custody".

It is simply ignorant and disgusting to reference the Nazis or Auschwitz when talking about the detention of terrorist suspects by America.

217 Randall Gross  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 6:26:03pm

re: #203 ggt

The US Constitution was designed for civilians in a country without a standing army. Not for war/military situations.

One could easily argue at killing on a battlefield is pre-meditated murder. Do you think that would be a correct verdict?

Since we are talking KSM, maybe his co conspirator Moussaoui should be our yardstick. 9/11 conspirator tried in civilian court serving a life term at Supermax.

218 sattv4u2  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 6:26:14pm

re: #204 JasonA

This won't get half as much attention as the OJ trial. I'll bet money on that.

You'll lose. I'm in the broadcast business. Theres not a satellite truck east of the Mississippi (and many west of it) nor ad hoc satellite space available for booking

219 Charles Johnson  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 6:26:21pm

The Moussaoui trial turned into a circus, true, but don't forget that he's now in jail for the rest of his life.

220 SteveMcG  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 6:26:34pm

re: #216 Bagua

What, you don't think the Al Qaeda recruiters wouldn't?

221 John Neverbend  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 6:26:37pm

Slower modes of travel seem rather more inviting in these days of terrorism.

I'm reminded of J.M. Barrie in an almost apposite quotation, "We then wander about Barsetshire in a heavyish carriage drawn by two slow horses with long tails and the motors whiz by us, but with Anthony on the box we do reach our destination which perhaps they don't."

222 solomonpanting  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 6:26:45pm

re: #204 JasonA

This won't get half as much attention as the OJ trial. I'll bet money on that.

Or even as much as the bin Laden trial.

223 Four More Tears  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 6:28:21pm

re: #218 sattv4u2

You'll lose. I'm in the broadcast business. Theres not a satellite truck east of the Mississippi (and many west of it) nor ad hoc satellite space available for booking

You honestly think those kinds of ratings will be there? You think the American people will be mesmerized by KSM like we were the Juice? Really??

224 Charles Johnson  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 6:28:35pm

The Moussaoui trial is actually an argument in favor of putting Gitmo detainees on trial in the criminal justice system.

The system worked. He's never getting out of prison.

225 tradewind  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 6:28:52pm

re: #219 Charles
Wonder if he is holding classes?///

226 Randall Gross  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 6:29:01pm

I hear your arguments and thought they should have been tried in military tribunals long ago. I'll repeat that the R's blew it on that, and now it's just too damned late. I'd like to get the bastards tried and sentenced some way.

227 Velvet Elvis  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 6:29:44pm

re: #168 Girth

Not everything gets filibustered.

Only Democratic bills.

228 Walter L. Newton  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 6:30:10pm

re: #225 tradewind

Wonder if he is holding classes?///

Considering he is in Super Max here in Colorado, no way. But of course, you already knew that.

229 baier  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 6:30:14pm

Would say you have issued a fatwa on Saudi Art Therapy?
//

230 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 6:30:23pm

re: #218 sattv4u2

You'll lose. I'm in the broadcast business. Theres not a satellite truck east of the Mississippi (and many west of it) nor ad hoc satellite space available for booking

We shall see! Regardless of how many Sat trucks are in play, we;re not talking about equipment, we're talking about the hold over the country. I think it's fundamentally impossible for one trial to hold the attention of the country the way OJ did. The news climate is different, our access to information is far more complete, television news does not have the hold over America like it did during OJ.

A decent chunk of my generation is Gitmo-ed out, we're terrorist-ed out, we're becoming increasingly cynical about news. These men are terrorists, not beloved celebrities. Everyone in the country knew who OJ was. The average man on the street cannot even name these terrorists.

So I'm going with OJ: way bigger circus, way more media staying power.

231 What, me worry?  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 6:30:35pm

re: #213 sattv4u2

Ask our Attorney General, as Senator Graham did, if a soldier were to caspture Osama bin Laden today, would OBL be read his miranda rights!?!?!
I beleive Holders answer was a series of 'ummmsss,,, uuuhhhss,,, and eeerrrsss

You think these fellows, apprehended in the Philippines, were read Miranda? They sit in Supermax today.

232 diamonda2u  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 6:30:55pm
I have a lot more faith in the American criminal justice system than I do in Saudi Arabia’s “art therapy” program.

What he said!

233 What, me worry?  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 6:31:45pm

re: #231 marjoriemoon

You think these fellows, apprehended in the Philippines, were read Miranda? They sit in Supermax today.

Oops. [Link: en.wikipedia.org...]

Sorry!

234 sandbox  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 6:32:15pm

re: #224 Charles

IMO Moussawi should have got the death penalty

235 Charles Johnson  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 6:32:29pm

re: #226 Thanos

I hear your arguments and thought they should have been tried in military tribunals long ago. I'll repeat that the R's blew it on that, and now it's just too damned late. I'd like to get the bastards tried and sentenced some way.

I agree -- if they'd been tried in military court shortly after they were detained, this wouldn't even be an issue. It would be over and done with.

But they weren't, and now we have to deal with the fallout -- and the fallout now includes an attempted mass murder attack on an airplane.

Try them. Get it over with. The longer this goes on, the more pain it will cause.

236 Walter L. Newton  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 6:33:22pm

re: #234 sandbox

IMO Moussawi should have got the death penalty

Fine, now, does that change the truth of what Charles said?

237 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 6:33:26pm

re: #234 sandbox

IMO Moussawi should have got the death penalty

IMO the death penalty would be far more humane than supermax!

238 sattv4u2  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 6:33:41pm

re: #223 JasonA

You honestly think those kinds of ratings will be there? You think the American people will be mesmerized by KSM like we were the Juice? Really??

absolutely. I'm in Atlanta. The company i work for does work for all the major networks. CNN has already put together an entire staff OVER AND ABOVE THEIR NEW YORK STAFF that they will be going to New York for the duration, just to give you one (of many) examples. we already have commitments from many foreign bureaus and news orgs as well, to get footage fibered from New York to us in Atlanta to be put on satellite for South America, Western Europe, the Middle East and North Africa. we have a facility in Los Angeles that has commitments to do the same for the Pacific Rim

239 Dark_Falcon  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 6:34:44pm

re: #237 WindUpBird

IMO the death penalty would be far more humane than supermax!

Quite Concur. Being hanged with no drop would be more humane than life in Supermax.

240 reine.de.tout  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 6:34:49pm

re: #133 Killgore Trout

It's possible but I think Bush painted himself into a corner with Gitmo. It was a nice experiment in transparency but there were too many legal issues involved. We simply couldn't hold people there forever and making a legal case against them was too problematic. It was a nice experiment but they should have been put in secret black sites where they could be held indefinitely without public scrutiny.

I can't believe you said that. I really can't believe you said that.

With all of the "transparency" of Gitmo, we have people upset and ranting over the plight of the detainees, being held for long stretches of time without being charged, being tortured . . . can you imagine, could you just imagine, the hullaballoo if they had been held somewhere in secrecy with no public scrutiny? Good gosh . . .

I can't remember the name of the program, but didn't we allow some of these detainees to be held and/or questioned by other countries? Lots of pointing of fingers and shrieking about that, wasn't there?

And even that was more open that secret locations away from public scrutiny.

241 Baier  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 6:34:52pm

re: #235 Charles

I agree -- if they'd been tried in military court shortly after they were detained, this wouldn't even be an issue. It would be over and done with.

But they weren't, and now we have to deal with the fallout -- and the fallout now includes an attempted mass murder attack on an airplane.

Try them. Get it over with. The longer this goes on, the more pain it will cause.

I wonder if they didn't do it to get info from them...I wonder if they did get any good intelligence out of the detainees.
But I agree, I wish it was already done.

242 Walter L. Newton  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 6:34:59pm

re: #238 sattv4u2

absolutely. I'm in Atlanta. The company i work for does work for all the major networks. CNN has already put together an entire staff OVER AND ABOVE THEIR NEW YORK STAFF that they will be going to New York for the duration, just to give you one (of many) examples. we already have commitments from many foreign bureaus and news orgs as well, to get footage fibered from New York to us in Atlanta to be put on satellite for South America, Western Europe, the Middle East and North Africa. we have a facility in Los Angeles that has commitments to do the same for the Pacific Rim

So?

243 sattv4u2  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 6:35:09pm

re: #230 WindUpBird

see 238

244 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 6:35:20pm

re: #238 sattv4u2

absolutely. I'm in Atlanta. The company i work for does work for all the major networks. CNN has already put together an entire staff OVER AND ABOVE THEIR NEW YORK STAFF that they will be going to New York for the duration, just to give you one (of many) examples. we already have commitments from many foreign bureaus and news orgs as well, to get footage fibered from New York to us in Atlanta to be put on satellite for South America, Western Europe, the Middle East and North Africa. we have a facility in Los Angeles that has commitments to do the same for the Pacific Rim

This is irrelevant to the changing culture of news. Covering the trial vigorously is completely irrelevant to whether it's going to be a bigger media storm than OJ.

245 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 6:36:43pm

re: #243 sattv4u2

see 238

Just read it, it's completely beside the point. Hiring people and buying resources in anticipation of a story does not magically create cultural resonance.

246 sattv4u2  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 6:36:44pm

re: #244 WindUpBird

This is irrelevant to the changing culture of news. Covering the trial vigorously is completely irrelevant to whether it's going to be a bigger media storm than OJ.

I see. So if there is more coverage than the OJ trial that doesn;'t mean that it's covered more!

gotchya!

247 zephirus  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 6:36:46pm

re: #223 JasonA

If the media are decreeing it will be news, then it will be.

248 brookly red  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 6:37:20pm

Somehow this just doesn't seem like the way to win a war to me.

249 Existential_Donuts  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 6:37:38pm

re: #247 zephirus

If the media are decreeing it will be news, then it will be.

It is as simple as that.

250 Walter L. Newton  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 6:37:47pm

re: #240 reine.de.tout

I can't believe you said that. I really can't believe you said that.

With all of the "transparency" of Gitmo, we have people upset and ranting over the plight of the detainees, being held for long stretches of time without being charged, being tortured . . . can you imagine, could you just imagine, the hullaballoo if they had been held somewhere in secrecy with no public scrutiny? Good gosh . . .

I can't remember the name of the program, but didn't we allow some of these detainees to be held and/or questioned by other countries? Lots of pointing of fingers and shrieking about that, wasn't there?

And even that was more open that secret locations away from public scrutiny.

Comes full circle, doesn't it. It's difficult to juggle all the partisanship without occasionally stepping on ones past opinions. I'm starting the see the loony far left come full circle around to agree with the wacky far right. It happens.

251 sandbox  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 6:38:07pm

re: #248 brookly red
name the enemy (radical islam), win the war!

252 Dark_Falcon  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 6:38:14pm

re: #248 brookly red

Somehow this just doesn't seem like the way to win a war to me.

Nor to me either.

253 Walter L. Newton  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 6:38:34pm

re: #245 WindUpBird

Just read it, it's completely beside the point. Hiring people and buying resources in anticipation of a story does not magically create cultural resonance.

I agree. These media people have no clue. Neophytes in this sort of thing. Pikers.

254 SanFranciscoZionist  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 6:38:48pm

re: #247 zephirus

If the media are decreeing it will be news, then it will be.

I don't think the media are going to care that much. Think Moussaoui. Maybe slightly bigger than that.

255 SanFranciscoZionist  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 6:39:19pm

re: #251 sandbox

name the enemy (radical islam), win the war!

They're not Rumplestiltskin.

256 Velvet Elvis  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 6:39:38pm

re: #194 Sharmuta

So you are going to bring soldiers up on charges?! Why- because they're not law enforcement?

I was picturing mid-level CIA or DHS bureaucrats who would rather horde intelligence than turn it over to the armed forces so it can be used as evidence in a military tribunal.

257 Bagua  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 6:39:44pm

re: #188 Existential_Donuts

People seem to have no faith in our criminal legal system, they would rather literally lock people away forever instead of stand them up before our laws. I don't even know how to react to that sort of mindset.

I am assuming you are OK with the fact that the terrorists who tried to bomb the airliner were released? It is almost certain that we did not have strong evidence on them or they would never have been released. The same is true of the others we have released who have later engaged in attacks.

There is simply no way we had good evidence on people we have already released or transferred. It is highly likely that even many of those we did hold onto will be released when the civilian courts fail to convict them.

I admire your high minded sense of justice and civil rights. I hope you are OK with bodies dropping from the sky and other atrocities. It is unlikely they will not keep trying.

Personally I trust the US military and Intelligence services to do the right thing and get the right people, under the supervision of the Commander in Chief.

These are extreme circumstances and we are dealing with ruthless and dangerous people. We should be spending less time agonising about the alleged "rights" of the few terrorists we manage to capture, and spend more time increasing the number of prisoners.

If we have learned anything from Bush's mistake in releasing these two monsters, it is that we need to hold on to more of the suspects we have in custody.

258 sattv4u2  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 6:39:53pm

re: #245 WindUpBird

Just read it, it's completely beside the point. Hiring people and buying resources in anticipation of a story does not magically create cultural resonance.

And hoping that it won;t be as big as the OJ trial doesn;'t magically mean it wont

what will be in play here. As soon (actually, shortly before) the trial starts we will be inundated with all the footage, interviews, retelling the events that led up to and post 9/11. That will re-fan the fires of interest. The 1st time (read 1st DAY) KSM starts spouting off, or his lawyer (yes, i know he's repping himself, but he'll have counsel) starts with discovery, calling Bush as a witness, bringing up "torture" the game is on

259 recusancy  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 6:40:08pm

re: #246 sattv4u2

I see. So if there is more coverage than the OJ trial that doesn;'t mean that it's covered more!

gotchya!

It's relative. There's so many more media distractions because of the internet. People don't sit around and watch things like that on their tv anymore. And the reason OJ was big was because it had a soap opera drama quality to it. It was a love triangle gone bad. People knew who OJ was and there were camera's inside the courtroom. There won't be camera's in a federal trial.

260 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 6:40:12pm

re: #246 sattv4u2

I see. So if there is more coverage than the OJ trial that doesn;'t mean that it's covered more!

gotchya!

Are you even reading what I'm saying? You know, the part about cultural resonance? I ain't typing for my health here.

I'm talking about the country paying attention to the trial, not the coverage itself. Very important distinction that has nothing to do with ad hoc satellite space or any other industry insider stuff you bring up.

If CNN covers something exhaustively, spending hundreds of millions of dollars putting it on 24/7...and then their ratings don't budge in prime time, then it doesn't matter to the culture, does it?

261 sandbox  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 6:41:05pm

re: #255 SanFranciscoZionist

Naming the enemy is a big deal in this war. Our leaders like Janet Napolitano and other and so politically correct they can't name the enemy.

262 reine.de.tout  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 6:41:05pm

re: #180 Sharmuta

I don't know, Charles. I have a feeling the KSM trial might change your mind when it devolves into a circus. Then there are the consequences of al-qaeda getting discovery.

And there is the real problem with civilian trials.

Like Thanos said a bit upthread, I would have prefered to see military tribunals for these guys, within a reasonable period of time. It didn't happen. It is time to try these guys and sentence them, get them put away. And it appears the only way that's going to happen is with civilian trials. I have a suspicion that there will be at least a few released not because there is lack of evidence, but so that security issues can be preserved from the discovery rights of the defendant. So be it.

263 Mark Pennington  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 6:41:09pm

I find it odd that there are only 35 comments on the ABC article. This is a HUGE story and the wingnuts are very quiet tonight. Wonder why?

264 Stanghazi  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 6:41:20pm

re: #254 SanFranciscoZionist

I don't think the media are going to care that much. Think Moussaoui. Maybe slightly bigger than that.

Unfortunately the way it seems to be going, a Sarah Palin or Tiger Woods' event will eclipse the serious trial of a terrorist.

265 tradewind  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 6:41:38pm

re: #224 Charles
The thing is, though... he was here on a visa, (albeit overstayed) and he had been living in the US, attending the flight school in MN. He paid rent, lived as a resident alien, and his criminal activity was in a defined jurisdiction here.... not exactly the equivalent of a captured battlefield detainee. I understand the analogy, but I think the legal issues of his arrest and trial are another ball game re the gitmo transfers.

266 Dark_Falcon  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 6:41:43pm

re: #261 sandbox

Naming the enemy is a big deal in this war. Our leaders like Janet Napolitano and other and so politically correct they can't name the enemy.

Quite Concur.

267 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 6:41:43pm

re: #247 zephirus

If the media are decreeing it will be news, then it will be.

It'll be news, but the news cannot put their foot down and captivate the nation at will for months and months and months. If they could, they would already be doing that.

268 Killgore Trout  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 6:42:43pm

re: #240 reine.de.tout


I can't believe you said that. I really can't believe you said that.

With all of the "transparency" of Gitmo, we have people upset and ranting over the plight of the detainees, being held for long stretches of time without being charged, being tortured . . . can you imagine, could you just imagine, the hullaballoo if they had been held somewhere in secrecy with no public scrutiny?

I grew up in a State Dept. family so I've always been around CIA and NSA type folks. These blacksites are a necessary reality. Not everybody can be turned over to a court for trial. It depends on how evidence against them was collected (sometimes legally, sometimes not) and how much a public trial would comprimise operatives, techniques and other investigations. The point is that these black sites are actually secret. We're holding people today at this very moment and nobody knows about it. Some of them will never see the light of day again. They'll just disappear or turn up dead somewhere and it will never be in the papers. This stuff used for rare circumstances but after 9-11 we have a lot of cases to deal with. Blacksites are one way to handle them.

269 Walter L. Newton  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 6:43:05pm

re: #263 beekiller

I find it odd that there are only 35 comments on the ABC article. This is a HUGE story and the wingnuts are very quiet tonight. Wonder why?

What ABC story?

270 reine.de.tout  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 6:43:31pm

re: #250 Walter L. Newton

Comes full circle, doesn't it. It's difficult to juggle all the partisanship without occasionally stepping on ones past opinions. I'm starting the see the loony far left come full circle around to agree with the wacky far right. It happens.

I'm not gonna call Killgore the "loony far left", 'cause I don't think he is.

But honestly, it was startling to me to see that suggestion made by anybody here.

271 Dark_Falcon  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 6:44:13pm

re: #263 beekiller

I find it odd that there are only 35 comments on the ABC article. This is a HUGE story and the wingnuts are very quiet tonight. Wonder why?

They're too used to getting their cues from Glen Beck and he's on vacation.

272 Four More Tears  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 6:44:24pm

re: #246 sattv4u2

We shall see. I've made my statement and I stand by it. This is a trial that probably won't be over all that quickly. Holding a nation's attention span is no small feat. Iran can tell you all about that. I'm not saying there won't be any circus, just that it won't be like what we saw back then.

273 rwmofo  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 6:44:31pm

I don't think there's a simple solution for dealing with the guys in Guantanamo, however, my opinion is they shouldn't be tried in a civilian court. Here's why:

They were captured on a battlefield by our military.

Our military will be cross-examined (our guys will be put on trial).

"Did Sergeant Brown hit you?"

Yes.

"Did Sergeant Brown torture you?"

"Yes."

"Was your confession a result of Sergeant Brown beating you?"

"Yes."

"Did you commit these crimes?"

"No."

"Sergeant Brown, show us all the methods you use for gathering intelligence from the enemy"

Then here comes Pelosi calling for the prosecution of our military, Bush, Rumsfeld, Rove, et al.

274 tradewind  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 6:45:09pm

re: #230 WindUpBird
The OJ trial just set new guidelines and created new cable shows. Imagine if say, one of Tiger Woods' babes had been offed, and suspicion had fallen on either Elin or Tiger and one of them was on trial.
Huge audience.... through the roof. People would call in sick. (which is in itself sick, come to think of it...).

275 reine.de.tout  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 6:45:49pm

re: #268 Killgore Trout

I grew up in a State Dept. family so I've always been around CIA and NSA type folks. These blacksites are a necessary reality. Not everybody can be turned over to a court for trial. It depends on how evidence against them was collected (sometimes legally, sometimes not) and how much a public trial would comprimise operatives, techniques and other investigations. The point is that these black sites are actually secret. We're holding people today at this very moment and nobody knows about it. Some of them will never see the light of day again. They'll just disappear or turn up dead somewhere and it will never be in the papers. This stuff used for rare circumstances but after 9-11 we have a lot of cases to deal with. Blacksites are one way to handle them.

Killgore -you might be absolutely correct that this could have been one way to handle them, but that could never have happened with these detainees. People were too interested in ensuring they were treated humanely and fairly by the big bad US of A.

276 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 6:45:59pm

re: #274 tradewind

The OJ trial just set new guidelines and created new cable shows. Imagine if say, one of Tiger Woods' babes had been offed, and suspicion had fallen on either Elin or Tiger and one of them was on trial.
Huge audience... through the roof. People would call in sick. (which is in itself sick, come to think of it...).

I was actually about to say I wonder if these trials will get the same attention as Tiger Woods did.

277 Bagua  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 6:46:09pm

re: #245 WindUpBird

Just read it, it's completely beside the point. Hiring people and buying resources in anticipation of a story does not magically create cultural resonance.

I agree also, you have a good read on this sort of thing and the media in general.

278 Walter L. Newton  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 6:46:13pm

re: #270 reine.de.tout

I'm not gonna call Killgore the "loony far left", 'cause I don't think he is.

But honestly, it was startling to me to see that suggestion made by anybody here.

I wasn't calling Killgore anything, but I was pointing out that the far ends are coming around, so it doesn't surprise me to start hearing such stuff coming from the middle, right, left otherwise.

279 Dark_Falcon  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 6:47:32pm

re: #275 reine.de.tout

Killgore -you might be absolutely correct that this could have been one way to handle them, but that could never have happened with these detainees. People were too interested in ensuring they were treated humanely and fairly by the big bad US of A.

And we should have ignored those demands. It should have been made clear right from the get-go that captured terrorists would have no rights.

280 SteveMcG  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 6:47:34pm

The only coverage I want to see is the puppet theater on Countdown.

281 reine.de.tout  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 6:47:59pm

re: #278 Walter L. Newton

I wasn't calling Killgore anything, but I was pointing out that the far ends are coming around, so it doesn't surprise me to start hearing such stuff coming from the middle, right, left otherwise.

Right, sorry Walter, I didn't mean to imply that's what you were saying about Killgore, I wasn't clear.

It still did surprise me a lot.

282 Mark Pennington  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 6:48:18pm

re: #269 Walter L. Newton

What ABC story?

this one: http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/northwest-flight-253-al-qaeda-leaders-terror-plot/story?id=9434065

283 recusancy  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 6:48:30pm

re: #278 Walter L. Newton

I wasn't calling Killgore anything, but I was pointing out that the far ends are coming around, so it doesn't surprise me to start hearing such stuff coming from the middle, right, left otherwise.

I can assure you that Kilgore is an outlier (if he's on the left). We don't want secret sites under Bush and we don't want them under Obama. Period.

284 brookly red  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 6:48:44pm

re: #276 WindUpBird

I was actually about to say I wonder if these trials will get the same attention as Tiger Woods did.

/when we issue them all restraining orders that should make the front pages!

285 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 6:48:48pm

re: #277 Bagua

I agree also, you have a good read on this sort of thing and the media in general.

Thank you. I almost sorta wish I didn't, I think of all the cool stuff I should have been drawing instead of watching television news or listening to talk radio.:P

Though part of it is I'm always drawn to "insider" shows about the media, or shows where the hosts are openly critical of their field. Phil Hendrie being my number one example!

286 tradewind  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 6:48:56pm

re: #276 WindUpBird
I think they'll get the same amount of attention, from a different audience. People who live and breathe the adventures of Tiger as the Cheetah probably think that KSM is a brand of lotion.///

287 SanFranciscoZionist  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 6:49:15pm

re: #276 WindUpBird

I was actually about to say I wonder if these trials will get the same attention as Tiger Woods did.

Doubt it. Americans don't CARE about KSM. We want him punished, but we don't identify with him, or relish the horror of him much. He has no human interest.

288 SteveMcG  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 6:49:16pm

re: #279 Dark_Falcon

You keep ignoring that everybody we pick up isn't a terrorist. I'm happy that you have the power of perfect knowledge of who is and who isn't a terrorist. Why don't we just drag your ass all over Afghanistan and you tell us who is and who isn't a bad guy.

289 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 6:49:58pm

re: #280 SteveMcG

The only coverage I want to see is the puppet theater on Countdown.

That's the part about Countdown I still like, the goofy Sportcenter-inflected stuff. When it gets too political, and not in the Daily Show way, it becomes completely awkward and impossible to watch.

290 Walter L. Newton  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 6:50:07pm

re: #283 recusancy

I can assure you that Kilgore is an outlier (if he's on the left). We don't want secret sites under Bush and we don't want them under Obama. Period.

Touchy aren't we? And I don't think you should be speaking for Killgore. I wasn't.

291 sandbox  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 6:50:43pm

re: #288 SteveMcG

The military courts can determine that as well.

292 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 6:51:03pm

re: #286 tradewind

I think they'll get the same amount of attention, from a different audience. People who live and breathe the adventures of Tiger as the Cheetah probably think that KSM is a brand of lotion.///

hahaha I LOLed :D

The KSM trial will get a lot of attention from news junkies and people like us who are very politically aware. But it won't really be the talk of the watercooler the way Oj was.

293 Existential_Donuts  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 6:51:10pm

re: #257 Bagua

I am assuming you are OK with the fact that the terrorists who tried to bomb the airliner were released? It is almost certain that we did not have strong evidence on them or they would never have been released. The same is true of the others we have released who have later engaged in attacks.

There is simply no way we had good evidence on people we have already released or transferred. It is highly likely that even many of those we did hold onto will be released when the civilian courts fail to convict them.

I admire your high minded sense of justice and civil rights. I hope you are OK with bodies dropping from the sky and other atrocities. It is unlikely they will not keep trying.

Personally I trust the US military and Intelligence services to do the right thing and get the right people, under the supervision of the Commander in Chief.

These are extreme circumstances and we are dealing with ruthless and dangerous people. We should be spending less time agonising about the alleged "rights" of the few terrorists we manage to capture, and spend more time increasing the number of prisoners.

If we have learned anything from Bush's mistake in releasing these two monsters, it is that we need to hold on to more of the suspects we have in custody.

Call me crazy, but the "high minded sense of justice" you assign to me used to be a cornerstone of this country. American Exceptionalism, if you will. Your argument falls short for me because our criminal justice systems deals with dangerous, ruthless people all of the time. And the argument of 'extreme circumstances' is also very dangerous because 'extreme circumstances' are completely subjective.

Try them in court, lock them up.

294 lawhawk  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 6:51:25pm

I have no faith in the Saudi (or Yemeni) rehab programs, but the detainees deserve no federal court trial for reasons I've previously posted extensively on - particularly when the tribunal system has been found constitutional and even the Obama Administration has found them useful where federal courts are not likely to find convictions (showing the utter craziness and folly of trying some in federal courts and others in tribunals even though all would be getting far more civil liberties protections than any of these detainees ever should have been entitled to under the US Constitution or Geneva Conventions.

As the President and AG Holder have said, they intent to try KSM in federal court, but if isn't convicted by the jury, they'll still hold him indefinitely (reason enough to keep all in the military tribunals system that all 3 branches of the federal government have had a say on).

It was, and will always remain, a mistake to release these detainees back into the wilds - and the Obama Administration has been contemplating releasing 95 of them to Yemen, which is where al Qaeda is at its most active.

Moreover, we've repeatedly seen a recidivist rate that should have been sending up alarm bells during the Bush Administration to make them stop the insanity of sending these detainees to Saudi Arabia and other countries willing to take them back, but ignored; the Obama Administration ignores them still - and it is to our continued peril.

295 Randall Gross  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 6:51:29pm

KT: I think you are being slight obfuscatory here. We don't have blacksites, once someone's in US custody, they are ours and treated accordingly.

Foreign gov'ts do have blacksites, and I can name a few, but these are sites where prisoners are kept by foreign gov'ts, not the US, it might be at the request or behest of the US, but they aren't in our custody.
Once remanded to us, they end up in Gitmo. (ala the few last year who mysteriously disappeared from Landi Khotal and appeared in Gitmo) Sometimes this is referred to as rendition, and some of the "transfer points" in Europe have been exposed as well, but... those people were not in US custody at those points.

296 rwmofo  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 6:51:33pm

re: #288 SteveMcG

You keep ignoring that everybody we pick up isn't a terrorist. I'm happy that you have the power of perfect knowledge of who is and who isn't a terrorist. Why don't we just drag your ass all over Afghanistan and you tell us who is and who isn't a bad guy.

So if they aren't terrorists, why did we capture them? Jaywalking?

297 tradewind  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 6:51:45pm

re: #288 SteveMcG
Personally, I'd rather accuse a few unjustly and say ' whoopsie, sorry about that' later, since if you miss one, once you're blown up, there's no chance for a do over.///

298 Velvet Elvis  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 6:52:35pm

re: #257 Bagua


I admire your high minded sense of justice and civil rights. I hope you are OK with bodies dropping from the sky and other atrocities. It is unlikely they will not keep trying.

The price of living in a free and just society is high indeed. Freedom means people are going to die. I'd rather live with that risk than in Singapore where chewing gum is illegal.

299 tradewind  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 6:53:07pm

re: #292 WindUpBird
Yep.

300 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 6:53:15pm

re: #296 rwmofo

So if they aren't terrorists, why did we capture them? Jaywalking?

We captured them based on information that was faulty. Informants who had tribal reasons for seeing people out of the picture, etc. Someone who seems like they're in the know says "that guy's a terrorist!" we believe them on their word.

See how this might result in some innocent sbeing scooped up?

301 lawhawk  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 6:53:23pm

re: #288 SteveMcG

And you ignore the fact that the military was carrying out military operations, and contemplating Mirandizing terrorists on the battlefield wasn't exactly in their playbook. It was something imposed after the fact by politicians who were demanding treatment for detainees that was never before contemplated.

302 Dark_Falcon  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 6:53:40pm

re: #288 SteveMcG

You keep ignoring that everybody we pick up isn't a terrorist. I'm happy that you have the power of perfect knowledge of who is and who isn't a terrorist. Why don't we just drag your ass all over Afghanistan and you tell us who is and who isn't a bad guy.

I don't ignore it, but I feel its more important to neutralize the terrorists than to release those who might be innocent. given the amount of damage even a few of these terrorists can do, I feel that in cases where we are not sure the person should remain in detention. Better safe than sorry.

303 Velvet Elvis  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 6:53:56pm

re: #258 sattv4u2

And hoping that it won;t be as big as the OJ trial doesn;'t magically mean it wont

what will be in play here. As soon (actually, shortly before) the trial starts we will be inundated with all the footage, interviews, retelling the events that led up to and post 9/11. That will re-fan the fires of interest. The 1st time (read 1st DAY) KSM starts spouting off, or his lawyer (yes, i know he's repping himself, but he'll have counsel) starts with discovery, calling Bush as a witness, bringing up "torture" the game is on

He's already said he's going to plead guilty and wants to be executed.

304 SteveMcG  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 6:54:53pm

re: #297 tradewind

Geez, I feel like I'm back at Attytood with this weak stuff. Follow the yellow brick road. There's a guy in a big green house. He'll give you courage. Ask for seconds.

305 SanFranciscoZionist  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 6:55:03pm

re: #286 tradewind

I think they'll get the same amount of attention, from a different audience. People who live and breathe the adventures of Tiger as the Cheetah probably think that KSM is a brand of lotion.///

I will want to watch every minute. This in itself tells me that most Americans will be bored.

306 Killgore Trout  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 6:55:07pm

re: #275 reine.de.tout

Killgore -you might be absolutely correct that this could have been one way to handle them, but that could never have happened with these detainees. People were too interested in ensuring they were treated humanely and fairly by the big bad US of A.

Take KSM as an example. The world never needed to know we had him. We published pictures of his capture because we were going to take him to GITMO and give him a trial. But suppose it would jeopardize other operations or the evidence against him wouldn't be allowed in court (military or civilian). We could have picked him up, flown him to a blacksite, interrogated him and have him "disappeared". Nobody would have ever known. I wouldn't be terribly surprised to learn that's what happened to Bin laden. His remains may turn up some day and we'd never really know.

307 lawhawk  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 6:55:13pm

re: #295 Thanos

And to add to your point, rendition was a policy that was engaged in by the Clinton Administration prior to the Bush Administration, and the Obama Administration is continuing the policy.

308 Velvet Elvis  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 6:55:46pm

re: #261 sandbox

Naming the enemy is a big deal in this war. Our leaders like Janet Napolitano and other and so politically correct they can't name the enemy.

Who do you think the enemy is? Mooslums?

309 SteveMcG  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 6:55:49pm

re: #302 Dark_Falcon

We did a lot more damage to ourselves than the terrorists did to us.

310 MandyManners  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 6:55:55pm

re: #276 WindUpBird

I was actually about to say I wonder if these trials will get the same attention as Tiger Woods did.

Oh, for fuck's sake.

Only if you don't get your news from TMZ.

311 Randall Gross  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 6:56:02pm

re: #307 lawhawk

And to add to your point, rendition was a policy that was engaged in by the Clinton Administration prior to the Bush Administration, and the Obama Administration is continuing the policy.

Correct

312 tradewind  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 6:56:11pm

re: #298 Conservative Moonbat
Well, as one who has walked the pristine streets of Singapore without fear of gum sticking to my shoe sole, I say ' Yes We Cane' take a page from their playbook.///
(If you've never seen Jane Lynch on Glee, you won't understand).

313 RealismRox  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 6:56:18pm

The KSM trial won't be televised re: #303 Conservative Moonbat

I've read reports that KSM has changed his mind about pleading guilty.

KSM Trial Strategy

314 reine.de.tout  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 6:56:32pm

re: #300 WindUpBird

We captured them based on information that was faulty. Informants who had tribal reasons for seeing people out of the picture, etc. Someone who seems like they're in the know says "that guy's a terrorist!" we believe them on their word.

See how this might result in some innocent sbeing scooped up?

Yes, of course that could result in an innocent being scooped up.

You have knowledge that this happened?

315 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 6:56:38pm

re: #305 SanFranciscoZionist

I will want to watch every minute. This in itself tells me that most Americans will be bored.

Isn't that the truth! Almost every show I love gets cancelled or has almost comatose ratings. :D

316 Olsonist  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 6:56:42pm

re: #168 Girth

Not everything gets filibustered.

The filibuster goes back to the idea of negative control engineered into the mixed constitutional system of the Romans. They had several layers of vetoes. In principle the tribune of the plebs (10 of them) or either of the consuls could veto. In practice this allowed the optimates to control things from a minority.

Just like today.

317 tradewind  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 6:56:52pm

re: #304 SteveMcG
Naw, I think I'll try some of that Koolaid you're having.///

318 Walter L. Newton  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 6:57:00pm

re: #307 lawhawk

And to add to your point, rendition was a policy that was engaged in by the Clinton Administration prior to the Bush Administration, and the Obama Administration is continuing the policy.

I thought all this rendition had stopped. Didn't Obama promise that?

319 The Shadow Do  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 6:57:01pm

re: #300 WindUpBird

We captured them based on information that was faulty. Informants who had tribal reasons for seeing people out of the picture, etc. Someone who seems like they're in the know says "that guy's a terrorist!" we believe them on their word.

See how this might result in some innocent sbeing scooped up?

I hear this one over and over. Do you have evidence of this or is this speculation on your part.

320 SanFranciscoZionist  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 6:57:13pm

re: #296 rwmofo

So if they aren't terrorists, why did we capture them? Jaywalking?

I don't think we were all that precise about who we picked up in the early stages of All This.

321 Bagua  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 6:57:24pm

re: #293 Existential_Donuts

Call me crazy, but the "high minded sense of justice" you assign to me used to be a cornerstone of this country. American Exceptionalism, if you will. Your argument falls short for me because our criminal justice systems deals with dangerous, ruthless people all of the time. And the argument of 'extreme circumstances' is also very dangerous because 'extreme circumstances' are completely subjective.

Try them in court, lock them up.

I don't call you crazy. I respect the ability to be so high minded in the face of these exceptional threats. I also agree that 'extreme circumstances' is a very slippery slope.

There are no simple answers. I certainly want the rule of law to be upheld for all US citizens, and I want America and the West to hold to high standards of justice, fairness, rule or law and respect for human rights.

I reckognise however, that there needs to be a means by which we detain or eliminate that tiny fraction of people we identify during this horrendous war. I accept that tragic mistakes will also be made, but I want our President and our Military and Intelligence agencies to have all the leeway then need to protect the innocent citizens and defeat the terrorists.

322 SanFranciscoZionist  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 6:57:35pm

re: #297 tradewind

Personally, I'd rather accuse a few unjustly and say ' whoopsie, sorry about that' later, since if you miss one, once you're blown up, there's no chance for a do over.///

When's 'later'?

323 A Man for all Seasons  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 6:57:36pm

re: #312 tradewind

Well, as one who has walked the pristine streets of Singapore without fear of gum sticking to my shoe sole, I say ' Yes We Cane' take a page from their playbook.///
(If you've never seen Jane Lynch on Glee, you won't understand).

I'm going to Singapore in Spring...Excited to go..Thank Gawd I don't crew gum

324 SteveMcG  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 6:57:43pm

re: #314 reine.de.tout

Yeah, the evidence is that the recidivism rate isn't 100%.

325 Killgore Trout  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 6:57:50pm

re: #295 Thanos

KT: I think you are being slight obfuscatory here. We don't have blacksites, once someone's in US custody, they are ours and treated accordingly.


I wouldn't bet on that. We've been runing black sites and secret prisons for a very long time and I don't think the practice has suddenly vanished under Obama. The NSA and other agencies have a lot of leeway and I don't think Obama could personally stop the practice even if he wanted to.

326 Bagua  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 6:58:44pm

re: #294 lawhawk

Excellent comment, strongly agree.

327 rwmofo  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 6:58:49pm

re: #306 Killgore Trout

I think Bin Laden assumed room temperature about five years ago.

328 Dark_Falcon  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 6:58:55pm

re: #325 Killgore Trout

I wouldn't bet on that. We've been runing black sites and secret prisons for a very long time and I don't think the practice has suddenly vanished under Obama. The NSA and other agencies have a lot of leeway and I don't think Obama could personally stop the practice even if he wanted to.

And that is a good thing. I'm not fond of such places, but sadly in the current war we need them.

329 Existential_Donuts  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 6:59:28pm

re: #322 SanFranciscoZionist

When's 'later'?

Sounds fine unless you are one of the unjustly accused, huh?

330 sandbox  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 6:59:29pm

Perhaps we need a GITMO lite location for GITMO detainees we no longer want to keep, but remain too dangerous to send back to their country of origin. This could also serve as a place to deport radical islamists whose country of origin don't want them back or whose country of origin may torture or kill them. I am thinking of the radical islamist imams in the UK who they can't seem to get rid of.

331 Killgore Trout  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 6:59:40pm

re: #327 rwmofo

I think Bin Laden assumed room temperature about five years ago.

Yeah, I'm pretty sure he's dead too.

332 tradewind  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 6:59:44pm

Charles... re # 312....
It's not serious. It's a line from a comedy series.

333 wee fury  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 6:59:59pm

Comment #59 -- have been wading through Wiki sources. The only sources I question are the blog sources cited, and some of the links to Soros owned media.

334 reine.de.tout  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 7:00:13pm

re: #318 Walter L. Newton

I thought all this rendition had stopped. Didn't Obama promise that?

That's what I thought too.
And "rendition" is what I was trying to think of in an earlier comment. Goodness, didn't the Bush administration take all sorts of heat about that?

335 Randall Gross  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 7:00:50pm

re: #325 Killgore Trout

I wouldn't bet on that. We've been runing black sites and secret prisons for a very long time and I don't think the practice has suddenly vanished under Obama. The NSA and other agencies have a lot of leeway and I don't think Obama could personally stop the practice even if he wanted to.

I can point you to the foreign sites that have been exposed, (which somewhat backs up Charle's original statement btw) can you point me to one in the US that someone like Alex Jones isn't making up?

336 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 7:00:53pm

re: #310 MandyManners

Oh, for fuck's sake.

Only if you don't get your news from TMZ.

I am talking mainstream cable news, Mandy. The Tiger thing was on practically 24/7, and I know because I'm stuck in a workspace where cable news is on constantly. Tiger is the most famous sportsman in the country, I cna't think of a current sports figure more famous (MJ is retired) If you believe that more people will care about KSM than the most famous sports figure in America, fine. I'm not sure I believe that.

I just don't see the watercooler conversations about KSM happening constantly. I don't see average joes talking up the KSM trial, hanging on every detail. I could be wrong! I'm happy to be wrong. But I'm pretty sure I'm right.

337 reine.de.tout  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 7:02:06pm

re: #324 SteveMcG

Yeah, the evidence is that the recidivism rate isn't 100%.

And that means some innocent person was scooped up who was pointed out by a tribal member to get them out of the way? Or does it mean that some of the folks haven't returned to terrorism? (or probably some combination)

338 Walter L. Newton  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 7:02:21pm

re: #334 reine.de.tout

That's what I thought too.
And "rendition" is what I was trying to think of in an earlier comment. Goodness, didn't the Bush administration take all sorts of heat about that?

I thought so... I'm trying to find some reference to any statement by Obama on rendition. I thought it was one of the issues in his campaign...

I would like to see rendition stopped.

339 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 7:02:26pm

re: #319 The Shadow Do

I hear this one over and over. Do you have evidence of this or is this speculation on your part.

I thought it was established fact that some of the people at Gitmo were put there under those circumstances. I'm sure I could google it, but it's not really that important to me. Much more fun yakking about the media. 8-)

340 recusancy  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 7:02:41pm

re: #334 reine.de.tout

That's what I thought too.
And "rendition" is what I was trying to think of in an earlier comment. Goodness, didn't the Bush administration take all sorts of heat about that?

[Link: www.nytimes.com...]

Seems to be that closing Gitmo is a step in the process of ending rendition.

341 wee fury  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 7:03:07pm

re: #333 wee fury

OMG. Reread my post. Reads as though I have a phantom conspiracy theory squirreled away in my psyche. Gah.

342 Political Atheist  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 7:03:09pm

re: #121 Charles
My mind is not made up. I lean toward a military tribunal. I fear full blown due process (miranda anyone?) will result in the same result as above. Release only to do more harm later.
I think the MCJ is more apropo. But it's a leaning not a firm conclusion. Dedicated prison here onshore facilities would help.

343 Edward Halper  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 7:03:17pm

Charles:

I'm now in favor of trying the Gitmo detainees in civilian court, throwing the book at them, and locking them up after they've been given due process, and convicted, and no one can complain any more.

And if they aren't convicted, it's because we didn't have enough evidence to convict them.

We don't just need the evidence to convict. We need to insure that constitutional procedures have been followed. They have not because these folks are not American citizens. They are not entitled to the constitutional protections extended to citizens. I cannot imagine KSM being convicted in a US court. Of course, any evidence that was extracted by waterboarding would be inadmissible. However, his experiences at Gitmo will not just be brought up by his defense; they will be used to exonerate his actions retrospectively. I cannot see a court convicting someone whom the government claims it tortured. When he is set free, al-Qaeda will be able to say that even an American court recognized the injustice of the American government. We could not hand them a better recruiting tool.

344 SteveMcG  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 7:03:38pm

re: #337 reine.de.tout

I've never heard of a retired terrorist, so I would think most of the nonrepeaters weren't terrorists in the first place.

345 Spare O'Lake  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 7:03:44pm

re: #129 Existential_Donuts

Explain

We are in an existential war against radical Islamofascism, whose preferred MO is terrorism. This threat calls for bipartisan action, not partisan backbiting. It calls for unified national resolve, not political meltdowns. The enemy is not us, it is them.
That is why it is pathetic to cast stones inward instead of placing the blame squarely and exclusively where it belongs...on the fucking Islamofascist terrorists.

346 MandyManners  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 7:03:47pm

re: #327 rwmofo

I think Bin Laden assumed room temperature about five years ago.

More so than Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, he had a bright future of helping build the world in front of him.

347 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 7:03:56pm

re: #343 Edward Halper

He won't be set free. I'd bet my car title on it.

348 Dark_Falcon  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 7:04:46pm

And what a surprise the first half has been. The Bears are up 16-0. Where has this Chicago offensive line been all season?

349 The Shadow Do  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 7:05:04pm

re: #303 Conservative Moonbat

He's already said he's going to plead guilty and wants to be executed.

Which, coupled with the administrations insistance on a civilian venue, makes the trial pure kabuke, a show trial in which we get to see which side can wring the most political points out of it - AQ ideology or US liberalism.
Shameful is what it is.

350 reine.de.tout  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 7:05:52pm

re: #344 SteveMcG

I've never heard of a retired terrorist, so I would think most of the nonrepeaters weren't terrorists in the first place.

OK. Well, I would like to have some sort of evidence other than what you have or have not heard.

351 tradewind  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 7:05:59pm

re: #322 SanFranciscoZionist
When we discover our mistake. Who knows. That really wasn't the point... the point was that while our justice system rightfully operates under the premise that it is better to let the occasional guilty person go free than convict an innocent (which is generally a good thing), this (the case of terrorist threats) is an extreme situation where the result of letting someone slip through is not that one guilty person walks... it is that hundreds of innocents may die.
There's no perfect solution.

352 SteveMcG  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 7:06:06pm

re: #348 Dark_Falcon

Who cares? As long as it holds up 30 more minutes. And maybe we'll see a Favre/Childress mashup as a bonus.

353 Gus  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 7:06:32pm

re: #347 WindUpBird

He won't be set free. I'd bet my car title on it.

Speaking of being set free. From what I've read about the charges, Abdulmutallab is only facing a maximum of 20 years. Unless they come up with new charges.

355 wee fury  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 7:06:41pm

re: #348 Dark_Falcon

Hooray! Grind those Vikes right into the ground along with the traitor Farve.

356 Killgore Trout  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 7:06:46pm

re: #335 Thanos

I can point you to the foreign sites that have been exposed, (which somewhat backs up Charle's original statement btw) can you point me to one in the US that someone like Alex Jones isn't making up?

Uh, no. I wouldn't have that sort of knowledge. All I'm saying is that it's not really a secret that we run blacksites. Down at the bottom there's a quote from Obama saying that he wants to shut down CIA Blacksites but CIA is only one of many agencies and there are much more serious and secretive agencies out there that have their own facilities. I'm not even arguing in favor of blackites so much as I am saying that they're real and we use them. There are reasons why we use them. I don't think you can reasonably claim that it isn;t going on.

357 rwmofo  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 7:06:46pm

re: #346 MandyManners

Mandy, librarians dream of being as resourceful as you.

358 lawhawk  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 7:07:08pm

re: #343 Edward Halper

Actually, we have other sources of information that would tie him to the 9/11 attacks and other terrorism, some of which that would not undermine national security gathering techniques and tactics; he would most likely be convicted, but the problem is those who were captured overseas but with information that wouldn't hold up in federal court under federal rules of civil procedure.

That's why the military tribunals made the most sense to deal with all these detainees - it could separate those who were terrorists and should be detained from those that might have alibis.

360 SteveMcG  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 7:07:35pm

re: #350 reine.de.tout

NOW you want evidence? You could care less about throwing people away, but for the sake of an argument you want evidence. Pathetic.

361 tradewind  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 7:08:03pm

re: #340 recusancy
Huh?
Most rendition was imposed on captured jihadists or suspected jihadists who never made it as far as Gitmo, I believe. Deals worked out Over There.

362 Existential_Donuts  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 7:08:09pm

re: #345 Spare O'Lake

We are in an existential war against radical Islamofascism, whose preferred MO is terrorism. This threat calls for bipartisan action, not partisan backbiting. It calls for unified national resolve, not political meltdowns. The enemy is not us, it is them.
That is why it is pathetic to cast stones inward instead of placing the blame squarely and exclusively where it belongs...on the fucking Islamofascist terrorists.

I don't think that word means what you think it means. A true existentialist view on this would blame ALL religions for the current state of affairs. Also, blaming all Muslims for terrorism is like blaming all Christians for the few nuts that hurt other people. As far as an existential view on American politics, it's a cluster fuck.

363 Olsonist  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 7:08:24pm

re: #345 Spare O'Lake

We are in an existential war against radical Islamofascism, whose preferred MO is terrorism. This threat calls for bipartisan action, not partisan backbiting. It calls for unified national resolve, not political meltdowns. The enemy is not us, it is them.
That is why it is pathetic to cast stones inward instead of placing the blame squarely and exclusively where it belongs...on the fucking Islamofascist terrorists.

re: #179 Spare O'Lake

So let me understand this. Napolitano is not an embarrassment to her office and gets a pass because her deractors are calling for her head. Is that it?

I have a hard time squaring the Kumbaya nature of the first post with the partisan vitriol of the second. Can you help me out?

364 Dark_Falcon  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 7:09:05pm

re: #355 wee fury

Hooray! Grind those Vikes right into the ground along with the traitor Farve.

I originally didn't want the Bears to win this game, but I've now changed my mind. Go Bears, give us a reason to believe things can get better. And continue the good work of pounding on Bret Farve!

365 reine.de.tout  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 7:09:22pm

re: #360 SteveMcG

NOW you want evidence? You could care less about throwing people away, but for the sake of an argument you want evidence. Pathetic.

Please show me where I posted I wanted to throw people away.

You said that you have never heard of a retired terrorist, so you think they must have been innocent to begin with.

Well, I say we should base our opinions on these things on more than just what we have heard about or have not heard about.

I am not pathetic.

366 Walter L. Newton  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 7:09:31pm

re: #360 SteveMcG

NOW you want evidence? You could care less about throwing people away, but for the sake of an argument you want evidence. Pathetic.

What the fuck. Hey... a little respect here. Where did reine.de.tout ever say she anything about "throwing people away?"

367 tradewind  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 7:09:41pm

re: #353 Gus 802
I guess that's the max under the Liar Liar Pants on Fire statute.///

368 Gus  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 7:10:02pm

re: #367 tradewind

I guess that's the max under the Liar Liar Pants on Fire statute.///

Yep, it is.

369 Charles Johnson  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 7:10:02pm

re: #343 Edward Halper

We could not hand them a better recruiting tool.

Al Qaeda "recruiting tools" are completely irrelevant. They're going to use whatever they're given. If we put them on trial, they'll use that - and if we don't, they'll use that just as easily.

It's pointless to worry about whether we're encouraging Al Qaeda.

It's not pointless to worry about what it does to the US to hold people indefinitely without trial. This craziness has to end at some point, and we've already missed the point where we could have held quick military trials -- long ago.

370 Izzyboy  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 7:10:22pm
I’ve been undecided on the issue of trying Gitmo detainees for a long time — but I’m now in favor of trying the Gitmo detainees in civilian court, throwing the book at them, and locking them up after they’ve been given due process, and convicted, and no one can complain any more.

Wouldn't it be better if we tried them as enemy combatants and had military tribunals? Civilian court just ups the martyr angle IMO.

371 SteveMcG  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 7:10:29pm

re: #364 Dark_Falcon

And the best part if the Vikes lose will be all the questions about whether Favre called the right plays and audibles. I guess that'll happen if they win too. Yippee!!!

372 Political Atheist  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 7:10:40pm

re: #356 Killgore Trout
Once you have "black money" like what CIA, NSA, DARPA & aerospace contractors get, you have black programs that can go for a decade or more. Black prisons seems easy by comparison.

Allegedly there used to be black training facilities under Reagan and the anti Sandinista days. Georgia I think.

373 Dark_Falcon  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 7:10:43pm

re: #360 SteveMcG

Insulting Reine will earn you downdings.

374 reine.de.tout  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 7:11:28pm

re: #366 Walter L. Newton

What the fuck. Hey... a little respect here. Where did reine.de.tout ever say she anything about "throwing people away?"

Thanks, Walter.
He never heard of a retired terrorist, and wants me to believe that that means that everyone who is released and does not become a terrorist again must have been innocent to begin with.

I think we should find out what the facts are, and not base our thoughts on this on what we have or have not "heard" of.
But I'm pathetic, what do I know?

375 jaunte  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 7:11:57pm

Some interesting notes on the fighting on the Saudi-Yemen border:

The Sa’dah insurgency, of which the latest Saudi military invasion of Yemen is part, has been going on since 2004, when dissident cleric Hussein Badreddin al-Houthi launched an uprising against the Yemeni government. But the crucial moment that led to the latest Saudi invasion was August 27, 2009, when prince Naif bin Abdul Aziz Al Saud (a.k.a. prince Mohammed bin Nayef), son of King Ibn Saud and the Kingdom’s the second deputy prime minister and minister of interior, narrowly escaped a brazen attempt on his life by an al-Qaeda-linked Yemeni suicide bomber, who infiltrated the prince’s Jeddah palace. The incident shocked the Saudi royal clique, whose members are not used to such actions, and prompted the Saudi security establishment to move decisively against the Shiite Islamist opposition to its rule, which includes armed insurgents on both sides of the Saudi-Yemeni border.[Link: intelligencenews.wordpress.com...]
376 Dark_Falcon  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 7:12:09pm

re: #371 SteveMcG

And the best part if the Vikes lose will be all the questions about whether Favre called the right plays and audibles. I guess that'll happen if they win too. Yippee!!!

At this rate, the question will be how the Bears put together the win.

377 Randall Gross  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 7:14:13pm

re: #356 Killgore Trout

Uh, no. I wouldn't have that sort of knowledge. All I'm saying is that it's not really a secret that we run blacksites. Down at the bottom there's a quote from Obama saying that he wants to shut down CIA Blacksites but CIA is only one of many agencies and there are much more serious and secretive agencies out there that have their own facilities. I'm not even arguing in favor of blackites so much as I am saying that they're real and we use them. There are reasons why we use them. I don't think you can reasonably claim that it isn;t going on.

Well you are making a some what extreme claim that the modern version of "blacksites" exist within the US, the burden of proof is on you. I don't take things on assumption, and I recognize that there are and have always been "blacksites' within the US for projects, but I've never heard of one where people were detained.

So again, show me the US blacksites where people are detained.

378 jaunte  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 7:14:57pm

re: #360 SteveMcG
reine.de.tout is one of the most sane and reasonable people on this site.
If she says she would like some evidence, that's what she means.

379 Walter L. Newton  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 7:15:08pm

re: #374 reine.de.tout

Thanks, Walter.
He never heard of a retired terrorist, and wants me to believe that that means that everyone who is released and does not become a terrorist again must have been innocent to begin with.

I think we should find out what the facts are, and not base our thoughts on this on what we have or have not "heard" of.
But I'm pathetic, what do I know?

You're welcome...

And he doesn't even come back and back up his comment. I still want him to tell us when you said anything about "throwing people away?"

380 SteveMcG  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 7:15:33pm

re: #376 Dark_Falcon

Shit happens. Like fielding a punt inside the 5. Moron.

381 lawhawk  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 7:15:52pm

re: #353 Gus 802

Attempted murder under terror provisions 18 USC 2332, would be 20 years per charge.

Under 18 USC 2332f and pursuant to the sanctions under 18 USC 2332a, Mutallab could face life in prison.

He attempted to blow up an airline, which qualifies as a crime under 18 USC 2332f(a)(2). That's punishable by up to life in prison.

There are other lesser included charges to be considered as well.

382 reine.de.tout  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 7:16:00pm

re: #379 Walter L. Newton

You're welcome...

And he doesn't even come back and back up his comment. I still want him to tell us when you said anything about "throwing people away?"

I didn't.

I asked for evidence, rather than assumptions.

re: #378 jaunte

reine.de.tout is one of the most sane and reasonable people on this site.
If she says she would like some evidence, that's what she means.

Merci!

383 Walter L. Newton  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 7:16:00pm

re: #371 SteveMcG

Hey Steve, some people have an open question to you... care to answer?
re: #378 jaunte

reine.de.tout is one of the most sane and reasonable people on this site.
If she says she would like some evidence, that's what she means.


re: #374 reine.de.tout

Thanks, Walter.
He never heard of a retired terrorist, and wants me to believe that that means that everyone who is released and does not become a terrorist again must have been innocent to begin with.

I think we should find out what the facts are, and not base our thoughts on this on what we have or have not "heard" of.
But I'm pathetic, what do I know?

re: #379 Walter L. Newton

You're welcome...

And he doesn't even come back and back up his comment. I still want him to tell us when you said anything about "throwing people away?"

384 Dark_Falcon  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 7:16:39pm

re: #379 Walter L. Newton

You're welcome...

And he doesn't even come back and back up his comment. I still want him to tell us when you said anything about "throwing people away?"

He'll do what obnoxious leftists do when they get called out on their BS: run back crying to mommy.

385 Spare O'Lake  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 7:16:46pm

re: #362 Existential_Donuts

I don't think that word means what you think it means. A true existentialist view on this would blame ALL religions for the current state of affairs. Also, blaming all Muslims for terrorism is like blaming all Christians for the few nuts that hurt other people. As far as an existential view on American politics, it's a cluster fuck.

Your dissembling and blubbering is understandable, given that you are in denial of the fact that we are indeed in an existential war with Islamofascism.
Go stick your head back up your ass.

386 Existential_Donuts  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 7:17:12pm

re: #385 Spare O'Lake

Your dissembling and blubbering is understandable, given that you are in denial of the fact that we are indeed in an existential war with Islamofascism.
Go stick your head back up your ass.

Okay, nice to talk to you.

387 rwmofo  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 7:17:13pm

re: #377 Thanos

"So again, show me the US blacksites where people are detained."

Ummm, isn't that supposed to be a secret? Oh wait. The NY Times will probably tell us.

388 Gus  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 7:17:18pm

re: #381 lawhawk

Attempted murder under terror provisions 18 USC 2332, would be 20 years per charge.

Under 18 USC 2332f and pursuant to the sanctions under 18 USC 2332a, Mutallab could face life in prison.

He attempted to blow up an airline, which qualifies as a crime under 18 USC 2332f(a)(2). That's punishable by up to life in prison.

There are other lesser included charges to be considered as well.

Yes. Thanks. Those will probably come up on January 8th. He's looking at life.

389 Izzyboy  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 7:17:51pm

re: #381 lawhawk

That is an awesome site, thanks for linking it.

390 brookly red  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 7:18:38pm

re: #381 lawhawk

Attempted murder under terror provisions 18 USC 2332, would be 20 years per charge.

Under 18 USC 2332f and pursuant to the sanctions under 18 USC 2332a, Mutallab could face life in prison.

He attempted to blow up an airline, which qualifies as a crime under 18 USC 2332f(a)(2). That's punishable by up to life in prison.

There are other lesser included charges to be considered as well.

Considering that he was (allegedly) trying to blow himself up too, I don't think the possible sentencing is much of a deterrent.

391 The Sanity Inspector  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 7:19:10pm

re: #199 sandbox

I am looking to keep the jihadis in the military court system.

Me too. My biggest objection to going through civilian courts is that intelligence secrets will come out. Osama bin Laden was tipped off to our surveillance methods during the trial of the 1993 WTC bombers, and adjusted accordingly.

392 Walter L. Newton  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 7:19:18pm

re: #384 Dark_Falcon

He'll do what obnoxious leftists do when they get called out on their BS: run back crying to mommy.

Mommy down dinged you. Go back to your comment #384. LOL.

393 The Sanity Inspector  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 7:19:29pm

re: #387 rwmofo

"So again, show me the US blacksites where people are detained."

Ummm, isn't that supposed to be a secret? Oh wait. The NY Times will probably tell us.

If they haven't already.

394 tradewind  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 7:19:47pm

re: #377 Thanos
But if it's a ' black site ', that pretty much rules out being able to show it, doesn't it?
Otherwise it's really not living up to its name. Actually, I hope there is some tiny level of secrecy left intact that is available to our government, if only to frustrate the NYT.

395 Randall Gross  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 7:20:09pm

re: #387 rwmofo

"So again, show me the US blacksites where people are detained."

Ummm, isn't that supposed to be a secret? Oh wait. The NY Times will probably tell us.

They likely would if they were truly there. The CIA can't keep a secret during a Republican presidency anyway...

396 lawhawk  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 7:20:23pm

re: #390 brookly red

Not so much deterrent as protecting the public from his further exploits in terrorist sartorial splendor.

397 Bagua  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 7:20:34pm

As I am vocal on the subject of suspected foreign terrorists I would like to go on record as stating that I believe more should be done to prevent abuses in the American domestic justice system and prisons that lead to innocent people being convicted or convicts treated inhumanely while in custody.

This involves tens of thousands of American citizens and deserves major reform. Many worse torments are suffered routinely by US citizens than anything that happened to KSM.

Only terrorism rates consideration as being entitled to exceptions.

398 A Man for all Seasons  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 7:20:43pm

re: #380 SteveMcG

Shit happens. Like fielding a punt inside the 5. Moron.

?!?! What?

399 Olsonist  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 7:20:51pm

re: #391 The Sanity Inspector

Ramzi Yousef et al were tried in civilian court for the World Trade Center Bombing.

400 Walter L. Newton  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 7:21:45pm

re: #399 Olsonist

Ramzi Yousef et al were tried in civilian court for the World Trade Center Bombing.

Do you know why?

401 SteveMcG  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 7:21:52pm

re: #378 jaunte

I can't necessarily keep track of who's who yet. In general, the people who advocate keeping the terror suspects in custody without trial seem uninterested in evidence, and it is easy to wind up arguing with a different person than you started out with and not picking up on the nuance. The argument that the recidivism rate is far lower than 100% is a strong one that most of the released suspects weren't terrorists to begin with. I don't know what evidence Reine has in mind.

402 Randall Gross  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 7:22:03pm

re: #394 tradewind

Trust me the CIA is too much of a political animal and bureaucracy intent on it's own survival to have kept that a secret during an 8 yr Republican presidency. The NYT would have had it if they existed.

403 brookly red  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 7:22:59pm

re: #396 lawhawk

Not so much deterrent as protecting the public from his further exploits in terrorist sartorial splendor.

Mmmmm, maybe we could do more.

404 tradewind  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 7:23:07pm

re: #387 rwmofo
Well there ya go.... had I seen your post first, I could have saved myself the trouble...
:)

405 Walter L. Newton  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 7:23:15pm

re: #401 SteveMcG

I still want you us when Reine said anything about "throwing people away?"

406 Randall Gross  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 7:23:38pm

re: #401 SteveMcG

Well you could go by the recidivism rates reported by Saudi Arabia and Yemen, they are in need of revision now however.

407 Olsonist  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 7:24:55pm

re: #400 Walter L. Newton

Doubtlessly you'll tell me but he is also kept on US soil in the state of Colorado.

408 The Sanity Inspector  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 7:25:27pm

re: #399 Olsonist

Ramzi Yousef et al were tried in civilian court for the World Trade Center Bombing.

I know it.

409 Walter L. Newton  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 7:25:53pm

re: #407 Olsonist

Doubtlessly you'll tell me but he is also kept on US soil in the state of Colorado.

I asked you do you know why? That wasn't an answer.

410 Mostly sane, most of the time.  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 7:26:25pm

re: #409 Walter L. Newton

I asked you do you know why? That wasn't an answer.

Well, if he doesn't want to know why, I'd like to.

411 Killgore Trout  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 7:27:10pm

re: #377 Thanos

I've never heard of one where people were detained.


That's the whole idea behind a blacksite.

412 Bagua  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 7:27:21pm

One released terrorist going on to bomb airliners is justification for 1,000 wrongly imprisoned. There are now two we know of.

In general something like 1 in 7 has been mentioned. That is, the ones actually documented. Presumably most are not caught or identified.

413 SteveMcG  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 7:27:46pm

re: #405 Walter L. Newton

See 401. Sometimes you are in a discussion with more than one poster and you resond to somebody else's point towards the wrong person. There, I said it again. Is there some other syntax that you may need in a third entry?

414 Walter L. Newton  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 7:27:57pm

re: #407 Olsonist

Doubtlessly you'll tell me but he is also kept on US soil in the state of Colorado.

I didn't know that... but I looked it up and you are right... "He is held at the high-security Supermax prison ADX Florence in Florence, Colorado[3]. The handcuffs Ramzi Yousef wore when he was captured in Pakistan are displayed at the FBI Museum in Washington, DC.[24]"

415 reine.de.tout  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 7:28:24pm

re: #401 SteveMcG

I can't necessarily keep track of who's who yet. In general, the people who advocate keeping the terror suspects in custody without trial seem uninterested in evidence, and it is easy to wind up arguing with a different person than you started out with and not picking up on the nuance. The argument that the recidivism rate is far lower than 100% is a strong one that most of the released suspects weren't terrorists to begin with. I don't know what evidence Reine has in mind.

I never advocated keeping terror suspects in custody without trial. If I have, I am sure you can find the post where I did it. But you won't find it; it does not exist.

So . . . the "pathetic" comment, then was not directed at me but just "in general" to ...somebody?

At any rate - you indicated you assumed that non-recidivists were not guilty to begin with because you've never heard of a retired terrorist. I think it's flimsy to base an opinion of innocence or guilt on an assumption. You're OK with it - go for it. I'm not.

416 Bagua  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 7:28:31pm

re: #411 Killgore Trout

That's the whole idea behind a blacksite.

What about UFOs? And where IS Elvis?

417 Spare O'Lake  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 7:28:41pm

re: #363 Olsonist

I have a hard time squaring the Kumbaya nature of the first post with the partisan vitriol of the second. Can you help me out?

Your characterization of my comment as "Kumbaya" belies your own denial of the fact that the US is in an existential struggle. Very well, enjoy your smugness.
In her initial denial that homeland security had been breached, Napolitano was in obvious denial of the seriousness of the breach of security.
Get the connection?
Hint: Denial.

418 rwmofo  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 7:28:45pm

re: #399 Olsonist

Ramzi Yousef et al were tried in civilian court for the World Trade Center Bombing.

That's because he was in the US when he committed that crime. The guys in Guantanamo were captured on the battlefield off-shore. There's a difference between those two circumstances, ya know?

419 Olsonist  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 7:28:48pm

re: #414 Walter L. Newton

I didn't know that... but I looked it up and you are right... "He is held at the high-security Supermax prison ADX Florence in Florence, Colorado[3]. The handcuffs Ramzi Yousef wore when he was captured in Pakistan are displayed at the FBI Museum in Washington, DC.[24]"

Do you know why?

420 Randall Gross  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 7:28:53pm

re: #411 Killgore Trout

Sorry I don't find it credible without evidence. If the CIA were doing this on US soil it's certainly a salvo that would have been fired in the infighting before and after the consolidation into DHS which a huge faction at the CIA fought.

421 Dark_Falcon  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 7:29:23pm

re: #412 Bagua

One released terrorist going on to bomb airliners is justification for 1,000 wrongly imprisoned. There are now two we know of.

In general something like 1 in 7 has been mentioned. That is, the ones actually documented. Presumably most are not caught or identified.

Agreed. One terrorist who returns to Al Qaeda can kill dozens, if not hundreds. We cannot afford to run such risks. Those confirms as members of Al Qaeda must be imprisoned for the duration.

422 SteveMcG  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 7:29:23pm

re: #419 Olsonist

Because they're really cool handcuffs.

423 Walter L. Newton  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 7:30:12pm

re: #413 SteveMcG

See 401. Sometimes you are in a discussion with more than one poster and you resond to somebody else's point towards the wrong person. There, I said it again. Is there some other syntax that you may need in a third entry?

No you didn't. You said that Reine said "throwing people away." I can't find any place on this thread where she used those words. I can't find anyplace on this thread that anyone used those words. Evidently you saw those words, you attributed them to Reine. One more time, where?

424 recusancy  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 7:30:46pm

re: #417 Spare O'Lake

Your characterization of my comment as "Kumbaya" belies your own denial of the fact that the US is in an existential struggle. Very well, enjoy your smugness.
In her initial denial that homeland security had been breached, Napolitano was in obvious denial of the seriousness of the breach of security.
Get the connection?
Hint: Denial.

I think his/her point was why are you casting stones inward when you yourself made the point that we should not be doing that?

425 Kragar  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 7:31:06pm

Got the kids a Wii for Christmas, just spent the last 2 hours playing Wii sports with them. I didn't know video games were supposed to wear you out. lol

426 Dark_Falcon  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 7:31:16pm

re: #416 Bagua

What about UFOs? And where IS Elvis?

Elvis went back to his home planet in a UFO. Didn't you see Men in Black? :D

427 McSpiff  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 7:31:16pm

re: #412 Bagua

One released terrorist going on to bomb airliners is justification for 1,000 wrongly imprisoned. There are now two we know of.

In general something like 1 in 7 has been mentioned. That is, the ones actually documented. Presumably most are not caught or identified.

The idea that once you have the label of AQ, it can never be removed and you never released is a little too kafkaesque for me.

428 SteveMcG  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 7:31:45pm

re: #421 Dark_Falcon

And the freinds and relatives of an innocent man can become terrorists and kill dozens, if not hundreds. We cannot afford to run such risks.

429 Walter L. Newton  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 7:32:15pm

re: #419 Olsonist

Do you know why?

I asked you first. Why was Ramzi Yousef tried in a criminal trial and placed in a US prison.

If you don't answer, I am going to assume you don't know and made a worthless comment when you brought him up as some sort of example of something.

430 reine.de.tout  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 7:33:02pm

I'm beginning to understand why Mandy finds a use for the expression, "Go piss up a rope".

I think I shall bow out for this evening, folks, at least for a bit.
Enjoyed the company!
Thanks, guys, you know who you are.

431 lawhawk  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 7:33:03pm

re: #425 Kragar (proud to be kafir)

Just watch for Wii elbow - especially when playing the tennis and bowling games...

432 Four More Tears  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 7:34:37pm

re: #412 Bagua

One released terrorist going on to bomb airliners is justification for 1,000 wrongly imprisoned. There are now two we know of.

In general something like 1 in 7 has been mentioned. That is, the ones actually documented. Presumably most are not caught or identified.

When you say "wrongly imprisoned" do you mean without sufficient evidence to convict? Or are you suggesting that it's okay to imprison 1,000 innocent men?

433 Killgore Trout  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 7:34:43pm

re: #420 Thanos

Sorry I don't find it credible without evidence.


I have no hope of convincing you but the topic of this thread shows that secret prisons and blacksites can be useful and may be necessary. It has been proposed that these two al Qaeda operatives were turned over as a favor to the Saudis but suppose there wasn't enough admissible legal evidence for a conviction. Since we were holding them openly in Gitmo and had no hope of a trial we were forced to turn them lose. Perhaps it would have been better if they had been held secretly somewhere and simply vanished never to be heard of again.

434 Kragar  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 7:34:44pm

re: #431 lawhawk

Just watch for Wii elbow - especially when playing the tennis and bowling games...

As much as I hate the real sport, I'm now addicted to Wii Golf.

435 albusteve  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 7:34:46pm

re: #413 SteveMcG

See 401. Sometimes you are in a discussion with more than one poster and you resond to somebody else's point towards the wrong person. There, I said it again. Is there some other syntax that you may need in a third entry?

he'll survive, but that's a penalty

436 Existential_Donuts  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 7:35:35pm

re: #417 Spare O'Lake

Your characterization of my comment as "Kumbaya" belies your own denial of the fact that the US is in an existential struggle. Very well, enjoy your smugness.
In her initial denial that homeland security had been breached, Napolitano was in obvious denial of the seriousness of the breach of security.
Get the connection?
Hint: Denial.

You are going to have to find another word to make you seem smart. Existentialism is a philosophy, and simply does not fit in the way you are trying to use it. Even in the broadest sense, it does not apply. I think you are trying to say that your big picture view of this is that the..um.. Islamofascists are responsible for terrorism. Existentialism at its most refined is a philosophy that is apolitical, areligious. It does not support a dogma or rhetoric, it examines them.

437 rwmofo  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 7:35:45pm

re: #429 Walter L. Newton

I asked you first. Why was Ramzi Yousef tried in a criminal trial and placed in a US prison.

If you don't answer, I am going to assume you don't know and made a worthless comment when you brought him up as some sort of example of something.

I think my #418 covered the differences. I'd defer to lawhawk for specifics, however.

438 lawhawk  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 7:35:49pm

re: #427 McSpiff

Under the Geneva Conventions, POWs were allowed to be held for the duration of hostilities.

Given that the jihadis are hoping to fight and sustain a generational conflict, permanent detention would follow.

However, the Geneva Conventions really didn't anticipate a permanent state of war either... so you have a move to do something about holding them that ends the detainment at some point.

Necessarily ambiguous.

439 Dark_Falcon  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 7:36:44pm

re: #428 SteveMcG

And the freinds and relatives of an innocent man can become terrorists and kill dozens, if not hundreds. We cannot afford to run such risks.

Those people will consider him innocent no matter what we say. We should worry less about blowback.

440 SteveMcG  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 7:37:01pm

re: #423 Walter L. Newton

Maybe the third time's a charm. There are lots of comments advocating the indefinite detention of terrorists. As I was mixing it up with other people, who would qualify as pathetic, like the one above who says we cannot afford to run such risks. I have already conceded that Reine wasn't one of them. So Reine accidently got called pathetic instead of somebody else. I have a feeling Reine got my point on one of the first two attempts to explain it to you. Do you inderstand me yet?

441 Walter L. Newton  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 7:37:07pm

re: #437 rwmofo

I think my #418 covered the differences. I'd defer to lawhawk for specifics, however.

I didn't ask you. I was asking Olsonist, but he doesn't know.

442 Olsonist  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 7:37:09pm

re: #429 Walter L. Newton

I asked you first. Why was Ramzi Yousef tried in a criminal trial and placed in a US prison.

If you don't answer, I am going to assume you don't know and made a worthless comment when you brought him up as some sort of example of something.

Ah, first the baiting then the straw man argument. Classy.

I pointed out that Ramzi Yusef was tried in civilian court because we can do this. Did they learn something from us? Yeah, probably. We're an open society. It's not hard to learn something from us.

443 researchok  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 7:37:50pm

re: #325 Killgore Trout

I wouldn't bet on that. We've been runing black sites and secret prisons for a very long time and I don't think the practice has suddenly vanished under Obama. The NSA and other agencies have a lot of leeway and I don't think Obama could personally stop the practice even if he wanted to.

Bullseye.

From Wiki:

According to Clinton administration official Richard Clarke:
“'extraordinary renditions', were operations to apprehend terrorists abroad, usually without the knowledge of and almost always without public acknowledgment of the host government.... The first time I proposed a snatch, in 1993, the White House Counsel, Lloyd Cutler, demanded a meeting with the President to explain how it violated international law. Clinton had seemed to be siding with Cutler until Al Gore belatedly joined the meeting, having just flown overnight from South Africa. Clinton recapped the arguments on both sides for Gore: "Lloyd says this. Dick says that. Gore laughed and said, 'That's a no-brainer. Of course it's a violation of international law, that's why it's a covert action. The guy is a terrorist. Go grab his ass.'"

444 Randall Gross  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 7:38:40pm

re: #433 Killgore Trout

I have no hope of convincing you but the topic of this thread shows that secret prisons and blacksites can be useful and may be necessary. It has been proposed that these two al Qaeda operatives were turned over as a favor to the Saudis but suppose there wasn't enough admissible legal evidence for a conviction. Since we were holding them openly in Gitmo and had no hope of a trial we were forced to turn them lose. Perhaps it would have been better if they had been held secretly somewhere and simply vanished never to be heard of again.

All of those are fair statements, the minor quibble I have is with them existing on US soil. I'm well aware of the "foreign blacksites" and named one above. They do have their uses. I know you question what the right says, and sometimes the left, but there are still black helicopter people on the left too -- if such sites existed in the US I'm with Charles, I don't think they could stay secret. If they exist under Obama, that could be bad for him if it came out too.

445 Spare O'Lake  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 7:39:01pm

re: #424 recusancy

I think his/her point was why are you casting stones inward when you yourself made the point that we should not be doing that?

In time of war we need to pull together. But we can't afford incompetent boobs like Napolitano blowing smoke up our asses - and I say that without partisan rancor but rather looking only at her stunningly stupid on-air comment. I would contrast her insulting remarks with Obama's masterful speech.

446 Dark_Falcon  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 7:39:43pm

re: #440 SteveMcG

So, now I'm pathetic, am I? Go back to Democratic Underground, you liberal choad,

447 Walter L. Newton  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 7:40:04pm

re: #442 Olsonist

Ah, first the baiting then the straw man argument. Classy.

I pointed out that Ramzi Yusef was tried in civilian court because we can do this. Did they learn something from us? Yeah, probably. We're an open society. It's not hard to learn something from us.

You don't know shit do you. I was asking because I was interested in the answer. I'm sorry, next time I will ask someone who actually may know what they are talking about.

(P.S. go look up straw man or something. That wasn't a straw man, it was a unproven assumption, assuming that if you didn't answer, then you didn't know the answer. But, now it a founded assumption).

Thanks for playing.

448 prairiefire  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 7:40:08pm

re: #235 Charles
We, in an elementary way, are hashing out difficult questions for our American society. Thanks, Charles, for the opportunity to do so.

449 Killgore Trout  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 7:40:34pm

re: #443 researchok

Richard Clarke is kind of a douche but I'll agree with him on that one.

450 Dark_Falcon  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 7:40:39pm

re: #445 Spare O'Lake

In time of war we need to pull together. But we can't afford incompetent boobs like Napolitano blowing smoke up our asses - and I say that without partisan rancor but rather looking only at her stunningly stupid on-air comment. I would contrast her insulting remarks with Obama's masterful speech.

Perhaps it time for Obama to examine the contrast between those speechs and place Napolitano under the bus.

451 Walter L. Newton  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 7:41:50pm

re: #440 SteveMcG

Maybe the third time's a charm. There are lots of comments advocating the indefinite detention of terrorists. As I was mixing it up with other people, who would qualify as pathetic, like the one above who says we cannot afford to run such risks. I have already conceded that Reine wasn't one of them. So Reine accidently got called pathetic instead of somebody else. I have a feeling Reine got my point on one of the first two attempts to explain it to you. Do you inderstand me yet?

You know something. Your clean up is worst than the mess you made. So, who's pathetic? Or do you just like to throw out unfounded snarks and see where they will stick.

Jerk.

452 recusancy  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 7:41:57pm

re: #445 Spare O'Lake

In time of war we need to pull together. But we can't afford incompetent boobs like Napolitano blowing smoke up our asses - and I say that without partisan rancor but rather looking only at her stunningly stupid on-air comment. I would contrast her insulting remarks with Obama's masterful speech.

So was Bush not incompetent to let these two terrorists go?

453 researchok  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 7:42:43pm

re: #449 Killgore Trout

Richard Clarke is kind of a douche but I'll agree with him on that one.

Agreed re Clarke- and that's why he was good at his job.

Neither Clinton, Gore or Cutler ever denied the story.

454 Randall Gross  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 7:43:31pm

re: #449 Killgore Trout

Richard Clarke is kind of a douche but I'll agree with him on that one.

Again, I've stated that foreign sites exist, that renditions occur, but not that US sites exist. Gitmo doesn't really qualify as a "blacksite" does it?

455 brookly red  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 7:43:43pm

re: #452 recusancy

So was Bush not incompetent to let these two terrorists go?


/I guess the blame Bush thing CAN go on for ever after all ...

456 SteveMcG  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 7:44:08pm

re: #439 Dark_Falcon

You see, this is the kind of thing that earns the adjective pathetic. If you have your way (either way), it doesn't win the war on terror. You just need bigger jails. When are you going to realize that the war on terror is a political war? You also isolate yourself. How impressive was that coalition of the willing in Iraq? Plenty of nations who fight by our side in Afghanistan didn't want to touch us with a ten foot pole in Iraq. It was a cruel joke when you compare it to the coalition of 1991.

458 Stuart Leviton  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 7:45:02pm

re: #380 SteveMcG
Hi SteveMcG, I have down-dinged you for insulting both Reine and DarkFalcon. Disagreeing is okay - and encouraged. If you believe I have been hasty in my decision, let me know and I will reconsider.

459 Existential_Donuts  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 7:45:03pm

re: #455 brookly red

/I guess the blame Bush thing CAN go on for ever after all ...

You say that even under the circumstances? I honestly want to know, did Bush's accountability end when Obama took office?

460 Olsonist  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 7:45:25pm

re: #447 Walter L. Newton

You don't know shit do you. I was asking because I was interested in the answer. I'm sorry, next time I will ask someone who actually may know what they are talking about.

(P.S. go look up straw man or something. That wasn't a straw man, it was a unproven assumption, assuming that if you didn't answer, then you didn't know the answer. But, now it a founded assumption).

Thanks for playing.

Bullshit. If you wanted to know then you would have been satisfied with the answer, such as it is, given by rwmofo in 418. Right? But you were just baiting.

Period.

461 SteveMcG  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 7:45:37pm

re: #446 Dark_Falcon

Now we're getting somewhere. You do realize that neocons calling everybody else a liberal hasn't worked since 2006?

462 albusteve  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 7:45:48pm

re: #452 recusancy

So was Bush not incompetent to let these two terrorists go?

no, he took a chance due to all the leftwing pressure with regard to Gitmo...picked a coupla ringers and cut them loose...didn't work out so well did it?...can't win em all

463 Killgore Trout  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 7:45:52pm

re: #454 Thanos

Again, I've stated that foreign sites exist, that renditions occur, but not that US sites exist. Gitmo doesn't really qualify as a "blacksite" does it?

I think gitmo was an attempt at a sort of open blacksite where they thought they could be free from the legal restrictions but still be open about who they were holding.

464 Spare O'Lake  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 7:46:12pm

re: #436 Existential_Donuts

You are going to have to find another word to make you seem smart. Existentialism is a philosophy, and simply does not fit in the way you are trying to use it. Even in the broadest sense, it does not apply. I think you are trying to say that your big picture view of this is that the..um.. Islamofascists are responsible for terrorism. Existentialism at its most refined is a philosophy that is apolitical, areligious. It does not support a dogma or rhetoric, it examines them.


Wow, you are a denier's denier. Not only do you deny that Islamofascism poses an existential threat to us, but you deny my use of a commonly used term to describe it, with which you pretend to be unfamiliar.
Hopeless.
[Link: www.jargondatabase.com...]

465 McSpiff  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 7:46:34pm

re: #438 lawhawk

Under the Geneva Conventions, POWs were allowed to be held for the duration of hostilities.

Given that the jihadis are hoping to fight and sustain a generational conflict, permanent detention would follow.

However, the Geneva Conventions really didn't anticipate a permanent state of war either... so you have a move to do something about holding them that ends the detainment at some point.

Necessarily ambiguous.

Well, it's quite possible to legally justify just about any position when it comes to the Gitmo detainees. However, I simply cannot support indefinite detention without some form of trial/tribunal. I've seen too many miscarriages of justice in the civilian system to believe that no mistakes will be made in the military system. And there needs to be a mechanism to correct these mistakes. Now, if the evidence is properly judged, and the defense fails to prove it's case, indefinite detention or execution is fine with me.

466 lawhawk  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 7:46:36pm

re: #442 Olsonist

You've purposefully ignored the questions as to why Yousef was tried in federal court and not in some other fashion.

He was tried in federal court because the crime was committed within the US; the same justification the Obama Administration is using to buttress its defense of trying KSM and others involved in the 9/11 attacks. They figured that the amount of evidence that can be admissible in federal court was sufficient to overcome the FRE hurdles on evidence.

Yousef was tried and convicted in NY federal court during the Presidency of Bill Clinton, who treated terrorism, like the 1993 WTC bombing as a criminal matter, and not recognizing the jihad as a war against the US and our interests worldwide.

467 Mich-again  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 7:47:03pm

re: #443 researchok

Gore laughed and said, 'That's a no-brainer. Of course it's a violation of international law, that's why it's a covert action. The guy is a terrorist. Go grab his ass.'"

I like that version of the Gorebot.

468 MandyManners  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 7:47:28pm

re: #457 MandyManners

I don't think I'm the only one who felt the hand of God directing the events last Friday.

[Video]

Jeff Beck?

Youtube Video
469 Existential_Donuts  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 7:47:38pm

re: #464 Spare O'Lake

Wow, you are a denier's denier. Not only do you deny that Islamofascism poses an existential threat to us, but you deny my use of a commonly used term to describe it, with which you pretend to be unfamiliar.
Hopeless.
[Link: www.jargondatabase.com...]

that certainly isn't a definition I have read before. I will have to take that into account when dealing with Cheneyists.

470 researchok  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 7:47:39pm

re: #454 Thanos

Again, I've stated that foreign sites exist, that renditions occur, but not that US sites exist. Gitmo doesn't really qualify as a "blacksite" does it?

The thing about blacksites is that we'll never know. That said, stories of 'The Farm' sites in VA are plentiful. Igor Gouzenko was kept and interrogated on one such property.

Gitmo is anything but a blacksite. But KSM was held in Plattsburgh NY- and not a whole lot is known about what else goes on up there.

I suspect KT is right on th emoney on the subject.

471 Dark_Falcon  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 7:47:46pm

re: #456 SteveMcG

You see, this is the kind of thing that earns the adjective pathetic. If you have your way (either way), it doesn't win the war on terror. You just need bigger jails. When are you going to realize that the war on terror is a political war? You also isolate yourself. How impressive was that coalition of the willing in Iraq? Plenty of nations who fight by our side in Afghanistan didn't want to touch us with a ten foot pole in Iraq. It was a cruel joke when you compare it to the coalition of 1991.

And yet we are winning in Iraq. The size of your coalition matters less than if its troops are allowed to fight. I'd rather have 100 Canadian troops than 1000 Spanish troops because the Canucks are actually allowed to get the job done.

472 TheQuis  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 7:47:59pm

re: #166 Dark_Falcon

It takes 60 votes to put a normal bill through the Senate, and we did not have 60 Republicans at the time.

WOW, the discourse in our government has gotten so bad that intelligent people's perception of our laws have changed.

473 SteveMcG  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 7:48:08pm

re: #462 albusteve

I don't think they caved to some lefties. That would be a vindication of everything they said about him. My original argument was that for the most part, we really didn't know who we we're detaining. Abuse and torture went a long way to cause that.

474 MandyManners  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 7:48:47pm

re: #460 Olsonist

Ad for French Longbows:

Never plucked.

Dropped once.

******************

DING ME DOWN AGAIN!!!!

475 Randall Gross  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 7:49:45pm

KT: I don't think we are going to agree on this, I'm just trying to stay empirical here. There's lots of hearsay floating about but unless you've seen one or have proof I am going to keep assuming they don't exist on US soil, & you can assume they do. I'm going to poor a drink, eat some more smoked ribs and move upthread.

476 Walter L. Newton  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 7:49:50pm

re: #460 Olsonist

Bullshit. If you wanted to know then you would have been satisfied with the answer, such as it is, given by rwmofo in 418. Right? But you were just baiting.

Period.

"Because we can do this" wasn't an answer.

477 Spare O'Lake  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 7:50:10pm

re: #452 recusancy

So was Bush not incompetent to let these two terrorists go?

Last time I checked this is 2009, Bush is not in office, and Napolitano is.

478 recusancy  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 7:50:25pm

re: #464 Spare O'Lake

Wow, you are a denier's denier. Not only do you deny that Islamofascism poses an existential threat to us, but you deny my use of a commonly used term to describe it, with which you pretend to be unfamiliar.
Hopeless.
[Link: www.jargondatabase.com...]

You think the Islamic Terrorist are a threat to our very existence???

479 brookly red  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 7:50:40pm

re: #459 Existential_Donuts

You say that even under the circumstances? I honestly want to know, did Bush's accountability end when Obama took office?

No, haven't you heard anything that Obama has said? It's is Bush's fault. Obama takes responsibility for zip, so as far as I am concerned until O takes responsibility then Bush must still be in charge.

480 albusteve  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 7:50:41pm

re: #473 SteveMcG

I don't think they caved to some lefties. That would be a vindication of everything they said about him. My original argument was that for the most part, we really didn't know who we we're detaining. Abuse and torture went a long way to cause that.

sometimes might makes right...these are tough times...as for waterboarding I can almost guarantee it will expose your identity

481 Dark_Falcon  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 7:51:13pm

re: #461 SteveMcG

Now we're getting somewhere. You do realize that neocons calling everybody else a liberal hasn't worked since 2006?

I'm not a neo-con. I'm only 32, and I've been a conservative since I was 12. I'm a Gingrich Republican, is how I'd describe myself.

Namecall FAIL

482 lawhawk  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 7:52:00pm

re: #465 McSpiff

That's why I've repeatedly called the tribunals an acceptable way to determine who should or shouldn't be detained and how to deal with the legal status. Providing these detainees with federal court access was providing them with rights that not even uniformed POWs would ever hope to achieve under the Geneva Conventions.

Part of the problem comes from sometimes having to rely on the detainees themselves to prove that they were picked up by mistake and in some cases have openly lied about their intentions.

483 recusancy  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 7:52:03pm

re: #477 Spare O'Lake

Last time I checked this is 2009, Bush is not in office, and Napolitano is.

And those dudes were let out in '07.

484 Randall Gross  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 7:52:05pm

re: #470 researchok

The thing about blacksites is that we'll never know. That said, stories of 'The Farm' sites in VA are plentiful. Igor Gouzenko was kept and interrogated on one such property.

Gitmo is anything but a blacksite. But KSM was held in Plattsburgh NY- and not a whole lot is known about what else goes on up there.

I suspect KT is right on th emoney on the subject.

Held or transited through? You could say the same of any room he passed through as he went to Gitmo - now do you have proof or links to more info on the statements you made?

485 Olsonist  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 7:52:11pm

re: #466 lawhawk

You can strike purposefully and you'd have a strong argument. I'm certainly not sure what purpose you ascribe. Being baited I didn't rush to look it up.

It is a supposition that the bulk of the detainees couldn't be tried under the Federal Rules of Evidence. I believe that Obama has talked about a triage.

486 SteveMcG  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 7:52:57pm

re: #471 Dark_Falcon

Winning? How do you define winning? We took a country that was no real threat to us (no WMD's), it was a strategic counter to Iran and handed it to the Iranians. There's no way in hell that Iraq will be an ally of ours or at least neutral when we leave.

487 Velvet Elvis  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 7:53:54pm

re: #469 Existential_Donuts

that certainly isn't a definition I have read before. I will have to take that into account when dealing with Cheneyists.

An "existential threat" is simply a threat to one's existence. It doesn't mean somebody is invoking Kierkegaard. I've got a fucking philosophy degree so I know what the word means in all its various contexts. You're making yourself sound like you suck.

488 Walter L. Newton  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 7:53:54pm

re: #485 Olsonist

You can strike purposefully and you'd have a strong argument. I'm certainly not sure what purpose you ascribe. Being baited I didn't rush to look it up.

It is a supposition that the bulk of the detainees couldn't be tried under the Federal Rules of Evidence. I believe that Obama has talked about a triage.

I see how this works. Anyone that makes any sort of comment to you, from your point of view, it's "bait."

Most of us call that conversation. Of course, those who have a lot to say but have no answers to back up their statements usually call conversation "bait."

Like you have... twice on this thread. Grow up.

489 Existential_Donuts  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 7:54:08pm

re: #479 brookly red

No, haven't you heard anything that Obama has said? It's is Bush's fault. Obama takes responsibility for zip, so as far as I am concerned until O takes responsibility then Bush must still be in charge.

What would you expect Obama to say? Something like this?

Obama didn't release these guys to Saudi Arabia, Bush did. What am I missing?

490 Walter L. Newton  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 7:54:20pm

re: #487 Conservative Moonbat

An "existential threat" is simply a threat to one's existence. It doesn't mean somebody is invoking Kierkegaard. I've got a fucking philosophy degree so I know what the word means in all its various contexts. You're making yourself sound like you suck.

No kidding!

491 MandyManners  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 7:54:35pm

re: #465 McSpiff

Well, it's quite possible to legally justify just about any position when it comes to the Gitmo detainees. However, I simply cannot support indefinite detention without some form of trial/tribunal. I've seen too many miscarriages of justice in the civilian system to believe that no mistakes will be made in the military system. And there needs to be a mechanism to correct these mistakes. Now, if the evidence is properly judged, and the defense fails to prove it's case, indefinite detention or execution is fine with me.

NAME ONE.

492 Vicious Babushka  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 7:54:41pm

re: #474 MandyManners

Ad for French Longbows:

Never plucked.

Dropped once.

***

DING ME DOWN AGAIN!!!

Your mother was a hamster and your father smelt of elderberries!
I fart in your general direction!
Now begone before I mock you again!

493 Existential_Donuts  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 7:54:47pm

re: #487 Conservative Moonbat

An "existential threat" is simply a threat to one's existence. It doesn't mean somebody is invoking Kierkegaard. I've got a fucking philosophy degree so I know what the word means in all its various contexts. You're making yourself sound like you suck.

certainly wouldn't be the first time.

494 Dark_Falcon  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 7:54:52pm

re: #478 recusancy

You think the Islamic Terrorist are a threat to our very existence???

Yes, I do.

495 recusancy  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 7:55:40pm

re: #90 Spare O'Lake

Blame Bush for an Islamofascist terror attack.
Pathetic.
Just pathetic.

Are you calling Charles pathetic for posting this?

496 albusteve  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 7:55:47pm

re: #486 SteveMcG

Winning? How do you define winning? We took a country that was no real threat to us (no WMD's), it was a strategic counter to Iran and handed it to the Iranians. There's no way in hell that Iraq will be an ally of ours or at least neutral when we leave.

wow!...you can predict the FUTURE!...
nothing ventured nothing gained...if Iraq was no threat to the US how do you explain all the donks signing on to the Hussein must go meme?....you have either a very short memory are are just stupid

497 McSpiff  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 7:56:04pm

re: #491 MandyManners

NAME ONE.

...

You're seriously asking me to prove that mistakes have been made in the criminal justice system?

498 ryannon  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 7:56:24pm

re: #474 MandyManners

Ad for French Longbows:

Never plucked.

Dropped once.

***

DING ME DOWN AGAIN!!!


Point of information: the longbow was an English arm and invention.

[Link: en.wikipedia.org...]

They continually creamed the French with it. One would think that it would have immediately been copied by the French, but apparently not.

499 lawhawk  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 7:56:31pm

re: #485 Olsonist

Triage to determine who gets federal courts and who gets tribunals? That very act raises legal questions that could be avoided by having all tried under tribunals. After all, why would a detainee who gets pushed into a tribunal not want to get tried in federal court since that would likely result in their release because of the higher evidenciary standards. The Administration's decision to send some to tribunals opens equal protection arguments and still more lawsuits that will delay the operation of the tribunals even further.

500 Olsonist  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 7:56:52pm

re: #476 Walter L. Newton

"Because we can do this" wasn't an answer.

Att. Gen. HOLDER: I'm not going to base the determination on where these cases ought to be brought on what a terrorist - what a murderer wants to do. He will not select the prosecution venue. I will select it and I have.

501 Dark_Falcon  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 7:57:13pm

re: #486 SteveMcG

Winning? How do you define winning? We took a country that was no real threat to us (no WMD's), it was a strategic counter to Iran and handed it to the Iranians. There's no way in hell that Iraq will be an ally of ours or at least neutral when we leave.

We got rid of a brutal tyrant and replaced him with a government that, while corrupt is moving in the right direction. Iraq does not want to be Iran's ally, and it won't be. Instead, Iraq will serve as the Good Example that helps bring the Mullahs down.

502 Walter L. Newton  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 7:58:24pm

re: #500 Olsonist

Att. Gen. HOLDER: I'm not going to base the determination on where these cases ought to be brought on what a terrorist - what a murderer wants to do. He will not select the prosecution venue. I will select it and I have.

Yawn.

503 Spare O'Lake  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 7:58:33pm

re: #478 recusancy

You think the Islamic Terrorist are a threat to our very existence???

Why don't you ask the families of the 9/11 victims that question...or the families of the Fort Hood victims...or for that matter, the passengers on the Nortwest Xmas flight.
I do.
And you obviously don't.
And there we are.

504 Vicious Babushka  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 7:58:33pm

re: #498 ryannon

Point of information: the longbow was an English arm and invention.

[Link: en.wikipedia.org...]

They continually creamed the French with it. One would think that it would have immediately been copied by the French, but apparently not.

Pluck yew! Pluck yew!

505 researchok  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 7:58:38pm

re: #484 Thanos

Held or transited through? You could say the same of any room he passed through as he went to Gitmo - now do you have proof or links to more info on the statements you made?

Re KSM: He was held in Plattsburgh for quite a while before his location was made public (or leaked).

No other info on other sites as of yet- and that would be par for the course re blacksites.

Still, other democracies maintain such sites and use them regularly. In Canada for example, during the October Crisis (1970, I think), a whole bunch of FLQ types were disappeared for a while. The then great Liberal PM Pierrre Trudeau, when asked about civil rights violations, said 'You haven't seen anything yet'.

I just find it hard to believe that we are the exception.

As an aside, I'll pour myself a gin and tonic. No need for you to be drinking alone.

506 albusteve  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 7:58:47pm

re: #501 Dark_Falcon

We got rid of a brutal tyrant and replaced him with a government that, while corrupt is moving in the right direction. Iraq does not want to be Iran's ally, and it won't be. Instead, Iraq will serve as the Good Example that helps bring the Mullahs down.

our govt is corrupt too...nothing new there, it's all relative

507 Killgore Trout  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 7:59:29pm

re: #475 Thanos

KT: I don't think we are going to agree on this, I'm just trying to stay empirical here. There's lots of hearsay floating about but unless you've seen one or have proof I am going to keep assuming they don't exist on US soil, & you can assume they do.

You're right, we probably won't agree but the blacksites on US soil isn't even central to my point. We do run blacksites and secret prisons, I don;t think there's much disputing that. If you or I had any idea of the secret shit that is occurring on US soil right now our heads would explode (darpa, skunkworks, genetically engineered bioweapons, cyborg robots, etc). I think secret prisons would be the least surprising revelation.

508 albusteve  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 7:59:46pm

I'm gonna reheat my Beef-O-Roni and follow Thanos

509 McSpiff  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 7:59:52pm

re: #482 lawhawk

That's why I've repeatedly called the tribunals an acceptable way to determine who should or shouldn't be detained and how to deal with the legal status. Providing these detainees with federal court access was providing them with rights that not even uniformed POWs would ever hope to achieve under the Geneva Conventions.

Part of the problem comes from sometimes having to rely on the detainees themselves to prove that they were picked up by mistake and in some cases have openly lied about their intentions.

No disagreement here at all. Believe me, I think the burden of proof should be very, very low on the prosecution. But I still think the system should acknowledge that, like every human institution it is not infallible.

510 brookly red  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 8:00:14pm

re: #489 Existential_Donuts

What would you expect Obama to say? Something like this?

Obama didn't release these guys to Saudi Arabia, Bush did. What am I missing?

I guess what I am trying to say is that we are at war. Politics be damned. I don't give a crap how we got here, I care about where we go from here.

511 lawhawk  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 8:00:21pm

re: #500 Olsonist

Actually, the venue is chosen based on where the crimes occurred. Having made the choice to try KSM in federal court, the SDNY was an appropriate venue for trying him because the WTC was in the SDNY. Other appropriate venues could have been in the Virigina District court where the Pentagon was located or the PA district court where Shanksville was located. However, of those, SDNY was the best option given its prior experience in trying terror cases (including WTC 1993).

512 SteveMcG  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 8:00:35pm

re: #481 Dark_Falcon

I guess that makes me a Republican since before you were born, as if we were keeping score. Gingrich is an embarrassment to conservatism. He talked a good game, but he was about as sincere as Joe Lieberman. As far as he was concerned, the Republican Party was just a tool for his own advancement. Conservatism got hijacked by the Dixiecrats, and he was the man at the wheel. Conservatism as we know it died with Iran-Contra.

513 Dark_Falcon  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 8:00:36pm

re: #498 ryannon

Point of information: the longbow was an English arm and invention.

[Link: en.wikipedia.org...]

They continually creamed the French with it. One would think that it would have immediately been copied by the French, but apparently not.

French society was too dominated by the Knightly aristocracy to consider the longbow. The nobles did not want to surrender any of their power to commoners, and that attitude got a lot of them killied/

514 rwmofo  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 8:00:43pm

re: #486 SteveMcG

Winning? How do you define winning? We took a country that was no real threat to us (no WMD's), it was a strategic counter to Iran and handed it to the Iranians. There's no way in hell that Iraq will be an ally of ours or at least neutral when we leave.

No, there weren't any WMDs found in Iraq - except the 500 tons of unranium!

515 Killgore Trout  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 8:01:09pm

re: #508 albusteve

I'm gonna reheat my Beef-O-Roni and follow Thanos

Is that free range beef-o-roni?

516 Existential_Donuts  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 8:01:25pm

re: #487 Conservative Moonbat

An "existential threat" is simply a threat to one's existence. It doesn't mean somebody is invoking Kierkegaard. I've got a fucking philosophy degree so I know what the word means in all its various contexts. You're making yourself sound like you suck.

BTW, that philo degree would also equip you with the knowledge that philosophy discussed on any level is better that philosophy not discussed at all. Isn't the point to open the mind? I can admit that I had not internalized the definition that Spare-o provided, but to deride a fellow traveler is pretty low.

517 tradewind  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 8:01:40pm

re: #468 MandyManners
There are angels in places everywhere, and a couple of them were sitting over that wing behind the underbomber, all right.
Great video. And very appropriate, since I bet'cha that it may very well have been ' the hour I first believed ' for a few of the passengers.
:)

518 armylaw  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 8:01:44pm

re: #262 reine.de.tout

And there is the real problem with civilian trials.

Like Thanos said a bit upthread, I would have prefered to see military tribunals for these guys, within a reasonable period of time. It didn't happen. It is time to try these guys and sentence them, get them put away. And it appears the only way that's going to happen is with civilian trials. I have a suspicion that there will be at least a few released not because there is lack of evidence, but so that security issues can be preserved from the discovery rights of the defendant. So be it.

In military trials, the Accused gets discovery too, so that shouldn't be a determining factor in how to try terrorist defendants.

519 Dark_Falcon  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 8:01:56pm

re: #512 SteveMcG

To echo Walter:

Yawn

520 Walter L. Newton  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 8:02:14pm

re: #514 rwmofo

No, there weren't any WMDs found in Iraq - except the 500 tons of unranium!

Yellow cake in itself is not a WMD.

521 SteveMcG  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 8:02:43pm

re: #496 albusteve

I never signed on to the Sadaam must go petition. You know who else said Sadaam must stay? Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, George H Bush (the smart one), Colin Powel for starters. They knew in 1991 that toppling Hussein would be a disaster.

522 Randall Gross  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 8:02:44pm

re: #505 researchok

Re KSM: He was held in Plattsburgh for quite a while before his location was made public (or leaked).

No other info on other sites as of yet- and that would be par for the course re blacksites.

Still, other democracies maintain such sites and use them regularly. In Canada for example, during the October Crisis (1970, I think), a whole bunch of FLQ types were disappeared for a while. The then great Liberal PM Pierrre Trudeau, when asked about civil rights violations, said 'You haven't seen anything yet'.

I just find it hard to believe that we are the exception.

As an aside, I'll pour myself a gin and tonic. No need for you to be drinking alone.

Do you have a link? What's "a considerable amount of time?"

523 Existential_Donuts  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 8:02:46pm

re: #510 brookly red

I guess what I am trying to say is that we are at war. Politics be damned. I don't give a crap how we got here, I care about where we go from here.

I can see that, but to those of us that were screaming at the top of our lungs to stop this while it was going on feel a little bitter about that attitude. Maybe that's my flaw, but it really bugs.

524 Four More Tears  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 8:02:47pm

re: #491 MandyManners

NAME ONE.


re: #497 McSpiff

...

You're seriously asking me to prove that mistakes have been made in the criminal justice system?

I'd go with this one, myself: Cameron Todd Willingham

525 Olsonist  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 8:03:44pm

re: #502 Walter L. Newton

Yawn.

Yawn wasn't an answer either.

526 McSpiff  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 8:03:50pm

re: #524 JasonA

I'd go with this one, myself: Cameron Todd Willingham

Thanks, I'll post a list if Mandy wants. I'm seriously confused as to why I'm being yelled at simply for suggesting that people have been wrongly convicted in the past.

527 MandyManners  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 8:03:52pm

re: #497 McSpiff

...

You're seriously asking me to prove that mistakes have been made in the criminal justice system?

You made the assertion.

528 tradewind  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 8:04:48pm

re: #519 Dark_Falcon
( with a snort tossed in there).

529 Randall Gross  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 8:04:56pm

re: #507 Killgore Trout

You're right, we probably won't agree but the blacksites on US soil isn't even central to my point. We do run blacksites and secret prisons, I don;t think there's much disputing that. If you or I had any idea of the secret shit that is occurring on US soil right now our heads would explode (darpa, skunkworks, genetically engineered bioweapons, cyborg robots, etc). I think secret prisons would be the least surprising revelation.

Actually my dad worked in embassies as well, I also know a few things and no, I won't talk about them. I slipped once long ago on a FNDT and still regret it.

530 SteveMcG  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 8:05:03pm

re: #519 Dark_Falcon

Typical. And pathetic.

531 MandyManners  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 8:05:06pm

re: #498 ryannon

Point of information: the longbow was an English arm and invention.

[Link: en.wikipedia.org...]

They continually creamed the French with it. One would think that it would have immediately been copied by the French, but apparently not.

My post was a continuation of a post from earlier today. One which Olsonist dinged.

532 Walter L. Newton  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 8:05:15pm

re: #525 Olsonist

Yawn wasn't an answer either.

Ding.

533 McSpiff  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 8:06:11pm

re: #527 MandyManners

You made the assertion.

[Link: en.wikipedia.org...] is a list of a few examples. As was post #524.

534 ryannon  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 8:06:19pm

re: #513 Dark_Falcon

French society was too dominated by the Knightly aristocracy to consider the longbow. The nobles did not want to surrender any of their power to commoners, and that attitude got a lot of them killied/

That sounds quite plausible. To use a longbow, you have to get off your horse and slog through all kinds of shit. The doughty English yeomen were perfectly at ease on the ground.

535 Killgore Trout  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 8:06:45pm

re: #529 Thanos

How did your ribs turn out the other night? It's been so windy and dry here I actually had to cook a chicken in the oven. I think it was the first time I've cooked meat indoors in over a year.

536 Dark_Falcon  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 8:06:50pm

re: #530 SteveMcG

GAZE

537 MandyManners  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 8:06:53pm

re: #500 Olsonist

Att. Gen. HOLDER: I'm not going to base the determination on where these cases ought to be brought on what a terrorist - what a murderer wants to do. He will not select the prosecution venue. I will select it and I have.

Huh?

538 Four More Tears  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 8:07:31pm

re: #526 McSpiff

Thanks, I'll post a list if Mandy wants. I'm seriously confused as to why I'm being yelled at simply for suggesting that people have been wrongly convicted in the past.

Of course, 'jailing kids for cash' is a nice example, too.

539 SteveMcG  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 8:07:44pm

re: #536 Dark_Falcon

This is the intellectual laziness that Gingrich helped bring to the Party.

540 rwmofo  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 8:07:57pm

re: #520 Walter L. Newton

Yellow cake in itself is not a WMD.

So what were the Iraqis going to do with it?

541 Dark_Falcon  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 8:08:11pm

re: #534 ryannon

That sounds quite plausible. To use a longbow, you have to get off your horse and slog through all kinds of shit. The doughty English yeomen were perfectly at ease on the ground.

That, and the English knights were more concerned with winning than social position. They were quite willing to dismount and support their archers with pikes, axes and warhammers.

542 McSpiff  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 8:08:19pm

re: #538 JasonA

Of course, 'jailing kids for cash' is a nice example, too.

Apparently Mandy was unaware that people have been convicted of crimes and later exonerated.

543 recusancy  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 8:08:29pm

re: #537 MandyManners

Huh?

It's a quote from attorney gen Holder

544 Randall Gross  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 8:08:50pm

re: #535 Killgore Trout

How did your ribs turn out the other night? It's been so windy and dry here I actually had to cook a chicken in the oven. I think it was the first time I've cooked meat indoors in over a year.

They were great, we did end up putting them in the oven for an hour at 275 to finish the normal cycle because I ran out of wood.

545 Walter L. Newton  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 8:08:54pm

re: #530 SteveMcG

Typical. And pathetic.

I tell you what Steve. A few things you can try not to do. 1) Don't claim someone said something when all anyone has to do is go up thread and search, it makes you look dumb. 2) Don't paint with a broad brush. If you want to call someone "pathetic" or call someone a "jerk" or tell someone to "fuck off," than address that person, don't just throw a scatter-shot comment out in an attempt to see where it will stick. 3) Just apologize when you make a mistake, and stop tap dancing all the way down the page.

FYI.

546 MandyManners  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 8:09:12pm

re: #504 Alouette

Pluck yew! Pluck yew!

Violence inherent in the system!

547 ryannon  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 8:09:56pm

re: #540 rwmofo

So what were the Iraqis going to do with it?

Is that you, Marie Antoinette?

548 prairiefire  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 8:10:20pm

re: #529 Thanos

Don't say a word. You'll be following in a long line of patriots, liberal and conservative.

549 MandyManners  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 8:10:29pm

re: #511 lawhawk

Actually, the venue is chosen based on where the crimes occurred. Having made the choice to try KSM in federal court, the SDNY was an appropriate venue for trying him because the WTC was in the SDNY. Other appropriate venues could have been in the Virigina District court where the Pentagon was located or the PA district court where Shanksville was located. However, of those, SDNY was the best option given its prior experience in trying terror cases (including WTC 1993).

Your little grey cells...they shine.

550 Walter L. Newton  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 8:11:09pm

re: #540 rwmofo

So what were the Iraqis going to do with it?

You called it a WMD, it's not, yellow cake is low grade, has to go through a lot of processing to become anything, and then, in itself it's not a weapon, just a part of a weapon.

That would be like calling a computer a WMD. Sure, it may be able to be used as part of a lunching system for a WMD, but by itself it's not a weapon.

551 MandyManners  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 8:11:33pm

re: #515 Killgore Trout

Is that free range beef-o-roni?

Damn right.

552 researchok  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 8:11:47pm

re: #522 Thanos

Do you have a link? What's "a considerable amount of time?"

Can't find a link. I'll keep looking.

I do recall that he was reputed to have been waterboarded there.

553 Olsonist  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 8:12:25pm

re: #511 lawhawk

No disagreement there. I pointed out the WTC Bombing trial location because somehow there is this underlying assumption in the discussion that we can't do it because unspecified bad things might happen similar to the unspecified bad things that might happen if the detainees and convicts were moved to Illinois. That there may be jurisdictional or other technical reasons for choosing one venue over another is a complication above my pay grade but not surprising.

554 CommonCents  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 8:13:46pm

re: #61 Charles

Well, since I've said exactly that on numerous occasions, I feel fairly confident that I've been paying attention.

That obviously came across differently than I intended. I wasn't saying 'you' specifically but more of a general 'you' as in anyone.

No disrespect intended.

555 MandyManners  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 8:13:58pm

re: #516 Existential_Donuts

BTW, that philo degree would also equip you with the knowledge that philosophy discussed on any level is better that philosophy not discussed at all. Isn't the point to open the mind? I can admit that I had not internalized the definition that Spare-o provided, but to deride a fellow traveler is pretty low.

Whoa.

Step back.

556 tradewind  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 8:14:10pm

re: #542 McSpiff
How fortunate for them. At least there was a correctable mistake.
Now if only we could figure out a way to make the victims of an inflight terrorist bombing whole..... so to speak....that might be a comparison.
But no.

557 rwmofo  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 8:14:24pm

re: #547 ryannon

Is that you, Marie Antoinette?

Ummm, the other kind of cake.

558 Gus  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 8:14:46pm

re: #507 Killgore Trout

You're right, we probably won't agree but the blacksites on US soil isn't even central to my point. We do run blacksites and secret prisons, I don;t think there's much disputing that. If you or I had any idea of the secret shit that is occurring on US soil right now our heads would explode (darpa, skunkworks, genetically engineered bioweapons, cyborg robots, etc). I think secret prisons would be the least surprising revelation.

Was looking around for some information. I've always supported black sites but anyway here's an excerpt from President Bush's speech:

President Discusses Creation of Military Commissions to Try Suspected Terrorists
The East Room

In some cases, we determine that individuals we have captured pose a significant threat, or may have intelligence that we and our allies need to have to prevent new attacks. Many are al Qaeda operatives or Taliban fighters trying to conceal their identities, and they withhold information that could save American lives. In these cases, it has been necessary to move these individuals to an environment where they can be held secretly [sic], questioned by experts, and -- when appropriate -- prosecuted for terrorist acts.

Also see: Undisclosed U.S. Detention Sites Overseas: Background and Legal Issues

559 MandyManners  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 8:14:47pm

re: #517 tradewind

There are angels in places everywhere, and a couple of them were sitting over that wing behind the underbomber, all right.
Great video. And very appropriate, since I bet'cha that it may very well have been ' the hour I first believed ' for a few of the passengers.
:)

How was your Christmas?

560 ryannon  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 8:14:47pm

re: #546 MandyManners

Violence inherent in the system!

No, I think she's saying that the French 'plucked' Yew trees to try and make superior copies of the English longbow.

[Link: runescape.wikia.com...]

Unfortunately, they always forgot to string them.

561 McSpiff  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 8:15:14pm

re: #550 Walter L. Newton

You called it a WMD, it's not, yellow cake is low grade, has to go through a lot of processing to become anything, and then, in itself it's not a weapon, just a part of a weapon.

That would be like calling a computer a WMD. Sure, it may be able to be used as part of a lunching system for a WMD, but by itself it's not a weapon.

Another term would be precursor. Most WMD/CBN weapons have many precursors. Most of them harmless enough on their own. Its only through refinement and assembly that you have a WMD/CBN weapon.

Thats why some analyst have three categories for nuclear states. States without nuclear weapons, states with nuclear weapons and states that have the necessary knowledge and materials to rapidly assemble such a weapon.

562 SteveMcG  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 8:15:51pm

re: #545 Walter L. Newton

Are you still on the Reine thing. Walt? I tried three times to explain my foul up, but you don't seem to want to let it go. I found my mark in Dark Falcon and it does seem that he is the one that "pathetic" would apply to. When pushed, he cannot support his idea. He went neocon on me and called me a liberal. I don't see anything scattershot at all here. I have been pretty specific in making my point. If Dark Falcon can't be bothered to stick up for himself beyond name calling and "Yawn" (his word, not mine), he only hurts his own case. Yet you seem fixated on me.

563 Dark_Falcon  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 8:17:09pm

re: #562 SteveMcG

How did I "not support" my idea?

564 rwmofo  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 8:17:27pm

re: #550 Walter L. Newton

You called it a WMD, it's not, yellow cake is low grade, has to go through a lot of processing to become anything, and then, in itself it's not a weapon, just a part of a weapon.

That would be like calling a computer a WMD. Sure, it may be able to be used as part of a lunching system for a WMD, but by itself it's not a weapon.

OK, so how effective would their nukes have been without the 500 tons of uranium?

565 McSpiff  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 8:18:21pm

re: #556 tradewind

How fortunate for them. At least there was a correctable mistake.
Now if only we could figure out a way to make the victims of an inflight terrorist bombing whole... so to speak...that might be a comparison.
But no.

What are you talking about? Someone could certainly be wrongful convicted of an inflight terrorist bombing. I've never seen it happen mind you, but it's within the realm of possibility. All I'm saying is admit the fact that mistakes can and do happen, allow people to have their day in tribunal, and then lock them up and throw away the key or take them out back and shoot them if found guilty.

566 SteveMcG  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 8:18:37pm

re: #563 Dark_Falcon

"Yawn", was my first clue.

567 tradewind  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 8:19:38pm

re: #559 MandyManners
It was wonderful, thanks... disastrous amounts of food and not a peep about politics or the sorry state of world affairs. Just another Tender TN Christmas.
Hope yours was great, and happy new year if I miss ya'll that day.

568 MandyManners  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 8:19:50pm

Unlike many here, I don't have a spouse to take control of my child so that I can devote time to debate.

569 SteveMcG  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 8:20:12pm

re: #564 rwmofo

I'm sure if you dropped 500 tons of yellowcake on something, it would break.

570 albusteve  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 8:20:15pm

re: #515 Killgore Trout

Is that free range beef-o-roni?

I don't read the labels, I just look at the pictures

571 ryannon  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 8:20:25pm

re: #550 Walter L. Newton

You called it a WMD, it's not, yellow cake is low grade, has to go through a lot of processing to become anything, and then, in itself it's not a weapon, just a part of a weapon.

That would be like calling a computer a WMD. Sure, it may be able to be used as part of a lunching system for a WMD, but by itself it's not a weapon.

Nor are Iranian centrifuges.

572 tradewind  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 8:20:25pm

re: #565 McSpiff
----groan-----not the perps---

573 recusancy  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 8:21:02pm

re: #564 rwmofo

OK, so how effective would their nukes have been without the 500 tons of uranium?

Just as effective with it as without it because it was low grade yellow cake. They could have balled it up and hurled at somebody but that's about it. Uranium isn't easy to enrich. And that's only part of the battle to building a bomb.

574 Dark_Falcon  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 8:21:03pm

re: #566 SteveMcG

That's not an answer. I repeat: How did I fail to support my ideas?

575 McSpiff  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 8:21:28pm

re: #572 tradewind

---groan---not the perps---

Then I have no idea where you're finding a false comparison. Sorry.

576 Olsonist  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 8:21:41pm

re: #566 SteveMcG

FWIW, I chased up that thread backwards and then I saw your line: Conservatism got hijacked by the Dixiecrats.

I like that observation and I'm going to have to give it a think.

577 MandyManners  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 8:22:07pm

re: #567 tradewind

It was wonderful, thanks... disastrous amounts of food and not a peep about politics or the sorry state of world affairs. Just another Tender TN Christmas.
Hope yours was great, and happy new year if I miss ya'll that day.

Youtube Video
578 albusteve  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 8:22:13pm

re: #521 SteveMcG

I never signed on to the Sadaam must go petition. You know who else said Sadaam must stay? Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, George H Bush (the smart one), Colin Powel for starters. They knew in 1991 that toppling Hussein would be a disaster.

they were wrong it seems...it has worked out nicely for Sadam and his boys

579 SteveMcG  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 8:23:10pm

re: #574 Dark_Falcon

I did pose a question that you yawned at? See #486

580 Ebetty  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 8:24:47pm

re: #484 Thanos

My understanding was that KSM was held at Black Sites in Jordan and Poland. See link from NYT for details.

581 Dark_Falcon  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 8:26:27pm

re: #579 SteveMcG

I did pose a question that you yawned at? See #486

I answered your #486 with my #501.

582 Randall Gross  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 8:26:47pm

re: #580 Ebetty

My understanding was that KSM was held at Black Sites in Jordan and Poland. See link from NYT for details.

I wasn't aware of the location other than having the impression that it had been foreign.

583 Claire  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 8:27:16pm

re: #573 recusancy

Just as effective with it as without it because it was low grade yellow cake. They could have balled it up and hurled at somebody but that's about it. Uranium isn't easy to enrich. And that's only part of the battle to building a bomb.

But they had the other parts too-

584 Edward Halper  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 8:27:53pm

re: #369 Charles

It's pointless to worry about whether we're encouraging Al Qaeda.

I don't think we can encourage al-Qaeda: they are already entirely enthusiastic. It's the rest of world I'm more concerned about. A trial that does not convict KSM because he was tortured would serve retrospectively to justify 9/11 in the eyes of many. There are already Americans who think it was justified.

It's not pointless to worry about what it does to the US to hold people indefinitely without trial. This craziness has to end at some point, and we've already missed the point where we could have held quick military trials -- long ago.

This is something we do need to worry about. We need to decide what to do with these people. It looks like we're in this war for the long haul. We have what amount to prisoners of war who were fighting for a Caliphate that does not yet exist. There is no state to which to repatriate them, but also no state with whom we can make peace. I don't think that there is any precedent for trying prisoners of war in civilian courts. I also don't see that there is any course of action that a court could take that is going to make these people fit to live in any society we know. We certainly do not want them to serve their time and then apply for American citizenship. Nor do we want the already volatile American prison population exposed to them. So far as I can see, American courts don't have criminal remedies for the crimes of war committed by prisoners at Gitmo--except for the death penalty and that will not be appropriate for all of them. We do need to find some way to neutralize the threat posed by these folks. I don't see why military trials have to be quick--we can still have them. Nor do I see that military trials would be likely to result in anything else beside indefinite detention for most. So, Charles, while I agree that it is not good for us to keep them as they are, I think that a discussion about realistic alternatives is most likely to lead us to conclude that the lot of the prisoners must be imprisoned indefinitely.

The Saudi government can't be happy about the people they "rehabilitated" returning to terrorism. As ridiculous as art therapy for terrorist might seem, I doubt that the Saudis really expected these folks to resume terrorism. The government figured that they could keep an eye on them. That it could not probably indicates that the terror network within Saudi Arabia is much larger than they supposed--perhaps strong enough to seriously threaten the Saudi government. As disgusting as this government is, its fall to al-Qaeda would be a real disaster for all.

585 tradewind  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 8:29:10pm

Good night, ya'll.....
Here's to the supremely decent and responsible Nigerian father who tried to warn us, and may we wise up.

586 Stuart Leviton  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 8:30:04pm

re: #465 McSpiff

I've seen too many miscarriages of justice in the civilian system to believe that no mistakes will be made in the military system.

Hi McSpiff, is this what you meant to say?

587 Dark_Falcon  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 8:31:04pm

re: #585 tradewind

Good night, ya'll...
Here's to the supremely decent and responsible Nigerian father who tried to warn us, and may we wise up.

Goodnight, Tradewind. You are correct as usual.

588 Ebetty  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 8:32:19pm

re: #582 Thanos

That was my understanding too, had not heard the Plattsburgh reference before.

589 MandyManners  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 8:33:12pm

re: #584 Edward Halper

re: #584 Edward Halper

Registered since: Nov 5, 2006 at 12:50 pm

590 Gus  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 8:33:20pm

re: #582 Thanos

I wasn't aware of the location other than having the impression that it had been foreign.

Povilas Malakauskas

591 Spare O'Lake  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 8:33:27pm

re: #570 albusteve

I don't read the labels, I just look at the pictures

You are wise not to read the Barfaroni label.
;D

592 Stuart Leviton  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 8:33:57pm

re: #540 rwmofo

Yellow cake in itself is not a WMD.

So what were the Iraqis going to do with it?


Let them eat yellow cake.
//

593 prairiefire  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 8:34:11pm

re: #584 Edward Halper

Then there will soon be death strikes.

594 Bagua  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 8:36:53pm

re: #585 tradewind

Good night, ya'll...
Here's to the supremely decent and responsible Nigerian father who tried to warn us, and may we wise up.

Just out of curiosity. Assuming the Government did not screw up on the tip and did exclude the terrorist from air travel. Good job. But what then? Is he to be excluded from trains, metros and buses? What about shopping centres?

Presumably you are not suggesting he be detained and held. What would he be convicted of? His Father saying he sounded radical or hated the US?

Do we try to detain and hold terrorists who may be planning terrorist attacks, or do we only care about convicting them on good evidence after the atrocity?

Just rhetorical questions. This is a very challenging issue.

595 Vicious Babushka  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 8:37:22pm

re: #585 tradewind

Good night, ya'll...
Here's to the supremely decent and responsible Nigerian father who tried to warn us, and may we wise up.

And here's to Jasper Schuringa, the supremely competent and super hot Dutch traveler who jumped over four rows of seats to put out the fire with his bare hands, and then with his burned hands drag the perp into the forward cabin for a strip search.

596 Dancing along the light of day  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 8:41:49pm

re: #595 Alouette

And, he's making some money selling his cell phone pictures!
[Link: www.freep.com...]

597 Olsonist  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 8:42:00pm

re: #584 Edward Halper

I detect a certain ambivalence in the Saudis. When the Saudis want to be tough they are very brutally tough. After the Grand Seizure Mosque attack they captured and chopped off the arms of the attackers then publicly beheaded them in four cities. That's a far cry from art class.

598 SteveMcG  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 8:43:02pm

Oh, good. I don't know how I missed it. The "brutal tyrant" thing is not by itself a reason to overthrow a government, (unless you're looking for an excuse). We've tolerated and still do some brutal regimes. You don't see us getting mixed up in Darfur. Just because the Iraqis don't want to be dominated by Iran doesn't mean they will have any choice. There will not be a functional government (unless we find a new brutal tyrant) and the Iranians will simply dominate, just like they did in 2005-07. They just have to wait for us to leave. And that day will have to come, because we can't stay forever. I can't see a single national interest of ours that was improved by the invasion of Iraq. We had Hussein under control. We had no fly zones, we had sanctions in place, we had UN inspectors on the ground. We had an excuse to maintain a large presence in Saudi Arabia and Kuwait(ostensibly to protect against Iraq). We had a counter to Iran AND Al Qaeda (contrary to reports, Hussein feared Al Qaeda).

Now, in the aftermath, we have a very shaky government in place that probably cannot survive our withdrawal, thousands of casualties, hundreds of billions spent, a tarnished national image (we used to be the good guys until Abu Ghraib). What did we actually win?

599 SteveMcG  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 8:45:51pm

re: #581 Dark_Falcon

Sorry, my #598 was for this one.

600 albusteve  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 8:46:57pm

re: #598 SteveMcG

Oh, good. I don't know how I missed it. The "brutal tyrant" thing is not by itself a reason to overthrow a government, (unless you're looking for an excuse). We've tolerated and still do some brutal regimes. You don't see us getting mixed up in Darfur. Just because the Iraqis don't want to be dominated by Iran doesn't mean they will have any choice. There will not be a functional government (unless we find a new brutal tyrant) and the Iranians will simply dominate, just like they did in 2005-07. They just have to wait for us to leave. And that day will have to come, because we can't stay forever. I can't see a single national interest of ours that was improved by the invasion of Iraq. We had Hussein under control. We had no fly zones, we had sanctions in place, we had UN inspectors on the ground. We had an excuse to maintain a large presence in Saudi Arabia and Kuwait(ostensibly to protect against Iraq). We had a counter to Iran AND Al Qaeda (contrary to reports, Hussein feared Al Qaeda).

Now, in the aftermath, we have a very shaky government in place that probably cannot survive our withdrawal, thousands of casualties, hundreds of billions spent, a tarnished national image (we used to be the good guys until Abu Ghraib). What did we actually win?

ask the free Iraqis and quit being so self centered...you assume too much

601 Spare O'Lake  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 8:54:32pm

re: #594 Bagua

Just out of curiosity. Assuming the Government did not screw up on the tip and did exclude the terrorist from air travel. Good job. But what then? Is he to be excluded from trains, metros and buses? What about shopping centres?

Presumably you are not suggesting he be detained and held. What would he be convicted of? His Father saying he sounded radical or hated the US?

Do we try to detain and hold terrorists who may be planning terrorist attacks, or do we only care about convicting them on good evidence after the atrocity?

Just rhetorical questions. This is a very challenging issue.

If the attack has been planned, then the conspirators are legitimate targets for covert termination on foreign soil.

602 Dark_Falcon  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 8:55:25pm

re: #598 SteveMcG

"There will not be a functional government"

How do you figure? The government has every incentive to make itself work. The people of Iraq can resist Iranian influence by ferreting out infiltrators and maintaining a strong army, as well as providing support to the democratic resistance in Iran.

"We had Hussein under control."

With respect, I'm going to call that revisionist history. At the time, Saddam had subverted the Oil-For-Food program to gain access to advanced weapons like the AT-14, and support for the sanctions regime was collapsing in Europe as Saddam handed out bribes in the form of oil contracts. Given another couple of years, Saddam would have broken out of what was left of his isolation and resumed his WMD programs.

Please excuse the lateness of this reply. The Bears are in overtime.

603 Dancing along the light of day  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 8:57:12pm

re: #598 SteveMcG

If, I may be so bold as to make a couple of suggestions to you?
Regarding the AWESOME tools that Charles has provided us.....
If you are replying to a specific comment, you can hit the "reply" button.
It links the comment number, which can be clicked on, if the reader so desires.
There is also, a most excellent "preview" button.
Preview Is My Friend, and Preview Is Your Friend too!
AKA, PIMF, PIYF.....
And then there's "spellcheck" but you seem to be OK in the spelling arena...

Not meant to be mean, meant helpfully!
Welcome, recent hatchling!

604 Olsonist  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 9:00:15pm

re: #600 albusteve

They polled the free Iraqis and they want us gone.

605 researchok  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 9:20:38pm

Thanos-

Should have some more info re Plattsburgh tomorrow.

606 albusteve  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 9:26:25pm

re: #604 Olsonist

They polled the free Iraqis and they want us gone.

yes, that means they'd rather be oppressed by Hussein...I got it...I want us gone too

607 Olsonist  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 9:41:10pm

re: #499 lawhawk

Triage to determine who gets federal courts and who gets tribunals? That very act raises legal questions that could be avoided by having all tried under tribunals. After all, why would a detainee who gets pushed into a tribunal not want to get tried in federal court since that would likely result in their release because of the higher evidenciary standards. The Administration's decision to send some to tribunals opens equal protection arguments and still more lawsuits that will delay the operation of the tribunals even further.

I didn't see this until much later and frankly it requires a little bit of depth.

First, not all detainees have been accused of the same crimes so they necessarily won't be tried identically. Unfortunately I looked for the Obama quote but I couldn't find it.

As for the legal mess of trying them in federal court, Equal Protection claims can be made. It's an argument. There are many arguments. There's also Due Process: Hamdi. This mess like the economy and the war were not Obamas making but they are now on his watch.

Overall, I think Guantanamo has been counterproductive. We've essentially used it as a medieval torture chamber really for prurient domestic consumption, an episode of 24. The intelligence professionals see it as a waste. Torturing doesn't produce reliable information. The terrorism professionals see it as a recruiting tool for terrorists. It just hasn't worked.

So they torture some Saudis and then release them to art classes. What did they think they'd do?

608 Dark_Falcon  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 9:48:44pm

re: #607 Olsonist

Overall, I think Guantanamo has been counterproductive. We've essentially used it as a medieval torture chamber really for prurient domestic consumption, an episode of 24. The intelligence professionals see it as a waste. Torturing doesn't produce reliable information. The terrorism professionals see it as a recruiting tool for terrorists. It just hasn't worked.

"Medieval torture chamber"? How do you figure that? Did you miss the free Koran handed to each inmate by white-gloved Muslims, one that no non-Muslim is allowed to touch? How about the special meals and lemon chicken. The prisoners eat better than any other federal prisoners, better than the guards in fact. Some of your points have considerable merit. Please don't ruin them with inflammatory and untrue statements.

609 Olsonist  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 10:18:26pm

re: #608 Dark_Falcon

Did you miss the waterboarding? The legal John Yoo justified waterboarding? These were political acts for a political audience.

I'm no innocent. If this worked I'd be for it. But it didn't. In fact it was counterproductive. It made things worse. Instead Guantanamo has become a recruitment tool and it represents a lost opportunity for the information we could have gotten.

Torture was a political act for votes. That Bush would then spring a couple of well connected Saudis only further shows his lack of commitment to real anti-terrorism. Why chase down OBL when you can topple Saddam?

610 Dark_Falcon  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 10:24:53pm

re: #609 Olsonist

Did you miss the waterboarding? The legal John Yoo justified waterboarding? These were political acts for a political audience.

I'm no innocent. If this worked I'd be for it. But it didn't. In fact it was counterproductive. It made things worse. Instead Guantanamo has become a recruitment tool and it represents a lost opportunity for the information we could have gotten.

Torture was a political act for votes. That Bush would then spring a couple of well connected Saudis only further shows his lack of commitment to real anti-terrorism. Why chase down OBL when you can topple Saddam?

No sir, they were not. We did get useful information out of those we waterboarded. Bush would have preferred that it not come to light, to protect those ordered to do it. At no time was it intended as a political act. Nor is waterboarding, traumatic though it is, anywhere near as brutal as the tortures of the Middle Ages. It does not main and disfigure like the rack or the pear did.

611 Olsonist  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 10:36:50pm

This is how the real pros do it. It doesn't make for good television but it works.

If you think that waterboarding was effective then hell, we should have been waterboarding everybody. Get caught planting an IED? Get waterboarded cuz we know that you'll talk.

Except that the intelligence professionals actually wanted to get real information and save lives. So instead waterboarding was saved for a few high profile types like KSM and then YOU got to know about it.

That's a political act.

612 Dark_Falcon  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 10:48:31pm

re: #611 Olsonist

This is how the real pros do it. It doesn't make for good television but it works.

If you think that waterboarding was effective then hell, we should have been waterboarding everybody. Get caught planting an IED? Get waterboarded cuz we know that you'll talk.

Except that the intelligence professionals actually wanted to get real information and save lives. So instead waterboarding was saved for a few high profile types like KSM and then YOU got to know about it.

That's a political act.

What is your proof that it was a political act? That is a very strong allegation, and it must be backed up.

Also, negotiation and compromise are impossible with hard-core members of Al Qaeda. They think they are on a Mission From God and cannot be reasoned with. It is a good tactic when dealing with some lower ranking members or those who joined up for money, but it is useless against the truly committed.

613 Olsonist  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 11:00:14pm

re: #612 Dark_Falcon

What is your proof that it was a political act? That is a very strong allegation, and it must be backed up.

You'll admit that the torture was directed by Cheney and Rumsfeld. They advocated it; they selected who got it; they defended it; they let you know about it. Cabinet level officers this involved--that's a political act.

Also, negotiation and compromise are impossible with hard-core members of Al Qaeda.

In the Guardian article you'll see that in the plywood box with a lot of work you can get actual information out of the hardcore. It happens. It works. The professionals also know that torture doesn't work:

Torture and harsh techniques are counterproductive to preventing terrorist attacks, as they often lead to false information – a detainee will say anything to stop the pain.

614 Olsonist  Mon, Dec 28, 2009 11:19:23pm

BTW, you didn't explain why waterboarding isn't the rule rather than the exception. Why doesn't a poor schmuck who got paid $50 to plant an IED get waterboarded? Is there some humanity we should extend to him that we shouldn't to KSM at the cost of a dozen Marines lives?

If waterboarding worked I'd be all over it. But It Doesn't. If it did the pros would use it to save those Marines. But they actually care about the Marines lives so they want something that works. Building relationships and figuring people out is tough slow business but it works.

So waterboarding gets used for the really important stuff. Getting Bush re-elected.

615 SteveMcG  Tue, Dec 29, 2009 5:36:55am

re: #602 Dark_Falcon

Please excuse the lateness of this reply. I took a nap! And I had given up on the Bears after the field goal. I forgot about Adrien Peterson's iron hands. (I'm an Eagle fan, they can take the #2 seed with a win this week). I would just argue that Hussein had learned the Qaddafi lesson. If you just knock that shit off and stick to killing your own people, we'll let you die of old age. As long as he was frisky, the Saudis and Kuwaitis would have let us stay there and keep an eye on him. But I have to take issue with this statement: "The government has every incentive to make itself work. The people of Iraq can resist Iranian influence by ferreting out infiltrators and maintaining a strong army, as well as providing support to the democratic resistance in Iran." First of all there is no "people of Iraq". Iraq is not a nation. If the government had every incentive to make itself work, why is it that six years after liberation, a shaky election agreement is all we have? Remember all of those 18 benchmarks we set for conditions of our withdrawal? Hardly any of them have been met. The only reason we have a limited role is the SOFA that we had to live with because the mandate was expiring. It's kind of like propping up a government in South Vietnam, then quickly jumping out before it crumbles on you.

616 BARACK THE VOTE  Tue, Dec 29, 2009 6:47:07am

I realise this is a mostly dead thread, but wanted to clarify a few points I see people missing:

There are two forms of rendition, extraordinary rendition and just rendition. Extraordinary rendition involves the 'extrajudicial apprehension and detention' of suspects-- in other words, the illegal kidnapping of suspects and the transfer of them to offsite prisons where torture can be employed. This is the form of rendition that Obama campaigned on ending, and in fact he did sign an order two days after the inauguration to end both extraordinary rendition and the EIT: enhanced interrogation techniques such as waterboarding that we were legally performing ourselves.
Obama is just fine with original recipe rendition, which (I believe) was first approved by Clinton. The only difference is that rendition involves moving the suspect to the US, as opposed to a secret black site. So we're still kidnapping, hooding, restraining, and sedating people-- the only difference is whether they then disappear into black sites.

As to the closing of Gitmo, it is largely symbolic. There will still be that third category of detainee, whom we cannot try in either civilian or military court yet whom we cannot release because we know them to be guilty. (They cannot be tried because the evidence collection was bungled so badly a conviction can't be obtained even under the much more prosecution-friendly strictures of the military tribunal. ) Those detainees will be held at a new site-- the new Gitmo. Early indications are that it will be located at Bagram.

Finally, to those expressing worries about the civilian trials, -- don't. The only people getting civilian trials are those whom the Obama admin knows in advance it has sufficient evidence to convict that way. For those whom we can't, military tribunals will be convened-- and there is always the Neo-Gitmo at Bagram for the others.
So, it's meet the new boss, same as the old boss, pretty much, as far as civil libertarians are concerned.

617 BARACK THE VOTE  Tue, Dec 29, 2009 7:00:02am

re: #224 Charles

The Moussaoui trial is actually an argument in favor of putting Gitmo detainees on trial in the criminal justice system.

The system worked. He's never getting out of prison.

Just to add to this: under the Bush administration we tried and convicted 195 terrorists in the federal system. The system does work.
The only difference is that some of the wingnuts who had no problem with such trials then are now cynically manipulating people's fears and telling them that it's far too dangerous to try them in civil court. (such as Guliani). This is blatant fearmongering and the attempt to portray Obama as somehow soft on terror or weak. Some people are falling for it, though.

618 harrylook  Tue, Dec 29, 2009 9:48:09am

Too bad I'm late and no one will read this, but if we are now turning the battle vs. islamofascism into a legal fight, when do the Marines have to stop shooting, and start building a legal case? When do they put the gun down, and pick up their copy of the Miranda warning? Will they have to get a warrant before arresting a suspect in Afghanistan? Will public defenders be called to a holding cell in Bagram? Will they be Afghan lawyers or American lawyers? Or will prisoners be flown directly to the US? How will intelligence be collected from human sources in this scheme? And finally, as there is zero precedence in our system for treating war criminals like simple criminal defendants, WHY WOULD WE DO THIS????? Military tribunals are just fine for our soldiers accused of crimes - they should be just fine for al Qaeda.

619 jayzee  Tue, Dec 29, 2009 9:49:35am

re: #617 iceweasel

Just to add to this: under the Bush administration we tried and convicted 195 terrorists in the federal system. The system does work.
The only difference is that some of the wingnuts who had no problem with such trials then are now cynically manipulating people's fears and telling them that it's far too dangerous to try them in civil court. (such as Guliani). This is blatant fearmongering and the attempt to portray Obama as somehow soft on terror or weak. Some people are falling for it, though.

Can you quote a source as per the number? Were they Gitmo detainees or terrorists caught on US soil by US law enforcement? The article posted by you seems to indicate they were Gitmos detainees

Bush brought 195 terrorist suspects into the United States to face the American justice system.

but at least one mentioned, Moussaoui was not brought in, rather, he was captured on US soil, by law enforcement.

620 RazorMan1988  Tue, Dec 29, 2009 11:31:52am

What are you saying? I don't understand. Bush released terrorist wrong. Obama trying to release the rest right. His plan called for some of the detainees to go to Yemen. So we should proceed because Bush released some terrorists. Can you explain the point of this blog entry. Other than Bush did this nya nya nya.

621 Cosmo  Tue, Dec 29, 2009 12:50:31pm

Further demonstrating the absolute need for a jihadi penal colony--art-free, of course, on either Ceti Alpha V or Rura Penthe.

622 Mournie  Tue, Dec 29, 2009 12:52:32pm

Its all Bush's fault.

623 Olsonist  Tue, Dec 29, 2009 1:09:52pm

re: #619 jayzee

Can you quote a source as per the number? Were they Gitmo detainees or terrorists caught on US soil by US law enforcement?

The DOJ source is here page xv:

195 (reported) Individuals convicted or pleaded guilty resulting from terrorism investigations from 9-11-01 through 2-3-05

624 Mad Prophet Ludwig  Tue, Dec 29, 2009 4:05:24pm

re: #121 Charles

I'm now in favor of trying the Gitmo detainees in civilian court, throwing the book at them, and locking them up after they've been given due process, and convicted, and no one can complain any more.

And if they aren't convicted, it's because we didn't have enough evidence to convict them.

I have a lot more faith in the American criminal justice system than I do in Saudi Arabia's "art therapy" program.

Good for you.

625 jayzee  Tue, Dec 29, 2009 5:42:32pm

re: #623 Olsonist

Is that the link? What a horrible report. No one can get their stats accurate as per the OIG. Anyway, if so, it appears that all of the examples provided by the report are for those arrested by law enforcement within the US. That is very different than picking up non uniformed combatants on a battle field.

626 jayzee  Tue, Dec 29, 2009 5:43:13pm

re: #623 Olsonist

And thank you btw.

627 charles_martel  Wed, Dec 30, 2009 8:47:06am
I have a lot more faith in the American criminal justice system than I do in Saudi Arabia’s “art therapy” program.

Sadly, after serving on several juries, I do not.

628 Charles Johnson  Wed, Dec 30, 2009 10:40:46pm

re: #627 charles_martel

Sadly, after serving on several juries, I do not.

Really. So you see no difference between a Saudi "art therapy program" and the American criminal justice system?

That's just sad.


This article has been archived.
Comments are closed.

Jump to top

Create a PageThis is the LGF Pages posting bookmarklet. To use it, drag this button to your browser's bookmark bar, and title it 'LGF Pages' (or whatever you like). Then browse to a site you want to post, select some text on the page to use for a quote, click the bookmarklet, and the Pages posting window will appear with the title, text, and any embedded video or audio files already filled in, ready to go.
Or... you can just click this button to open the Pages posting window right away.
Last updated: 2023-04-04 11:11 am PDT LGF User's Guide RSS Feeds

Help support Little Green Footballs!

Subscribe now for ad-free access!Register and sign in to a free LGF account before subscribing, and your ad-free access will be automatically enabled.

Donate with
PayPal Cash.app
Recent PagesClick to refresh
The Pandemic Cost 7 Million Lives, but Talks to Prevent a Repeat Stall In late 2021, as the world reeled from the arrival of the highly contagious omicron variant of the coronavirus, representatives of almost 200 countries met - some online, some in-person in Geneva - hoping to forestall a future worldwide ...
Cheechako
4 days ago
Views: 132 • Comments: 0 • Rating: 1
Texas County at Center of Border Fight Is Overwhelmed by Migrant Deaths EAGLE PASS, Tex. - The undertaker lighted a cigarette and held it between his latex-gloved fingers as he stood over the bloated body bag lying in the bed of his battered pickup truck. The woman had been fished out ...
Cheechako
2 weeks ago
Views: 296 • Comments: 0 • Rating: 1