Third Party & Independents: Archives

I am ashamed of my country…. And it’s leaders.

There is no story here yet. Lugar said a hypothetical suggestion would be a bad idea. Levin agreed. All that the Post has is “The Pentagon and the CIA have asked the White House to decide on a more permanent approach for those it is unwilling to set free or turn over to U.S. or foreign courts” Nobody from the Whitehouse has commented. We might want to see what we are talking about before we can comment.

I agree with Jack, we’re a little light on details here.

Besides, I think life in prison for terrorists (ie non-state soldiers caught in a field of battle fighting US troops) would be misguided. How does battlefield execution grab you? Of course it’s better to get any intel they might possess first.

Eric, I like your hang ‘em first, and debate their guilt or innocence afterward, approach. It so clearly delineates the difference between so many on the right and left.

Jack and Eric, I guess you didn’t read the whole article.

As part of a solution, the Defense Department, which holds 500 prisoners at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, plans to ask Congress for $25 million to build a 200-bed prison to hold detainees who are unlikely to ever go through a military tribunal for lack of evidence, defense officials told The Post.

The money says it all!

David:
“The Bush administration is showing its willingness to bury the most basic core principles set out in our Constitution for expedience. I cannot recall a more traitorous act against our Constitution by a sitting President.”

But after Patriot Act I and II going through, it isn’t totally surprising is it? These clowns have been proving themselves true enemies of our Constitution - and international law, as well.

David, have you read this yet about the controversy over the appointment of Gonzales, and how White House has refused to provide copies of his memos on the questioning of terror suspects.?
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A45791-2005Jan3.html?ABTest=blurb_A

If you have a problem with Gonzales’ and Congress new attitude of breaking international law, you can sign this petition, which is a declaration against torture:
http://www.workingforchange.com/activism/petition.cfm?itemid=18313

Adrienne, yes, I got the email this afternoon and promptly signed the petition and sent a half dozen emails out to others to do the same. Thanks for the tip though.

I read the whole article David.

Pay attention to the words. Plans to ask congress. Plans - That is has not yet done so or even made the necessary studies and reports to do so. To ask – a lot of people ask Congress for a lot of things. Many are called; few are chosen. Congress – this would not be part of covert funding, so you can read all about the proposal if it ever happens.

It is like saying I plan to ask my wife to give me a pile of money to go to Las Vegas. It is an improbable chain of events that will get me there.

You guys can get all worked up if you want, but right now you are rooming with Don Quixote.

As for the petitions, I some experience with petitions and have been on the receiving end of things like this. Petitions are always given due consideration, especially those that look like form letters or come as spam. If you want to do something, contribute a thousand dollars to a campaign and get invited to some events. A spoken word is worth a hundred written ones and probably thousands of cyber words. I say this a true offer of advice, not just (although a maybe a little) sarcastically.

Jack, something so obvious as a logical extension of Bush’s already established policy is hardly a stretch. The alternative is to try them and set them free upon acquittal. Do you really believe Bush is considering that option as viable? If so, you are a far more trusting soul than I. This is the President who said the GC rules against torture would not apply to his war on terrorism.

I am reminded of the ultimate optimist who standing in the middle of the single lane highway with a Mack Truck bearing down on him at 70 mph, refuses to heed the warning of his friend yelling, move. He replies to the friend, “Oh, I saw that truck coming this way a minute ago and it hasn’t run me over yet.”

The writing is on the wall. The CIA and Pentagon are simply giving credibility to Bush’s assent. Bush’s argument will go something like, well, if our military and intelligence say we have to detain them without trial, I am not going to ignore their advice and risk their attacks on America again.

Note the fallacy of the argument, they weren’t proven and can’t be proven to have ever been a threat to us in the first place.

David

I don’t think we will keep them for life because it will not be worth it. After ten years, we won’t want to have these guys around. They will not be worth the money or trouble.

The Geneva Convention does not cover them, since they don’t represent a signatory state. If they were, it would go worse for them. If they were considered soldiers, they would stay in prison until the war was over or they were paroled. The war may not be over for a long time. Worse, the convention considers anyone not in uniform behind lines to be a spy who could be shot.

I don’t know what to do with them. After a while, I suppose we can send them back to their home countries, where no doubt they will face local justice.

One thing that is important to remember. The U.S. has managed to maintain a perfect head body ratio among our detainees, something our enemies can’t seem to do.

Jack said, “I don’t think we will keep them for life because it will not be worth it. After ten years, we won’t want to have these guys around.”

I sure hope you are right, Jack. But, that hardly addresses the issue of the US setting the standards for due process of law that we are touting for the peoples of the rest of the world, does it?

Due process is a humanitarian concept. The US will be losing its a piece of its humanity and sanctioning the loss of humanity in other nations if it pursues this policy of arresting and imprisoning human beings without due process of law, to at least determine if their arrest was justified or not in the first place.

“If you want to do something, contribute a thousand dollars to a campaign and get invited to some events. A spoken word is worth a hundred written ones and probably thousands of cyber words. I say this a true offer of advice, not just (although a maybe a little) sarcastically.”

Pathetic, isn’t it? That conservatives feel they have to buy their way into everything?
The truth is, I wouldn’t give a thousand dollars to go to events simply to be heard by the “right people”. I’d rather give my spare cash to those who actually need it, or to those who will wisely use it to improve something.
I grew up in a town simply crawling with old-money, influential Assholes - and not only did I find the majority of them to be dreadful bores, I came to an early understanding that their ridiculously inflated sense of superiority, their greedy mindset, and their shameless exploitation of everyone who isn’t in their social class is _exactly_ what is wrong with this country.

David:
“But, that hardly addresses the issue of the US setting the standards for due process of law that we are touting for the peoples of the rest of the world, does it?”

Exactly. It goes against everything we are supposed to stand for. And their willingness to disregard this fundamental principle is just one more display of the f**king insanity of these neo-cons.

“Due process is a humanitarian concept. The US will be losing its a piece of its humanity and sanctioning the loss of humanity in other nations if it pursues this policy of arresting and imprisoning human beings without due process of law, to at least determine if their arrest was justified or not in the first place.”

I couldn’t agree more.
And what I find so disturbing is that as conservatives continue to desperately rush to defend the breaches of decency made by this administration, they seem to have no sense that they are trading in a little of their own humanity, bit by awful bit.

Thank you, David, for posting this. I wish the word “appalled” still meant something. I can’t believe that the American government is publically and unrepentantly torturing people, “disappearing” people, and proposing to detain people indefinitely without any semblence of due process.

Jack and Eric are defending this with hey, it’s just a proposal, and besides, even if it happens, life in prison is too good for them. I find it hard to understand why anyone would think of condoning this sort of treatment of suspected terrorists - particularly ones for whom there is no evidence of guilt.

Thank you William. I just wish there were more interest in the topic and more outrage expressed by the public and media.

I think if you polled the public they would be more in line with Jack and I.

We also have to define what torture is here. Is sleep deprivation torture? Is loud music torture? Are threats and psychological pressure torture?

So far this is all pretty vague.

Is every terrorist entitled to a lawyer? is Osama entitled to the full rights of US citizenship?

Eric said: I think if you polled the public they would be more in line with Jack and I.

America was polled about WMD and imminent threat in Iraq, before the invasion too and they agreed the President. That says a lot about your speculation above. :-)

Polling does not make a thing right or just, our Founding Fathers established a Republic for just that reason.

I don’t understand Jack’s point. We should wait until the first one dies in prison before we conclude that the administration doesn’t intend to give them due process?

And because we suspect they are terrorists, they have no rights? I suppose we could apply this to domestic criminal suspects as well. Just call ‘em terrorists. And how about those guys who disagree with current government policy? Didn’t our president say you were either with him or with the terrorists? Well, there you go! We can lock up the opposition. It’s a beautiful, powerful logic to wield. Thanks to our next Attorney General, all things are possible.

I think if you polled the public they would be more in line with Jack and I.

You would be wrong.

America was polled about WMD and imminent threat in Iraq, before the invasion too and they agreed the President.

Actually, the majority agreed - only if it was done as a UN operation. Otherwise, the majority opposed it.

America is admired when it’s an example of freedom and prosperity. This administration has has tarnished the values and principles that true Americans believe in.

Prior to invasion, AP, the majority believed the President when he said they Hussein had WMD, and that posed an Imminent threat, even after the invasion, one poll I remember showed 65% of Americans believed the WMD would be found.

I also remember a poll before the invasion that clearly showed a majority supported the invasion of Iraq. It may have been worded as “with UN cooperation”, I don’t remember. I do remember being shocked by the poll numbers so blindly following the President’s lead on this at a time when I was asking, Why would a dicatator who survived so much for decades willingly leave evidence about that would justify his removal. I have met some paranoid individuals of the non-schizophrenic kind in psych. hospitals, and they were very protective of self, overly so in fact. It just didn’t make sense.

As it turned out, Saddam was true to his paranoid character and got rid of the WMD early on. It is what one would predict of a paranoid person who knew WMD could become his downfall if the evidence were found. But, also, like overprotective paranoids, who believe they are smarter than their adversaries, Hussein believed he was safe in claiming to have them, counting on the U.S. and U.N. to demonstrate proof of his absent weapons before invading. His bravado of believing himself to be an excellent judge of character, totally miscalculated Bush. Bush didn’t need, nor require proof. Rumors and fasle data were all he needed to commit to war. Much to our nation’s regret, now.

The embodyment of absolute stupidity is never asking the hard Questions….. Oh and voting for bush. You people who sit up there on your moral high horses thinking that this country can do no wrong or will never be defeated by anyone need to go back to school and actually listen to your history teacher this time. Rome was destroyed by ridged greedy power hungry romans who decided civil war was in their best interests. If you think that won’t end up happening here than you have got another thing comming. Just because fifty one percent of us are morons who decided that getting all of thier political information off of thirty second ads during the football game or soaps or at church was enouph doesn’t mean that Bush is moral or right. All of those commercials were half truths or outright lies, and as far as god is concerned he who listens to the traditions and oppinions of man deserves what he gets. Spending a few good hours looking into Bush’s record will tell you that he is just doing all of this to stay out of prison which is where he and most of his “advisors” belonged before the 2000 election. You all need to take a good hard look at what you have allowed to happen and then bend over and kiss your fat headed, lazy asses good bye because the parties over and your getting stuck with a bill you can’t pay. Thanks allot.