Olbermann: the beginning of the end of America

[Arlos]

Leuyen, one very very salient point you are failing to take into account is this: The Government Makes Mistakes.

You say you have no care about aliens held for indefinite periods, subject to harsh interrogation methods, etc. as long as they're not US citizens. Well, what if they're innocent? Have you heard of the case of a certain Canadian citizen? He was absolutely innocent of any wrongdoing whatsoever, yet his name was somehow put onto a terrorist list. He was stopped in New York on his way back home, during a stopover before the final leg of his flight. With no ability to contact anyone once he was taken into custody, he was arrested, and shipped off to Syria via the CIA secret prisons program. The Syrians then proceeded to torture him, physically, for about 2 months, and he was kept in custody there for 10 months in a cell the exact dimensions of a coffin 24 hours a day, in solitary confinement in complete darkness. He was only released because of political pressure from the Canadian government, because he had relatives who apparently had some clout.

Now, what are you going to do about the next such case? A man who has done NOTHING WRONG, who the US puts into custody, where he is beaten and tortured, etc. and now he has NO WAY WHATSOEVER to challenge his imprisonment.

I'm sorry, but that's unconscionable. I don't care that these people are aliens, they should and MUST be accorded the same rights as any one of our citizens would be. The moment you abrogate what formerly used to be a universal law with "Well, it's universal... except for 'THESE PEOPLE'" you have opened Pandora's box. It becomes a much much easier step to "Well, it's Universal... except for 'THESE PEOPLE' *AND* 'These Other People We Just Added to the Non-Universal List'". And then some time later a 3rd group is added. And a 4th. A 5th... and pretty soon, we all lose it.

No, I say. Habeus Corpus is a fundamental right of ANYONE in a civilized society, and denying it makes us less than civilized.

-Arlos

[Lueyen]

I stated in a previous thread that I had no concerns with this act in regards to aliens, that statement isn't entirely accurate. I have no concerns with the constitutional validity of the act in regards to aliens.

Arlos I do have concerns about the Act and the effects it will have, because there is no question in my mind on the constitutional validity does not mean there is no question at all. While I do not want to afford a possible terrorist the opportunity to clog up our domestic court system with habeas corpus challenges, there should be some form of an appeals process (habeas corpus) that establishes some form of oversight and that oversight should be constructed by powers outside those of the executive branch or the military. In truth my real concern with allowing access to domestic courts or habeas corpus writs isn't so much in added load on those courts, but in their qualifications to deal with international matters. "Qualifications" is probably a misleading word, but I feel that a judge or judges reviewing these cases should have intimate familiarity with international matters and world events, and at the very least should have security clearance of a level that they can review all evidence in the case. There is also on my part a lack of faith in our court system to consistently make the right decisions in this matter, it is one thing to erroneously let perpetrators of domestic crimes off, it's an entirely different matter to let a terrorist go. The challenge of false imprisonment and charges by foreign peoples who have been apprehended and charged on these basis must be handled with the utmost care and consideration so that NO mistakes are made.

Incidentally on the issue of torture the act doesn't address it directly except to clearly define it, and the inadmissibility of evidence obtained by it, in this aspect it is right in line with preventing torture.

Other concerns I have are in how classified evidence is handled, the procedures outlined for the challenge of fitness for the presiding judge of a military tribunal, and the absence of any time limit in making the unlawful combatant determination.

Again however none of these issues mean that Olbermann was correct, but I suppose it's to much to ask Bush haters to base their accusations and attacks in fact, even if there are factual reasons to take issue with if they aren't quite as good as fictional issues.

[Narrock]

Lueyen said:

Again however none of these issues mean that Olbermann was correct, but I suppose it's too much to ask Bush haters to base their accusations and attacks in fact, even if there are factual reasons to take issue with if they aren't quite as good as fictional issues.

Personally, I like the eloquent Diekan-esque responses such as, "Bush SUCKS... mkay dude?"

[Spazz]

Well the list of things hes done to earn him the title of sucking its just a lot easier to say he suskcs than take all day goin nto detail.

[Lueyen]

Ah spazz but in these two recent pieces Olbermann does not simply express "Bush sucks", he fabricates false reasons for his criticisms. If as you say the list of things he's done is so exhaustive to warrant not even going into because of the length of time it would take, then why would it be necessary to invent even more?

It is exactly the same question I ask regarding the Act that is his subject matter; there are valid factually based reasons to take issues with it... why does he feel the need to criticizing it using evidence that is simply not there?

[Narrock]

Olbermann is a typical left-wing clueless retard. I liked how he quoted Bush as saying that the U.S. does not engage or authorize the torturing of prisoners, and then he cited the Abu Ghraib prison scandal... OMFG. He might as well have just said that Bush authorized what happened in Abu Ghraib. It's a good thing most Americans see right through the retardation of the left and the ultra-idiocy of scumbags like Olbermann.

[Arlos]

Well, it's pretty well been confirmed that the administration DID condone the use of torture. They didn't have any Americans do it, no, that's true, btu they subcontracted it out to countries like Syria, etc.

Remember the admission of secret prisons in other countries? Bingo. The CIA used executive jets (gulf streams, and the like) to shuttle prisoners around, one of them being that Canadian citizen I mentioned. There's documentary evidence in the form of reams of flight logs, pictures of the planes arriving at airports, leaving airports, etc. from plane-spotting hobbyists (like trainspotting, people just hang out at airports and watch planes for fun, and take pictures.) There's even pictures of the passengers, in shackles, being on or off-loaded. So, this is pretty well entirely proven at this point.

One of the prisons that people got shuttled to was in Syria, and was notorious as a torture center for years and years, long before 9/11. Prisoners in there are kept in cells that are literally the exact dimension of coffins, exactly 6' long. (so any tall prisoner has to lie at a permanent angle and can never stretch out). They're kept in those sells 24x7, alone, in complete darkness, except when they're taken out for "interrogations", ie, beatings and other forms of torture. Doctors have examined that Canadian citizen and confirm he bears lasting injuries consistent with his stories of what was done to him.

As for Abu Gharib, I don't believe the administration ordered that, specifically. But I DO believe that the people they had in place there were encouraged to go to any lengths to get information, and there was no oversight worth mentioning. You get enough sadists in one spot with easy access to helpless prisoners like that, something is bound to happen eventually.

In any case, as I've said, while it's not necessarily true that any CIA personnel have full-on tortured anyone (though it wouldn't surprise me), we CERTAINLY have worked hand in hand with regimes that DO torture people, and given those regimes lists of questions to ask the prisoners we've sent them without giving them any restrictions on how they go about getting the answers. So we are RESPONSIBLE for torture, even if we haven't done it ourselves.

-Arlos