Time:
Aiken, Clay
•Adam Lambert is not enjoyed by, and apparently not because of his ambiguous sexuality
More Related
Blagojevich, Patti
•acceptance by of NBC offer to appear on Costa Rican jungle-based reality show that husband of was unable to appear on due to being under indictmen
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
What's preposterous is the notion that EIT did not yield valuable information. Even Obama's own National Intelligence Director acknowledged that fact in a memo to the president. Then of course Obama only released the part of the memo that supported his position that these techniques don't work. Unfortunately, it was leaked. This is what Admiral Blair had to say “High value information came from interrogations in which those methods were used and provided a deeper understanding of the al Qa’ida organization that was attacking this country,” http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/30335592/ After this was leaked he issued a CYA press release that disavowed part of this memo, but only koolaid drinkers buy into that memo. The fact is Admiral Blair who was appointed by Obama believes that “High value information came from interrogations in which those methods were used and provided a deeper understanding of the al Qa’ida organization that was attacking this country;” Sounds like it saved American lives to me and that is a much higher moral imperative than the comfort of those who would murder us.
Hilarious. Mr. Aiken heard one singer sing one song and the other he never heard sing on the American Idol show. And there is a place for his opinion, Why?
Maybe he should branch out to politics- we have seen similarly undeserved authority placed on people like Liz Cheney because they are warm bodies in the vicinity of Washington.
It's the weeping and gnashing of teeth stupid!
New Main...and the GOP tr0llwh0.res are howling. ROTFL
"Obama Says He's Talked With Bush Since Inauguration"
Bush talks to God...
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=bush+talks+to+god&aq=0&oq=bush+talk&aqi=g10
One of the more frightening elements of that sociopathic cretin was his feigned or real religious zelotry.
After Ir@.q, I wondered if Dubya would next feel called upon to usher in the final apocalypse.
On how to treat some of the prisoners at Gitmo, the basic problem arises from the fact that we call this military action (presumably) against terr0rists as war. Were it a real war, we would have no problem classifying many prisoners as "prisoners of war" and detaining them, without trial, till the end of that war in accordance with the Geneva Convention. As such, we must find within existing laws a way to handle them, or, possibly, pass new laws.
Of course, any new laws we pass must confirm to international norms and laws and ratified by other countries.
The problem is that passing laws and getting international agreements would take time. Meanwhile, the President must find a way to handle these prisoners.
It is not an easy decision. It is our job to keep the pressure on, and demand that whatever is done does not violate our values, but we must also acknowledge that it is not a clear cut decision and allow the President more time to deliberate and find a solution.
.
my response is pending...
photo
Obama's notion of "preventive detention" is completely outside our current Constitution and "law." How is it different from our internment of the Japanese during WWII??? That was also based on the idea of prevention or what they might do sometime in the future. There is nothing in the U.S. Constitution that permits imprisonment for what Philip Dick in his great short story "The Minority Report" called "Precrime." If we are a country of law and if we are to be such in the future then we have to take the bad with the good. Prosecute where we can and then perhaps take those who we can't prosecute back to their country of origin and release them. I find it amazing that so few have noted the contradiction between looking forward on everything associated with those Americans who clearly committed war crimes but we can't afford the same privilege to those who were rounded up by war lords and bounty hunters and sold for lucre to the highest bidders from the CIA.
Obama's notion of "preventive detention" is completely outside our current Constitution and "law."
-----------
You might be right, but you are not the Supreme Court of the United States. That's the authority in our system which determines what is Constitutional.
It is very different than the internment of the Japanese. Those in question are not American citizens living here, and arrested just because of their heritage. And the scale is also very different.
Again, Constitutionality must be determined by our justice system, not by you and not by Ph-il-ip D!ck, although your opinion and his must be respected.
I would very much like to see those who committed crimes held accountable, but not led by emotion and driven by the American need for "quick fixes" and instant gratification. I want it done through our well established system of government, with due diligence, and consistent with our laws and procedures. That takes time.
I am with you in demanding that justice be done.
SCOTUS made it quite clear that even if the detainees are protected by the Third Geneva Convention.
The Court's holding in Hamdan that Common Article 3 applies as a matter of treaty obligation to the conflict against Al Qaeda thus should stop at least some of the Administration's interrogation policies in their tracks. In this respect, the holding will de facto require the Administration to finally adopt the recommendation of the 9/11 Commission (see page 380 of its Report) that the United States "engage its friends to develop a common coalition approach toward the detention and humane treatment of captured terrorists," and in so doing "draw upon Article 3 of the Geneva Conventions on the law of armed conflict," which was "specifically designed for those cases in which the usual laws of war did not apply."
The Court held "merely" that the minimum baseline protections of Common Article 3 are binding on the U.S. in the conflict with Al Qaeda. The Court did not suggest that Al Qaeda detainees are entitled to POW status, and did not opine on the procedures that may be required to deprive a detainee of POW status.
http://gulcfac.typepad.com/georgetown_university_law/2006/07/top_ten_myths_a_1.html
*even the* not *even if*
Further:
On June 29, 2006, the Supreme Court by a 5-3 vote in Hamdan v. Rumsfeld (1) set aside President Bush's November 13, 2001 order (2) providing for trial by military commission of non-citizens believed to be associated with the al Qaeda terrorist organization and apprehended during the conflict in Afghanistan and being held in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. In an opinion authored by Justice Stevens, the Court held that President Bush lacked congressional authorization to provide for the trial of these Guantanamo detainees by military commission and that some of the procedures contemplated for these trials contravened the Uniform Code of Military Justice ("UCMJ"). (3) Heralded by many academic observers as a signal victory for the "Rule of Law" and human rights even in wartime, Hamdan requires the President to try the Guantanamo detainees by court-martial proceedings or to seek from Congress express authorization of the use of military commissions falling short of court-martial procedures. Now, less than one year after the Court's decision, Congress has provided such authorization in the Military Commissions Act of 2006 ("MCA"). (4) Before discussing the MCA, we begin with an examination of the limits of the Court's holding in Hamdan.
http://www.accessmylibrary.com/coms2/summary_0286-31273875_ITM
__________
Which means these detainees are entitled to a fair trial or the protections of court-martial procedures.
The indefinite detention without trial that the Obama Administration is purportedly considering would be illegal and un-Constitutional
Try this -- it will help you understand where we are at:
http://gulcfac.typepad.com/georgetown_university_law/2006/07/top_ten_myths_a_1.html
Explaining why we shouldn't torture to "moral highgrounders" is tiresome. Not a single one has the intellectual curiosity to read on the topic themselves. Their mentality is the downfall of our country and they don't even get it.
"What's caused the Republican Party's real meltdown? It's that it has ceased to exist as a political party and is instead a dwindling weirdly eclectic collection of uneducated rubes led by a few fearful angry far right thinkers who talk in media sound bites geared to the types of people who watch Fox News. Jack Kemp was not part of this horrible little "party." He was a smart compassionate man. There used to be more Republicans like Kemp. Today the Republican core constituency is the national village idi.ot."
Frank Schaeffer: Republican Disaster -- The (Unspoken) Anatomy of The Meltdown
Reposted... This analysis perfectly explains the tro//s.
Agreed. Very accurate summation.
here's the reality
the american people were a collective group of sleep walkers, going through their daily routines with minimal time to catch snippets of breaking news rather than absorbing whole facts. This environment helped the repubs to hum right along hoodwinking as they go. Then a man like Barack Obama comes along and encourages all of us to wake up and learn the truth, stay engaged and don't ever allow anyone to lull us into complacency again. In this new world the repubs don't know how to act, their half-truths get disqualified, their soundbites are ripped apart and the constituency is not buying what they are selling. They are floundering like fish out of water, woefully inept to exist in a world where folks are actually paying attention and holding them accountable for their lies now.
We don't miss anything from Cheney. Stop giving him the spotlight!
Where was Miss Caliboobia and Perez Hilton? Any mention of preposterous that dont include them is incomplete.
Yeah, when's Miss CaliBo.ob making her triumphant return? I hope she brings WifeofEIBdevotee with her!
Dam.n! They must have ban.ned both of those ladies. I fanned 'em both but they have vanish.ed into thin (at least in Miss CaliBo.ob's case) air!
Slansky is incomplete. He's missing his naughty, brainy and witty bits.
Yeah ... but that is sooooo "the week before last".
On this Memorial Day weekend, I would like to take this opportunity to thank those who served this great nation of our. Thank you for your service and Salute!!!!!
I second that.
co-sign with great honor and deep abiding gratitude to all of them
I agree, Republicans lie when they say Democrats don't support the troops and the country... While they are busy attacking the President of the United States of America.
I'd certainly agree in principle. However, those who currently serve in Iraq and Afghanistan are actually a disservice to this country. It's not their fault, of course, and certainly not what they intended when they took their oath.
That's just the way things have turned out under Bush.
Interesting how ChainE never mentions the 14 detainees that were released under his regime
who went back to being ter rorists. The righties also keep saying how releasing memo's regarding
to rture makes us less secure because our enemies now know of the techniques used.
I would pose this question to them. Under Bush - ChainE 500 detainees were released. Did they all promise to not tell of any to rture they witnessed? I sure hope none of them had their fingers crossed behind their backs.
ThunderclapNewman I'm a Fan of ThunderclapNewman I'm a fan of this user permalink
It doesn't matter if it worked or not.
Torture is illegal in all circumstances.
Torture is immoral in all circumstances.
The sole purpose of torture is torture.
But the president has reserved the right to use EITs in the case of exigent circumstances. What? If hey destroy our values, are against the law, make us less safe, are a terr0r/st recruiting tool, and don't work, why would he do that? Uhhh maybe they do work and saving American lives is a higher moral imperative to Obama than the comfort of those who would murder our citizens. Yathunk?
Get back to us if Obama uses his reserved right to to rture.
Republicans torture for homoerotic excitement. No other reason.
If you actually believe that t0rture was performed at the behest of Bush and CO to save lives instead of trying to fabricate a link between Saddam/Iraq and Bin Laden/@l Q@eda , you're a bigger f00l than I 1st thought , and that's saying something ...............Just nothing good.
You will believe what you want to believe and so will I. But I will not call you a bigger f00/ than I first thought, though you r.
False premise. Torture is less effective than traditional methods, and if it takes 183 times in a month it isn't exactly timely, is it bud?
Videotaped?
False premise? Maybe you and Obama ought to confer with his Director of National Intelligence. “High value information came from interrogations in which those methods were used and provided a deeper understanding of the al Qa’ida organization that was attacking this country,” Adm. Dennis C. Blair, the intelligence director, wrote in a memo to his staff last Thursday. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/30335592/
stop calling it "EITs", it's freaking torture, own it, wear it as your badge of disgrace, you certainly earned it!
Thanks for the chickenhawk posts Rampage.
The real question to me is whether or not the guys who had to take their place survived the combat.
They all walk around carrying that bad Karma.
True dat
I just have to ask this question one more time.
Does anyone else feel like most of the GOP and their faux media regalia has collectively slipped into their own verision of The Truman Show?
They seem so convinced of their own bizarre, fabricated reality that every now and then I have to pinch myself to make sure I'm not just dreaming that they've become so completely ridiculous.
There is a cult phenomena here... These people have taught themselves to believe their own lies... And this is a very dangerous combination when these type people are in leadership, or education postions. They are at best actors, but their version of reality is bad for America.
Does that also include the speaker of the house?
Faustian bargains are never a good deal but the right keeps making them anyway.
I like the way you put it, their own Truman show,
Indeed!!!!
They believe their own garbage, and they continue to spew it adnauseum. And Cheney is the head of the beast, this has become crystal clear to me now. I always suspected he was the REAL president. Now I know, he was. And he continues to be a dangerous person.
I think is was in the movie "Annie Hall" that, during a cocktail party, a character played by Jeff Goldblum is overheard talking to his guru on the phone. What he says, and I'm paraphrasing here, is essentially, "I've forgotten my mantra. What was it again?"
The joke, of course, is that one's "mantra" is a phrase or word repeated over and over again, thousands of times, in a form of meditation. It isn't something you forget.
The surreal image of the GOP is cultivated by their willingness to adopt the most absurd mantras - which, once repeated for the ten-thousandth time, become "reality" to them. Take Cheney's insistence on repeating that the "proof" of the efficacy of his policies is the fact that we haven't been attacked on our soil since 9/11. If you say it often enough, there's no room in your battered psyche even for simple and obvious questions like. "Who's to say Mr. Cheney that if we HADN'T engaged in torture we WOULD have been attacked again? Where's the proof of that?"
They engage in a mass self-hypnosis - and they do it for a reason.
It's "profitable".
8
http://www.publiusforum.com/2009/05/23/christian-university-decertifies-democrat-club-why-it-is-the-right-decision/
In Republican World (tm) if you are in dissagreement with them, they will discriminate against your civil rights.
Sadly, the GOP are happy to betray your best interests even if you agree with them.
Indeed, the best interests of the country are nowhere on their list. They have degraded, or devolved, into a cult.
Frank Schaeffer: Republican Disaster -- The (Unspoken) Anatomy of The Meltdown
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=republican+disaster&aq=0&oq=republican+disa&aqi=g1
Question for the Deferred D.i.c.k...
If you go to war to eliminate al Qaeda, smoke 'em out, bring 'em to justice and prevent them from having a safe haven and in the end there are more of them, not brought to justice, plotting from their safe haven...
Where would your effort fall on the success/failure continuum?
Thank you. This is why I repeat that even Afghanistan is a failed occupation - and, moreover, one that cannot become "un-failed" by any change of tactics, length of time, financial investment or increase in troops.
It's time to come home, re-group, reassess our priorities, redouble our intelligence efforts ( the real ones, not the "data-by-design" bullshit we've been fed from the CIA for the last 5 decades ) and take a new course.
But before taking a new course, one has to fully admit that the one you're on isn't working.
Good luck to us with that one.
8
Loading comments…
First Posted: 05-22-09 10:44 PM | Updated: 05-22-09 10:48 PM