AI letter to Knesset Member Kiryat Ben Gurion
*sigh*
I hate being right all the time... :?
Human Rights Watch
*sigh*
I hate being right all the time... :?
Human Rights Watch
Origin of the "Enemy Combatant" designation
- Thread starter Vanni Fucci
- Start date
"Enemy Combatant" certainly sounds like a ruse, certainly sounds like a "prisoner."
Up close and personal, if you got a "bad guy", allowing the circus of lawyers, doctors, Red Cross, leaks to the press, secret messages carried out, etcetera, has got to tie the hands of those charged with the responsibility of a country's security.
Inevitably detainment centers and prisons are porous over time, inept over time, decadent over time.
It's worth the risk, some say.
And it's worth keeping a moral standard above those of the enemy.
But then there's that legitimate question of Germany letting go a known member of al Qaeda, who consorted with members of the 9/11 crew, who went to the training camps of al Qaeda but who could NOT be proven to have known anything about the plot AND who appears to have committed no crime, no act of conspiracy, but just the thoughts in his head and his choice of "friends."
Maybe he was guilty of knowledge, conspiracy and plotting. Maybe he is guilty of being in on another plan.
But they could'nt prove it in a court of law.
So may we all prey that the ineptitude and attention deficit of democratic nations and their screwed up bureaucracies can over the long haul continue to monitor this guy.
Up close and personal, if you got a "bad guy", allowing the circus of lawyers, doctors, Red Cross, leaks to the press, secret messages carried out, etcetera, has got to tie the hands of those charged with the responsibility of a country's security.
Inevitably detainment centers and prisons are porous over time, inept over time, decadent over time.
It's worth the risk, some say.
And it's worth keeping a moral standard above those of the enemy.
But then there's that legitimate question of Germany letting go a known member of al Qaeda, who consorted with members of the 9/11 crew, who went to the training camps of al Qaeda but who could NOT be proven to have known anything about the plot AND who appears to have committed no crime, no act of conspiracy, but just the thoughts in his head and his choice of "friends."
Maybe he was guilty of knowledge, conspiracy and plotting. Maybe he is guilty of being in on another plan.
But they could'nt prove it in a court of law.
So may we all prey that the ineptitude and attention deficit of democratic nations and their screwed up bureaucracies can over the long haul continue to monitor this guy.
So Jim,
For you it is better to err on the side of caution, and deny fundamental rights at a whim? These people are protected neither by US laws, nor international laws governing the treatment of prisoners...they cannot be protected by the Geneva Convention, because they are not prisoners of war...they are enemy combatants...
This is what's happening right now...and do you feel any more secure for it?
The abuse at Abu Ghraib, Gitmo and US detention facilities in Afghanistan are all results of the mindset that brought these fascist laws into being...
...but the point I was trying to make in starting this thread was how quickly the US adopted Israel's way of doing things...with not a bang, nor a whimper...
For you it is better to err on the side of caution, and deny fundamental rights at a whim? These people are protected neither by US laws, nor international laws governing the treatment of prisoners...they cannot be protected by the Geneva Convention, because they are not prisoners of war...they are enemy combatants...
This is what's happening right now...and do you feel any more secure for it?
The abuse at Abu Ghraib, Gitmo and US detention facilities in Afghanistan are all results of the mindset that brought these fascist laws into being...
...but the point I was trying to make in starting this thread was how quickly the US adopted Israel's way of doing things...with not a bang, nor a whimper...
Funny, the enemy thinks the same thing about you...I mean about a moral standard...what makes yours right?? big stick?? maybe :idea:
Vanni, I was just uh...ahem...(peapod tugging on attention span) bringing out the seesaw of both sides on the matter, noting (no peapod, let go) that we all take a risk going too far one way or the other and that (stop it please peapod) we should little ignore the risks as we balance this equation (for the love of mike, peapod, ouch, stop it) of security and fundamental rights.
Ouch !!!
Damnit.
Sheeesh.
Ouch !!!
Damnit.
Sheeesh.
Well, for those that buy into the 9/11 Commission report, the combined failures were put squarely on the shoulders of the intelligence community...
If that is true, which I have a hard time believing, should it not be the government's responsiblility to shore up the inadaquacies of their law enforcement and intelligence gathering practices, rather than deny rights that are guaranteed to US citizens and the international community?
In the mean time, there should be a commission established to find out the root cause of the anti-US sentiment, and take steps to repair the damage...because your government can't possibly think that it is going to be able to lock the all up...
...and how many innocents are snatched from airports across your country every day in the interest of national security...that's a rhetorical question, by the way, I don't know the answer, and don't expect you to either...
Just a thought...
If that is true, which I have a hard time believing, should it not be the government's responsiblility to shore up the inadaquacies of their law enforcement and intelligence gathering practices, rather than deny rights that are guaranteed to US citizens and the international community?
In the mean time, there should be a commission established to find out the root cause of the anti-US sentiment, and take steps to repair the damage...because your government can't possibly think that it is going to be able to lock the all up...
...and how many innocents are snatched from airports across your country every day in the interest of national security...that's a rhetorical question, by the way, I don't know the answer, and don't expect you to either...
Just a thought...
First off, Vanni, the 9/11 commission run by two highly respected bi-partisans, Kean, former Gop Gov of NJ, and Lee Hamilton, former democratic congressman, ensured that this report was not going to be written in bureaucrat-ese. It is wonderfully written.
It admits that it's focus was not on the policy makers but rather on the ineptitude of the bureaucratic system, and this ineptitude and turf warfare, and the millions of rules that would scare anyone from doing their job for real was a huge reason for the failure.
These are true, whether or not the policy makers influenced the intelligence agencies.
But I also agree that the other culprit along with those mentioned above are the Policy makers, even for just the reason of personal experience ---- we all know what the Boss wants to hear.
It admits that it's focus was not on the policy makers but rather on the ineptitude of the bureaucratic system, and this ineptitude and turf warfare, and the millions of rules that would scare anyone from doing their job for real was a huge reason for the failure.
These are true, whether or not the policy makers influenced the intelligence agencies.
But I also agree that the other culprit along with those mentioned above are the Policy makers, even for just the reason of personal experience ---- we all know what the Boss wants to hear.
Thomas Kean is on the board of Amerada Hess petroleum, and has been connected to Saudi financial and petroleum interests. Not quite as dirty as Kissinger, but the taint is still there...
http://www.truthout.org/docs_02/12.20A.wrp.kean.htm
...and I couldn't scrape up any dirt on Hamilton...and so I will concede that for all intents and purposes, these guys are about as squeaky clean as Washington career politicians are likely to get...
...and yet, according to David Ray Griffin, and others, there were many errors, omissions and outright lies contained within the report itself...
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article8765.htm
http://www.truthout.org/docs_02/12.20A.wrp.kean.htm
...and I couldn't scrape up any dirt on Hamilton...and so I will concede that for all intents and purposes, these guys are about as squeaky clean as Washington career politicians are likely to get...
...and yet, according to David Ray Griffin, and others, there were many errors, omissions and outright lies contained within the report itself...
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article8765.htm
Vanni?
You may not have been watching this guy, Kean, for the 30 years I've seen him in politics, nor probably have you watched Lee Hamilton over such a span, and there is more to them than the quick label, the quick google, as there is more to anyone you may want to get the quick line on.
And oh crappers, I do know you know that, after observing a lot of your posts.
Perhaps we need to discuss the ironic and contradictory nature of conflict of interest, a concept not much analyzed in the popular zeitgeist. It's the kind of thing about life lived over a long long long time.
More to this.
And as far as errors or omissions, if you actually start reading it I find it amazingly rational, candid and well written.
It is very up front that it does not analyze several culprits, mainly the policy makers.
It's focus was mainly on the CIA and its structure, it's myriad rules preventing anyone from even wanting to stick their neck out to do the right thing, the turf warfare, the carreerists, the handling of whistle blowers, and all of the mechanics of a stifling bureaucracy with so many rules written by well wishers such as you or I that little of the consequences of such was ever analyzed thoroughly.
On top of all those problems, you had the policy makers make their wishes known to their employees. In every job I've ever had, I've always paid attention to what the Boss said outright and even when he implied it, I divined what to infer what was best for my survival and goodwill.
And so it is with every bureaucracy. The banality of ineptitude far outweighs nefarious conspiracy by a country mile, everytime.
You may not have been watching this guy, Kean, for the 30 years I've seen him in politics, nor probably have you watched Lee Hamilton over such a span, and there is more to them than the quick label, the quick google, as there is more to anyone you may want to get the quick line on.
And oh crappers, I do know you know that, after observing a lot of your posts.
Perhaps we need to discuss the ironic and contradictory nature of conflict of interest, a concept not much analyzed in the popular zeitgeist. It's the kind of thing about life lived over a long long long time.
More to this.
And as far as errors or omissions, if you actually start reading it I find it amazingly rational, candid and well written.
It is very up front that it does not analyze several culprits, mainly the policy makers.
It's focus was mainly on the CIA and its structure, it's myriad rules preventing anyone from even wanting to stick their neck out to do the right thing, the turf warfare, the carreerists, the handling of whistle blowers, and all of the mechanics of a stifling bureaucracy with so many rules written by well wishers such as you or I that little of the consequences of such was ever analyzed thoroughly.
On top of all those problems, you had the policy makers make their wishes known to their employees. In every job I've ever had, I've always paid attention to what the Boss said outright and even when he implied it, I divined what to infer what was best for my survival and goodwill.
And so it is with every bureaucracy. The banality of ineptitude far outweighs nefarious conspiracy by a country mile, everytime.