And the System just keeps on working!
POSTED BY: Geezer
UPDATED: Thursday, August 3, 2006 21:59
VIEWED: 7375
PAGE 9 of 10
You're PRESUMING the people in Gitmo ARE terrorists just because they are there.
The problem is that many of 'those people' were turned in by warlords and Pakistanis for the US bounty on 'terrorists'. Nearly all of them have no evidence against them except the word of someone looking for a couple thousand and/ or revenge.
Aside from presuming guilt, there is also a deep strain of lumping all of 'them' together in your post and assigning hateful traits to 'them', without actually knowing much about 'them'. You need to reevaluate the basis for your notions.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
I know a lotta folk feel that way, Sig, but ya need two witnesses to an overt act, or a direct confession, and in order to be an 'overt act' the full intention to commit treason has to be there, not just the petty jackassery this administration is known for.
The pulling troops and the side deals is debateable under the guise of military strategy and necessity and/or diplomacy, no matter how incompetent, and to fry someone for outing Plame, you need to meet the 'two witnesses, overt act, confession' minimum standard.
Not sayin the bastards aren't traitorous, just saying that to charge someone with capital-T "Treason" has very specific requirements in the Constitution, and has em for very good reasons.
We can't play fast and loose with the rules and hold the moral high ground too.
Criminal prosecution for sure though, cause outing Plame blinded us just when we most needed the specific intel she was workin on - that was downright STUPID, and likely caused some fatal repercussions amongst our cutout agents, something no one else has bothered to mention, but I feel the need, since in essence, they got those folks killed.
-Frem
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by Fremdfirma:
Criminal prosecution for sure though, cause outing Plame blinded us just when we most needed the specific intel she was workin on - that was downright STUPID, and likely caused some fatal repercussions amongst our cutout agents, something no one else has bothered to mention, but I feel the need, since in essence, they got those folks killed.
The Wilsons filed a civil suit today against Cheney, Libby, Rove, and unnamed others. Sort of relevant to the topic.
http://biz.yahoo.com/bw/060713/20060713005646.html?.v=1
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by SoupCatcher:
The Wilsons filed a civil suit today against Cheney, Libby, Rove, and unnamed others. Sort of relevant to the topic.
Damn! The system does work.
"Keep the Shiny side up"
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by Geezer:
Damn! The system does work.
Actually, I did want to get your opinion on the legislation Arlen Specter is working on.
Quick summary: The Bush administration has not used the FISA court to get warrants for much of their information gathering. Their argument was that, since Congress didn't specifically tell them not to in the authorization to use force, it was okay to not follow the protocols. The Hamdan decision kind of blew that theory out of the water. So Specter is working on a bill that would make what the Administration is doing legit. Okay. That part is fine. Let's have the debate. It's what the Administration should have asked for when they started doing this type of information gathering (rather than just ignore the law).
But part of Specter's bill would retroactively bring into compliance what the Administration did. Pardon their law-breaking, in other words.
Is that the system working?
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Sig,
I understand what your saying but for now I remain optimistic. Not that I don't think that the system of checks and balances isn't in any danger. My hope is the latest Supreme Court deceision shows that the sysetm is resilient enough to outlast the efforts of the present administration.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by SoupCatcher:
Actually, I did want to get your opinion on the legislation Arlen Specter is working on.
Quick summary: The Bush administration has not used the FISA court to get warrants for much of their information gathering. Their argument was that, since Congress didn't specifically tell them not to in the authorization to use force, it was okay to not follow the protocols. The Hamdan decision kind of blew that theory out of the water. So Specter is working on a bill that would make what the Administration is doing legit. Okay. That part is fine. Let's have the debate. It's what the Administration should have asked for when they started doing this type of information gathering (rather than just ignore the law).
But part of Specter's bill would retroactively bring into compliance what the Administration did. Pardon their law-breaking, in other words.
Is that the system working?
Pretty much.
You believe that the Administration chose to ignore the law, and the bill would pardon their law-breaking. Some people agree with you.
Other people believe that the Administration did what it considered both legal and necessary to accomplish its job, and that the bill will clarify the uncertainty around their actions brought about by the Hamdan decision.
Other people probably believe something else.
All sides have the opportunity to let their representatives know their feelings. Protest, Send emails, call, write, respond to polls, etc. The representatives have the ability to pass, amend, or defeat the bill. If, whatever the representatives do, enough people don't like it, they can vote the bastards out. If someone makes a Constitutional challenge, the Supremes may get to rule on it.
No matter what happens, someone will not be happy. That's part of the system working too.
At this point in my lecture someone usually points to the party affiliations, pressure groups, corporate lobbies, personal interests, re-election considerations, and on and on, which keep this system from working perfectly. I've never claimed it works perfectly, just better than anything else that's come along. I also think that improvements are possible within the system. It's up to the people to get them.
"Keep the Shiny side up"
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
But part of Specter's bill would retroactively bring into compliance what the Administration did. Pardon their law-breaking, in other words.
Ex-Post-Facto.
Constitutionally Invalid.
-Frem
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Update.
The latest version of Specter's bill does not contain the amnesty granting provision.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME