Comments on: Sunday Talking Head Thread http://firedoglake.com/2006/09/17/sunday-talking-head-thread-23/ Firedoglake weblog Fri, 17 Feb 2012 12:51:13 -0600 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.1.2 By: Abe http://firedoglake.com/2006/09/17/sunday-talking-head-thread-23/#comment-300290 Abe Mon, 18 Sep 2006 23:06:06 +0000 http://www.firedoglake.com/2006/09/17/sunday-talking-head-thread-23/#comment-300290 <p>trial</p> trial

]]> By: katie Jensen http://firedoglake.com/2006/09/17/sunday-talking-head-thread-23/#comment-298678 katie Jensen Sun, 17 Sep 2006 20:26:27 +0000 http://www.firedoglake.com/2006/09/17/sunday-talking-head-thread-23/#comment-298678 <p>You know, alot of the detainees that came from Iraq, couldn’t have been terrorists given what we now know about the relationship between Saddam before the war. Those folks caught early on could not have been al queda. That’s disgusting. Who knows who those people were but many of them were obviously innocent and held for way too long. That will be an issue as well I am sure. I mean, they were caught between a rock and a hard place when they let several hundred go after 2 years!! Released because they weren’t guilty . </p> <p>Holy cow…this could get really ugly…it was ugly, we just couldn’t stand up to this moron. I feel very ashamed.</p> You know, alot of the detainees that came from Iraq, couldn’t have been terrorists given what we now know about the relationship between Saddam before the war. Those folks caught early on could not have been al queda. That’s disgusting. Who knows who those people were but many of them were obviously innocent and held for way too long. That will be an issue as well I am sure. I mean, they were caught between a rock and a hard place when they let several hundred go after 2 years!! Released because they weren’t guilty .

Holy cow…this could get really ugly…it was ugly, we just couldn’t stand up to this moron. I feel very ashamed.

]]> By: Slothrop http://firedoglake.com/2006/09/17/sunday-talking-head-thread-23/#comment-298641 Slothrop Sun, 17 Sep 2006 19:25:54 +0000 http://www.firedoglake.com/2006/09/17/sunday-talking-head-thread-23/#comment-298641 <p>The Geneva Conventions are vague only to Dick Cheney, but that’ll happen after five deferments.</p> The Geneva Conventions are vague only to Dick Cheney, but that’ll happen after five deferments.

]]> By: Mary http://firedoglake.com/2006/09/17/sunday-talking-head-thread-23/#comment-298523 Mary Sun, 17 Sep 2006 17:44:15 +0000 http://www.firedoglake.com/2006/09/17/sunday-talking-head-thread-23/#comment-298523 <p>egregious @198 - no, bc of the unique status of our facility there - an American BASE in Cuba, so it has autonomy on its grounds (and is how the court determined to start with in Rashul that habeas extends to GITMO - another wrong call by OLC.</p> egregious @198 – no, bc of the unique status of our facility there – an American BASE in Cuba, so it has autonomy on its grounds (and is how the court determined to start with in Rashul that habeas extends to GITMO – another wrong call by OLC.

]]> By: HotFlash http://firedoglake.com/2006/09/17/sunday-talking-head-thread-23/#comment-298441 HotFlash Sun, 17 Sep 2006 16:50:16 +0000 http://www.firedoglake.com/2006/09/17/sunday-talking-head-thread-23/#comment-298441 <p><a href="#comment-298419"><em>op99 @<br /> 200 </em></a></p> <blockquote><p><a href="#comment-298411"><em>HotFlash @ 199</em></a></p> <blockquote><p><a href="#comment-298344"><em>Twisted Martini @ 163</em></a></p> <blockquote><p>absentee ballots anyone?</p></blockquote> <p>I like the paper part, but how do we make them count the things?</p></blockquote> <p>What if a political operative picks up/sorts the mail? What is to prevent them from “disappearing” ballots from “unfriendly” zip codes? Are there safeguards in place to prevent this?</p></blockquote> <p>OK, found <a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20041010200246/http://www.electionline.org/site/docs/html/counting_absentee_ballots.htm">this</a>. Now to find out what the safeguards are. Op99, if you or anyone else think this is topical, could you pls move it to the next thread? Ta!</p> op99 @
200

HotFlash @ 199

Twisted Martini @ 163

absentee ballots anyone?

I like the paper part, but how do we make them count the things?

What if a political operative picks up/sorts the mail? What is to prevent them from “disappearing” ballots from “unfriendly” zip codes? Are there safeguards in place to prevent this?

OK, found this. Now to find out what the safeguards are. Op99, if you or anyone else think this is topical, could you pls move it to the next thread? Ta!

]]> By: The Lemming Herder http://firedoglake.com/2006/09/17/sunday-talking-head-thread-23/#comment-298420 The Lemming Herder Sun, 17 Sep 2006 16:37:56 +0000 http://www.firedoglake.com/2006/09/17/sunday-talking-head-thread-23/#comment-298420 <p>I was watching the talking heads this morning and had a question.</p> <p>Is Bush really concerned about the torture provisions of the Geneva Convention or is he really concerned with pushing through immunity from prosecution for war crimes via an international tribunal?</p> <p><a href="http://dontbealemming.com/2006/09/17/open-question–somebody-please-explain-this-to-me.aspx">http://dontbealemming.com/2006.....to-me.aspx</a></p> <p>Posted by the Lemming Herder from <a href="http://www.dontbealemming.com">Don’t Be A Lemming!</a></p> I was watching the talking heads this morning and had a question.

Is Bush really concerned about the torture provisions of the Geneva Convention or is he really concerned with pushing through immunity from prosecution for war crimes via an international tribunal?

http://dontbealemming.com/2006…..to-me.aspx

Posted by the Lemming Herder from Don’t Be A Lemming!

]]> By: op99 http://firedoglake.com/2006/09/17/sunday-talking-head-thread-23/#comment-298419 op99 Sun, 17 Sep 2006 16:37:48 +0000 http://www.firedoglake.com/2006/09/17/sunday-talking-head-thread-23/#comment-298419 <p><a href="#comment-298411"><em>HotFlash @ 199</em></a></p> <blockquote><p><a href="#comment-298344"><em>Twisted Martini @ 163</em></a></p> <blockquote><p>absentee ballots anyone?</p></blockquote> <p>I like the paper part, but how do we make them count the things?</p></blockquote> <p>What if a political operative picks up/sorts the mail? What is to prevent them from “disappearing” ballots from “unfriendly” zip codes? Are there safeguards in place to prevent this?</p> HotFlash @ 199

Twisted Martini @ 163

absentee ballots anyone?

I like the paper part, but how do we make them count the things?

What if a political operative picks up/sorts the mail? What is to prevent them from “disappearing” ballots from “unfriendly” zip codes? Are there safeguards in place to prevent this?

]]> By: HotFlash http://firedoglake.com/2006/09/17/sunday-talking-head-thread-23/#comment-298411 HotFlash Sun, 17 Sep 2006 16:32:40 +0000 http://www.firedoglake.com/2006/09/17/sunday-talking-head-thread-23/#comment-298411 <p><a href="#comment-298344"><em>Twisted Martini @ 163</em></a></p> <blockquote><p>absentee ballots anyone?</p></blockquote> <p>I like the paper part, but how do we make them count the things?</p> Twisted Martini @ 163

absentee ballots anyone?

I like the paper part, but how do we make them count the things?

]]> By: egregious http://firedoglake.com/2006/09/17/sunday-talking-head-thread-23/#comment-298385 egregious Sun, 17 Sep 2006 16:12:37 +0000 http://www.firedoglake.com/2006/09/17/sunday-talking-head-thread-23/#comment-298385 <p>Mary, would this cover Gitmo, as Cuba is a foreign country?</p> <p><a href="#comment-298352"><em>Mary @ 174 </em></a></p> <blockquote><p>PS - the AP article answers, IMO, part of the NYT earlier editorial re: Why the rush?</p> <p>The rush is that no one has an olc opinion anymore (not that they were worth the paper written on before IMO) and part of the Geneva Conventions problems involve taking detainees and holding them in foreign countries. So they have to cought them up or be involved in a very KNOWING and ONGOING criminal violation of the War Crimes act. Once you cough them up - you want cover as fast as you can get it.</p> <p>BTW - no one is asking what happened to the other 82 from the AP article. Such horrible “worst of the worst” guys — why aren’t we bringing them in for trial?</p></blockquote> <p>Thanks, always appreciate your legal analysis.</p> Mary, would this cover Gitmo, as Cuba is a foreign country?

Mary @ 174

PS – the AP article answers, IMO, part of the NYT earlier editorial re: Why the rush?

The rush is that no one has an olc opinion anymore (not that they were worth the paper written on before IMO) and part of the Geneva Conventions problems involve taking detainees and holding them in foreign countries. So they have to cought them up or be involved in a very KNOWING and ONGOING criminal violation of the War Crimes act. Once you cough them up – you want cover as fast as you can get it.

BTW – no one is asking what happened to the other 82 from the AP article. Such horrible “worst of the worst” guys — why aren’t we bringing them in for trial?

Thanks, always appreciate your legal analysis.

]]> By: Mary http://firedoglake.com/2006/09/17/sunday-talking-head-thread-23/#comment-298382 Mary Sun, 17 Sep 2006 16:11:20 +0000 http://www.firedoglake.com/2006/09/17/sunday-talking-head-thread-23/#comment-298382 <p>lotus - I think they do too. But Graham has tried to save their butt on numerous occassions and even got Levin to sign off on and co-sponsor his prior attempts to disenfranchise judicial review (remember the “anti-torture” bill also said - let’s not have the court look at what we’ve been doing in GITMO”</p> <p>Smart enough to know better makes me angrier than someone like Grassley who is plainly just lost and out of his depth. </p> <p>When you look at what McCain and Graham are doing now, it needs to be with the filter of what they did with the anti-torture (but hey, let’s not let a court decide, ‘Kay?) prior legislation.</p> <p>There is also the fact that by not following the Art3 provisions, we took this situation where everyone pretty much looked like a civilian so there were huge issues on having any real knowledge about whether they were or were not enemy combatants, and refused to have section 5 hearings - real, honest to God hearings. So all the things that you “approve” for enemy combatants - one question remains as to whether they are also “vague” or “ok” as applied to wrongfully kidnapped and detained civilians. </p> <p>Goldsmith, as part of the same brain trust that brought us the “we don’t have to follow the Geneva Conventions if we don’t want to” cartel, has recently joined with his Posner (and even combined, the two of them are a much lesser evil than the Other Posner) and done a WaPo piece about how what is really needed in GITMO is (and here, you have to think they were Gobsmacked by Jove) “real” status review tribunals (or commissions).</p> <p>Well Lordy Lordy boys, why didn’t anyone think of something like that when, oh, say, American and other countries were putting together the Geneva Conventions and ….</p> <p>oh wait - uh, yeah, they DID already put that in - Sec 5(I think, without looking up, that’s right). The only reason to have to write your “ever thoughtful” heartfelt concern troll op piece is that YOU GUYS SAID that no one had to follow the Geneva Conventions. Is that the closest you can come to a mea culpa? If so - go join Pope Benedict in the line up for the lame excuse prizes. </p> <p>BC now everyone is just a little bit concerned about the fact that the incompetent in office never really made sure that it was “enemy combatants” who were exempted. And international conventions or not, it is flat out a crime (war crime or not) to kidnap people and assault, torture, falsely imprison, etc. them. </p> <p>And the people who solicited that activity - ? </p> <p>Heaven forbid that Congress should call an end to illegally trolling the domestic and international landscape for kidnap victims and hoping that they are actually “enemy combatants” Or that you can cover up what you’ve done if they are not.</p> lotus – I think they do too. But Graham has tried to save their butt on numerous occassions and even got Levin to sign off on and co-sponsor his prior attempts to disenfranchise judicial review (remember the “anti-torture” bill also said – let’s not have the court look at what we’ve been doing in GITMO”

Smart enough to know better makes me angrier than someone like Grassley who is plainly just lost and out of his depth.

When you look at what McCain and Graham are doing now, it needs to be with the filter of what they did with the anti-torture (but hey, let’s not let a court decide, ‘Kay?) prior legislation.

There is also the fact that by not following the Art3 provisions, we took this situation where everyone pretty much looked like a civilian so there were huge issues on having any real knowledge about whether they were or were not enemy combatants, and refused to have section 5 hearings – real, honest to God hearings. So all the things that you “approve” for enemy combatants – one question remains as to whether they are also “vague” or “ok” as applied to wrongfully kidnapped and detained civilians.

Goldsmith, as part of the same brain trust that brought us the “we don’t have to follow the Geneva Conventions if we don’t want to” cartel, has recently joined with his Posner (and even combined, the two of them are a much lesser evil than the Other Posner) and done a WaPo piece about how what is really needed in GITMO is (and here, you have to think they were Gobsmacked by Jove) “real” status review tribunals (or commissions).

Well Lordy Lordy boys, why didn’t anyone think of something like that when, oh, say, American and other countries were putting together the Geneva Conventions and ….

oh wait – uh, yeah, they DID already put that in – Sec 5(I think, without looking up, that’s right). The only reason to have to write your “ever thoughtful” heartfelt concern troll op piece is that YOU GUYS SAID that no one had to follow the Geneva Conventions. Is that the closest you can come to a mea culpa? If so – go join Pope Benedict in the line up for the lame excuse prizes.

BC now everyone is just a little bit concerned about the fact that the incompetent in office never really made sure that it was “enemy combatants” who were exempted. And international conventions or not, it is flat out a crime (war crime or not) to kidnap people and assault, torture, falsely imprison, etc. them.

And the people who solicited that activity – ?

Heaven forbid that Congress should call an end to illegally trolling the domestic and international landscape for kidnap victims and hoping that they are actually “enemy combatants” Or that you can cover up what you’ve done if they are not.

]]>