Login Here
As Congress prepares to make the Bush administration's dream of retroactive telecom immunity come true, I can't help but think of the vast legal gulf between the telecoms who will never need to defend themselves in court, and the Gitmo detainees who may never get the chance to.
On the one hand, the Bush administration, the GOP, and most of the Democratic leadership are working to ensure that the telecoms will be given blanket amnesty after clearing the laughably low hurdle of showing that the most dishonest government in American history told them their actions were lawful.
On the other, the Bush administration, the GOP, and 44 feckless Democrats (12 Sens., 32 Reps.) pushed through the Military Commissions Act which declared that the Gitmo prisoners were not entitled to a trial to contest their detention. Even after the Supreme Court ruled the MCA unconstitutional, President Bush expressed his intent to bypass their ruling legislatively. (Indeed, the MCA itself was just such a response to Hamdan v. Rumsfeld.) In the Republicans' legal bizarro world - which far too many Democrats inhabit - a terrorist suspect's rights are the exact mirror image of a telecom's.
Are the telecoms guilty? I think they probably are, but we'll never know. Are the detainees innocent? I think many of them are, but if the Bush administration gets its way, we'll never know that either.
Throw in the trumped-up, politically tainted prosecutions and convictions of Democrats like Georgia Thompson, Don Siegelman, and Paul Minor, the kid-glove treatment of Republican congressmen and allies like Jack Abramoff's bribees, Halliburton/KBR, and Blackwater, and you have the state of "justice" under the Bush administration. It has as much in common with the true meaning of the word as the Gitmo detainees have in common with the telecoms.
Share This 
Spotlight
Eli, I think that should be “just-us.”
Eli!
Neuro!
I was about to say that “just-us” could also apply to the comments on this thread…
You can Digg it right HERE!!!
4 comments in 17 minutes? What do you want, dood?
The Bushies think more in terms of privilege rather than justice.
Yep, that’s what it’s all about. Who you are, and who you’re affiliated with, is far more important than any law.
There is one group more to blame for the state of our nation more, much more, than any other.
You know who I’m talkin’ about.
The Democratic Party in Congress. If more than a handful are deserving of anything other than a horsewhipping I’d be shocked.
I know one person who will be hearing from up close and personal this Fall.
The vile Pelosi. The worst Speaker of the House in it’s long and varied history. Which other speaker shrugs off the deaths of one million Iraqis at our hands?
Which other Speaker took the Impeachment ‘off the table…’ of a President that even 8 year olds know is a crook, a liar, a thief and a murderous psychopath?
Yep Pelosi is a twofer alright.
I’m also concerned with people in this country getting justice. We have awful problems with AAs and Hispanics getting any sort of justice. The Bushies have no sense of humanity. Where has just plain old kindness gone in this country? Or “there but for the grace…..”.
What did they say, 88 plaintiffs had already died by the time the Exxon Valdez verdict came in.. it wouldn’t have been that generous to them, after all…
Thanks for articulating the injustices. Keep on keeping on.
Watching the insanity of Zimbabwe today. As the whole world watches. Some people willing to die for freedom.
Watching the corruption in our own yard. People here unwilling to protect the freedom we have. Not even conscious of it some. Some willing to sell it out for power and security.
Watching our newly nominated candidate say troubling thing after troubling thing.
“Throw in the trumped-up, politically tainted prosecutions and convictions of Democrats like Georgia Thompson, Don Siegelman, and Paul Minor, the kid-glove treatment of Republican congressmen and allies like Jack Abramoff’s bribees, Halliburton/KBR, and Blackwater, and you have the state of “justice” under the Bush administration.”
the concept of “justice” under the boosh administration has no meaning or reality whatsoever
ian says—On the other, the Bush administration, the GOP, and 44 feckless Democrats (12 Sens., 32 Reps.) pushed through the Military Commissions Act which declared that the….
=======
anybody got a link? i know this one’s been thrown around, but i didn’t save it…….i know a few names, but would like the rest of them…….
No argument here. If you want unkindness, check out the Paul Minor case if you haven’t already.
Eli, u sumz it up
Oh they have contempt for justice, imo.
Senate Roll Call
House Roll Call
I don’t think we should wait until more legislation pops up on the detainees. I think when we contact our Senators on FISA we need to also let them know that we won’t sit still for an end run around the Supreme Court in regards to torture and that if they do it we will have a massive march on Washington.
QUICKVOTE:
Who’s cooler?
A)George Schultz
B)Henry Kissinger
C)Dick Perle
The next AG may be more important to our general well-being than the rest of the people in DC put together.
Which is so interesting because Nancy Pelosi had backed Hillary Clinton for quite some time and even today she considers Hillary to be the most admired. Makes you wonder what Hillary thinks of impeachment? Does she have a table setting for it each night like we do?
I”m really disguted that with all the criminal actions of this administration, they will all walk away scot free. I just don’t believe Obama will want any of these investigations to continue after the election.
Thanks for the roll calls. Will use for my phone calling.
Nice to see Chaffee’s vote.
Snowe was non-vote. Abstaining? Where does she stand?
My guess is that BushCo’s plan is to run out the clock on the detainee trials so that President Closet-Muslim-Terrorist-Sympathizer gets the blame when the prosecutions fall apart for lack of evidence.
oh, I think all three should be put on ice
D) Me
;~P’
thanks, eli…………i didn’t save the vote when it happened…..
and to anyone who wants to know, jane created a firedoglake readers page on flickr.
inspired me to get out a camera someone gave me and create a page……only pics on there now, was going to wait to announce till some of my photoshop art loaded up there..screen said it could take a while for it to load, but then my internet quit while it was loading, so, don’t know if it all did…….will be playing with it next few days before i go out of town, and when i get back will do more……..this is gonna be fun!!!…so, promise to check back in a while????? when i put the really cool stuff up?
i’m d128
facebook didn’t work for me, this is much more how i operate.
http://www.flickr.com/groups/776591@N20/
Schultz. Those other losers don’t stand a chance.
I forgot James Woolsey.
Who would you choose as AG, Twain?
John Edwards - first. Fitz would be great, too. I think John would kick some serious a**.
I could go for that
As long as Fitz is in the DOJ *somewhere* where he can kick some ass. Maybe a special prosecutor in charge of investigating the previous administration…
Good choice, but I’d take Looseheadprop over John.
Unless, of course, she wants to run for Congress.
Schultz. Those other losers don’t stand a chance.
yeah - I love the Peanuts cartoons. Except when Lucy pulls the football away - reminds me too much of politics.
Maybe, but I think they will try whatever they can to keep any more evidence about torture from coming out.
Hey, Eli–
It ain’t over until its over. Give us until July 8 before you start the wailing and tearing of garments and sackcloth and ashes, OK?
Yes, I know what everyone’s saying, but they were saying last week that it was going to be a done deal before the 4th of July break. And look what happened?
Time to mobilize our troops again.
Bob in HI
So, does this mean you’ve got Sen Akaka turned around, ready to vote against FISA?
ianEli says…My point is more about the Bush administration and GOP’s skewed views of justice, but you’re right, I don’t have a lot of faith in the Democrats to do the right thing here.
Heh. I get that *all* the time, even when there are no Ians in the general vicinity.
Of course they will. They do everything they can to keep any evidence of *anything* from coming out.
I don’t have a lot of faith in the Democrats to do the right thing here.
I think that too many will - I wish they’d do the “left” thing a little more often…
great article by Marc Ash… continues your theme, Eli:
http://www.truthout.org/articl.....nd-useless
Look at this distorted WSJ piece about the Greenwald/Olbermann dispute:
Fair-Weather Civil Libertarians
http://online.wsj.com/article/…..lenews_wsj
I see the hand of Rupert Murdoch on this one.
*sigh*
Yeah, I’d say he’s got it about right…
Dugg!
and that is one vile hand
Gonna rally the troops this weekend. Gotta work on both senators.
Bob in HI
– I think they will try whatever they can to keep any more evidence about torture from coming out. –
A helpful nit to pick. Shun the word “torture.” It has a legal conclusion attached, that invites a “we don’t torture” defense.
In place of torture, accuse of cruel and inhuman treatment.
I know it’s a more complex utterance, but if the arguments scrupulously avoid accusation of “torture,” and argue violations of “cruel and inhuman” instead, the ramifications are profound. I don’t expect you dimwits to follow my advice, but there it is.
oo oo me too
Another take on the Greenwald/Olbermann disagreement:
Glenn Greenwald Takes Olbermann’s Recent Defense of Obama & FISA into a Back Room; Only Greenwald Comes Out
http://themoderatevoice.com/me.....comes-out/
Yeah… that was my favorite comment, too.
That and ”democracy is under siege this week”.
But score one for gun lobbyists and manufacturers. They did well this week. So that is the ”safe” constitutional issue to protect??? And Exxon got protected, too.
Feels like an Alice in Wonderland world for sure.
And you want to say to the SC and Congress, if you can’t help us, at least don’t make it worse.
The 2nd Amendment is just about the only piece of the Bill Of Rights still standing…
I think you make an excellent suggestion, however, did you ever think that perhaps more people might take your advice if you didn’t call them dimwits?
I think that’s probably better than the Ten Commandments are doing. :)
Shit!
He had me until you jumped in there
Whew
I don’t expect you dimwits to follow my advice, but there it is.
Call it what you want. I’m way too dim to even remember your advice past the time I finish typing this.
‘Course, the fact that I really don’t care to remember your advice might have something to do with it…
I think these constitutional issues are going to separate the boys from the men, the girls from the women, among the progressives. I think the boys and girls will landslide, sadly.
Eli, eloquent post and sad too. Yes, but not karmic law. But, karma aside, who they are with all their power and influence will not exempt them from old age and someday leaving this world.
– however, did you ever think that perhaps more people might take your advice if you didn’t call them dimwits? –
Aye. I figured to draw a reaction. I don’t plan to deliver a repetitive chorus, and it’s my experience that without a repetitive chorus, the advice goes unheeded.
I’ll stand by, mute, and see if there is a change in rhetoric (i.e., dropping “torture” in favor of “cruel and unusual”). Proof will be in the pudding. If “torture” remains the prominent accusation, then the accusers are in fact dimwits.
I yearn for a Daniel Ellsberg of the telecom “papers”
True, but most of them will continue to live very comfortable lives and never, ever face any negative consequences for their actions. It’s frustrating - I guess all I can do is hope that they come back as dung beetles or male Emperor Penguins or something.
So sayeth cboldt
So shall it be
I’m pretty sure that it’s possible to offer a divergent opinion without calling everyone else dimwits…
thatch
Well, the good news is that they can’t it with them, and the bad news is that they can’t take their relatives with them either.
– I’m way too dim to even remember your advice past the time I finish typing this. –
I don’t believe that. And if you let your emotional reaction to my “dimwit” observation to rule, then you are putting emotion ahead of reason.
I’ll repeat one time, if the label “cruel and unusual” is substituted for “torture,” the ramifications are substantial.
Not everyone else
IanEli.Only those who don’t agree.
;~P’
southern and nonplussed-left you a message at 68 in warmonger thread two flights of stairs down.
and sorry eli, not ian, brain reverted to the three letter name that i new best, know an ian.
Sometimes it’s the delivery, not the content, dimwit.
In an interveiw Obama stated that he would instruct his AG to look into these matters and if there was criminal intent, he would have him pursue it. I’m sure Republican’s will say all of these actions were “done to defend” the nation, without criminal intent.
I used to think Frank Capra movies, about the stand-up hero against the corrupt and the obtuse were exaggerations.
Remember the movie “Z” in which one had this cathartic high just before the reckoning whereby corruption prevails. Play the “democracy” theater until it starts to work and then take off the gloves and pull out the carpet.
The problem is, now instead of everyone thinking, “Wow, what an interesting point - I’d like to hear more about those ramifications,” they’re thinking, “Jeez, what a dick.”
Was this some kind of Vulcan initiation test or something?
duh–knew best, not new best, i’m multi-tasking trying to get awesome art up on my flickr page……not working.
Excellent point. On another subject, the Addington and Woo appearances before the HJC, Kevin Drum made the point that the members of the committee knew they were dealing with two that would be difficult to question. That they should have allowed their most adroit member (Artur Davis perhaps?) to have a full hour rather than each of them getting 10 minutes. The results could have been different if they had.
They say the ends justify the means, I say they’re one and the same.
At first I thought this post would be about the Extreme Court. But what you said in the first paragraph, Eli, said it all.
Or they just plain disagree with you because they know that whatever is said about the treatment of the detainees the Bush supporters will come up with a BS defense to pretend that they treated them humanely.
I agree with you. However the comment from Obama didn’t fill me with much hope.
and trying to eat at the same time.
variety of marinated chunks and pie slices of tofu from whole foods that i had in the freezer and a croissant………man, i love tofu.
and trying to get the tiger cat to come in………i just chased off a reallly cute baby raccoon from the feeders when the sun was setting…….darnit. cute, but they can’t hang here. so,. there is no justice to be ontopic.
telcos knew what they were doing, should go to jail for it…..
tortureres knew what they were doing, death penalty.
Well, if it’s a true statement, I’d say it’s a positive. I just don’t really believe it. I expect it’ll be like the congressional hearings, where they just can’t figure out how to get around the bogus claims of executive privilege.
Yes, but wouldn’t these people parse “cruel and inhumane treatment” ad nauseum?
Not nominated yet. ‘Presumptive nominee’ is more accurate.
I think you’re absolutely right.
Fixed for ya!
Although, I guess I’m too dimwitted to to decide if it’s “Inhumane” or “Unusual”
cboldt, please help!
justice is bling.
“Cruel and inhuman” is the term of art.
Sorry about the sloppy dropping of cruel and unusal
They can hang it around their necks and show it off?
Gold-plated rope?
Can you explain what it is that makes that particular phrase special? It sounds like you’re referencing something specific, but it doesn’t ring any bells for me.
Cruel & Unusual
Cruel & Inhumane
Torture
Split hairs much?
OT — Hey, PW, if you’re around, here’s a don’t miss story about Coleman’s digs in DeeCee over at Josh’s place.
bonger at 86–yeah, i just saw that, i need to catch up on the lingo…….haven’t read all the comments yet, but i will take cboldt’s advice on most anything……
like on the lehrer report when they said ’insurgents’ killed americans, what happened to ’armed combatants’?
ok, found it, cboldt at 50-In place of torture, accuse of cruel and inhuman treatment.
do you mean inhuman or inhumane?
still think we need both descriptors………treating someone in a cruel and inhuman(inhumane) manner is torture, so, you kinda need both phrases to completely describe what they did…..and are doing.
a most icelandic post eli, thanx for writing it
Heh. Thanks, perris!
eli aka ian at 77–They say the ends justify the means, I say they’re one and the same.
i was taught the means determine the ends, so, the means matter more in the end……….
– still think we need both descriptors………treating someone in a cruel and inhuman(inhumane) manner is torture, so, you kinda need both phrases to completely describe what they did…..and are doing. –
NO!
The term “torture” has a narrow legal meaning, and your opponents are applying the legal meaning. In the law, “cruel and inhuman” is different from “torture”
Use the force, Luke.
“Cruel and inhuman” (not inhumane, I just checked the statutes)
“just us” for the floating gulags….and Barry who seeks to rule them…
Julia has Late NIte upstairs!
Late Night FDL: Mc(Anheuser-)Busch family values
just hit the wall.
check out the flicker page in a few days or so, will have cool stuff on there soon.
right now just normal kinds of pics.
uploaded a bunch of photoshop stuff this afternoon, don’t know why it isn’t there, am waiting on an answer from them.
am going out of town next week, if stuff not on there in next few days, will do it when i get back.
take care pups.
Beer?
I’m there!
I have to disagree. Torture is an ugly word with a meaning like no other word. If I kick my dog it’s cruel and inhuman but it is not torture unless I do it hour after hour. The word used should be as ugly as the act itself.
I think part of what might be going on here is a conflict between legal objectives and messaging objectives. “Cruel and inhuman” may be the sweet-spot phrase to use for purposes of making a case against these criminals, but “torture” is the word that resonates in people’s brains.
So perhaps “cruel and inhuman” is best used when speaking to the criminals directly, or in the context of congressional hearings.
Nice wrap up. TY, Kirk.
– Can you explain what it is that makes that particular phrase special? It sounds like you’re referencing something specific, but it doesn’t ring any bells for me. –
War crimes and Geneva Convention statutory language.
Thanks, that’s what I was looking for.
safe travels, dmac
cboldt, is the “cruel and unusual” phrase derived from the Eighth Amendment and the following?
(from teh wiki)
– think part of what might be going on here is a conflict between legal objectives and messaging objectives. –
There’s an intersection there, and you boneheads are missing an opportunity by overreaching. You want to call it torture, knock yourself out. It’s a stupid tactic, and will not get you where you want to go.
If you accuse the admin of cruel and inhuman, you have them over a barrel.
don’t worry cboldt at 97, i getcha, i will look up what you’re talking about, and i will use the force…….if not for you i would never have understood half of the things i write and call about…..
thanks.
those of you who haven’t checked out cboldt’s blog, i suggest you do, but have a pen and paper handy. go all the way back to when mccain was trying to avoid being accountable for his fec violation……..
nitey nite.
You really should lay off the dimwit bonehead stuff. And I mean that not in a I-will-strike-you-down-with-my-hammer-of-fury way (I actually have no mod/admin powers whatsoever), but rather in a people-will-tune-out-your-important-message-if-you-keep-calling-them-stupid way.
delivery
content
delivery (sux)
content (very worthwhile)
Which one gets the attention?
boneheads - just because we disagree with you? I think not.
Yeah, that’s the problem. If you sprinkle in insults, all people will hear is “Blah blah blah blah dimwit blah blah blah blah bonehead blah blah your stupid minds, stupid stupid!”
The horse is dead, methinks.
nite
– you really should lay off the dimwit bonehead stuff. And I mean that not in a I-will-strike-you-down-with-my-hammer-of-fury way (I actually have no mod/admin powers whatsoever), but rather in a people-will-tune-out-your-important-message-if-you-keep-calling-them-stupid way. –
I don’t give a shit. If your skin is that thin, if the straight point is rejected because I happen to notice that people don’t notice (or reject) the straight point, so be it.
Tell you what. You take the message, if you believe in it, and be my gentle messenger. Because I don’t have the patience to convince people who think it’s better to yell “TORTURE TORTURE TORTURE” that they are reduced to background noise.
Like this?
Patience is a virtue.
trying to explain something to a varied group is a frustrating task……….cboldt has been here for many days posting about the senate and helping for more hours than anyone……….
i believe a break should be given here.
i used the phrase herding cats a while back and got slammed, but it is……
chill.
cboldt, you can call me a dimwit and a bonehead, but ”just don’t call me stupid”, stupid…..
: )
nite.