Tag Archives: war on terror

OK, this is change, but I can’t say I believe in it

8 Jul

The Obama justice system – Glenn Greenwald

Highlighting not mine.
[…] Spencer Ackerman yesterday attended a Senate hearing at which the DOD’s General Counsel, Jeh Johnson, testified.  As Ackerman highlighted, Johnson actually said that even for those detainees to whom the Obama administration deigns to give a real trial in a real court, the President has the power to continue to imprison them indefinitely even if they are acquitted at their trial.  About this assertion of “presidential post-acquittal detention power” — an Orwellian term (and a Kafka-esque concept) that should send shivers down the spine of anyone who cares at all about the most basic liberties — Ackerman wrote, with some understatement, that it “moved the Obama administration into new territory from a civil liberties perspective.”
Law professor Jonathan Turley was more blunt:  “The Obama Administration continues its retention and expansion of abusive Bush policies — now clearly Obama policies on indefinite detention.” […]

I cannot express how disgusted I am. Read the entire thing, if you have the stomach for it.

Tags: , ,

War with Iran in 3 weeks?

10 Oct

Does Bush Think War with Iran Is Preordained?

My opinion? Probably. And Chris Hedges seems to think so as well. Follow the link to read this very important and terrifying article. Or just click the cut below…

Continue reading →

Tags: ,

Real investigative reporting

27 Sep

Olbermann accepts President Clinton’s challenge to assess Bush record on terror in his first 8 months

It doesn’t look good for Bush, and seems to support Clinton’s assertions. Watch it for yourself.

Tags: , ,

Even Spy vs. Spy knows it’s true

24 Sep

Iraq War Hurting U.S. Terror Fight, Creating More Terrorists

Spy Agencies Say Iraq War Hurting U.S. Terror Fight
By Karen DeYoung
Excerpt

Tags: , ,

Do we want to be “the moral equals of Torquemada or the Jacobins”?

15 Sep

Bush Is Gonna Take His Iron Maiden and Go Home:

Here’s how you know you’ve lost your war: Chair of the House Homeland Security Committee Peter King said this about detainee treatment legislation: “If we capture bin Laden tomorrow and we have to hold his head under water to find out when the next attack is going to happen, we ought to be able to do it.” Let’s put it this way: it’s one thing to say that in a one-in-a-million Jack Bauer-esque situation, you’d probably break the law and a few fingers to get the info you need so the nuke doesn’t go off. But it’s another thing entirely to say that you wanna make it the law.
< Cut for language >
This is what we’ve been reduced to as a nation: arguing with each other over how far we can push our notions of “civilized” and still feel good about ourselves. How low can we go? ‘Cause, see, once you take one step down on a ladder, the next rung is right there, and the bottom gets ever closer.

There’s much more at the link above, but as always, he’s called the Rude Pundit for a reason.

Tags: , ,

Interesting analysis of Hamdan v. Rumsfeld

3 Jul

The significance of Hamdan v. Rumsfeld by Glenn Greenwald

States Mr. Greenwald: For the past 10 years, I was a litigator in NYC specializing in First Amendment challenges, civil rights cases, and corporate and securities fraud matters. I am the author of the New York Times Best-Selling book, How Would A Patriot Act?, a critique of the Bush administration’s use of executive power, released May, 2006.

Excerpt from the actual analysis:

Nonetheless, opponents of monarchical power should celebrate this decision. It has been some time since real limits were placed on the Bush administration in the area of national security. The rejection of the President’s claims to unlimited authority with regard to how Al Qaeda prisoners are treated is extraordinary and encouraging by any measure. The decision is an important step towards re-establishing the principle that there are three co-equal branches of government and that the threat of terrorism does not justify radical departures from the principles of government on which our country was founded.

There are several other salient points made, regarding how the current regime could go about ignoring this (by making legislative changes), as well as what this means for the central defense offered to date to support the illegal wiretapping and surveillance schemes. Well worth the read.

In addition, it looks like I have found yet another book I need to read. (And to try and find it in a library near you, click here.)

Tags: , , ,

Supreme Court ruling – Hamdan v. Rumsfeld

30 Jun

. . . For three years, Administration lawyers have argued that the Geneva Conventions don’t apply to its “war on terror”. That argument is finished. . . .

A President Rebuked by Bruce Shapiro in The Nation

Continue reading →

Tags: , , ,