CIA holds terror suspects in secret prisons

[The Real Hawkeye]

The New Barbary pirates are that--pirates. They are not subject to due process under U.S. or international law. By declaring themselves free of civility, they have identified themselves as targets in a free fire zone.

This, along with shooting them behind the ear with a .22, is exactly what the CIA SHOULD have been doing years ago!

If you, as a member of some legit agent of the law or military, are engaged in battle with Barbary pirates, you are under no obligation to arrest them and give them a trial. You can blow them out of the water and watch them drown. That's not what we're dealing with here. Many of these people were apprehended because someone was tortured into revealing their names in connection with a terror organization. That is to say, they are suspected of being terrorists. This is not a Barbary pirate situation. People are never subject to due process. It is the United States Federal Government that is subject to due process requirements, and this regardless of the citizenship of who is suspected. The Constitution does not say "No American citizen shall be deprived of life or liberty without due process of law." No, it says "No person shall be ..." It is a limit on what the Federal Government may do. It is not the granting of a right to those fortunate enough to be born American citizens.

 

[Ezekiel]

If we have to let the crazy uncle who lives in the apartment over our garage go out at night and shoot the crackheads down the street...

What disturbs me is the lack of concern over the precedent, not just the "act".

What happens when the metaphorical "crazy uncle" turns his sights on the home? You have unleashed, accepted and coddled the whim of a crazy person...

 

[El Tejon]

Ez, that was exactly the Founders concern! That's why we have the Second Amendment in order to defend ourselves from our government.

Precendent with Barbary pirates? Ever wonder how that phrase ". . . to the shores of Tripoli. . ." got in the Marine Corps hymn.

Real, Supremes decided that issue in the Mexi kidnap case (which had great 2A dicta, btw). Pirates, no due process for you!

 

[roo_ster]

Folks Are Surprised by This?

I just always kind of assumed this was occurring. Our government would be remiss in their responsibilities were they not. It has become impossible to bring the poor lambs CONUS due to the blissninnies insistence on mandatory footrubs for fedayeen*.

Also, it surely is a whole lot more easy on terrorists/insurgents/what-have-yous than summary execution, which is what they have earned under the various conventions & accords we have signed on to**. Hey, whadda say we leave it up to the captured terrorist/insurget/etc: summary execution or whisked away to a secret hidey-hole for an indefinite period?


* We just don't have enough service members trained to give quality footrubs. I mean, if they started tickling Mohammed, the wrong folks might think it was systematic torture.

** Not mere technicalities, as some uninformed poster wrote. I have posted the text in some past thread. Do a search and find out the facts.

 

[sturmruger]

This kind of stuff makes me feel good to be an American! I love to see our goverment being proactive about terrorists.

 

[Don't Tread On Me]

This kind of stuff makes me feel good to be an American! I love to see our goverment being proactive about terrorists.

Oh yea sure. Until the definition of "terrorist" changes....Folks at WACO could easily been considered "terrorists."

Law-abiding militias could be called terrorists.


YOU someday, could be considered a terrorist because of your political ideology, your choice to own firearms, or maybe even your religion.


History is on my side in proving that this does happen.

 

[blackguns]

Ok I have been lurking for a while and this thread made me register....

I have read this thread front to back and agree with a lot of the idealistic notions I have read.

I feel that the constitution and bill of rights simply declare rights that are or should be inherent for all mankind. I don't think that splitting hairs as far as location and citizenship has any bearing on right or wrong.....just cause someone is Canadian or Iraqi doesn't change the fact that having the CIA snatch someone off the street and cutting fingers off until they talk is wrong.

However, I remeber exactly where I was on 9/11 when I saw what was happening, a very cold rage still boils in my soul for the terrorists that did that to completly inoccent people.

If I thought that I could stop that from happening by getting information out of a person I don't think the high ideals of the founding fathers or natural law would even slow me down.

I would cheerfully inflict great amounts of pain on someone I felt had designs on another 9/11 if that meant that I could save the lives of innocent people.

In the final analysis my rights, your rights and the rights of all others will at some point conflict. The only result of that will be that someone looses.

If you instigate a life threatening danger to myself or my family I get to exercise my rights by defending my life and potentially ending yours. It must be strictly controled and regulated but when it boils down to it......it is no different in international relations.

Terroists pose a mortal threat to our nation and many nations. We didn't start this, but we need to end it.

Any other outcome will put us in greater danger in the future. You go to war to defeat an enemy, don't candy A** it. Go flat out without quarter until it is done.
To defend the lives of our loved ones most of us wouldn't give a second thought to shooting an attacker. Why is this so different?

Where will the next attack be? Maybe the CIA is defending your family.......or mine...

I knew people that walked into those towers and never walked out.

They say the ends shouldn't justify the means, I bet most would change thier tune if the "ends" was defending a loved one.

 

[goosegunner]

However, I remeber exactly where I was on 9/11 when I saw what was happening, a very cold rage still boils in my soul for the terrorists that did that to completly inoccent people.

So, you decided that risking a few inoccent people beeing in a secret prison for life was a great way to respond??

If I thought that I could stop that from happening by getting information out of a person I don't think the high ideals of the founding fathers or natural law would even slow me down.

I would cheerfully inflict great amounts of pain on someone I felt had designs on another 9/11 if that meant that I could save the lives of innocent people.

Well how many innocent people will it be OK to 'cut fingers of until they talk' before you find a real terrorist.

 

[blackguns]

Yeah,

That's the problem with idealism or any "absolute" measures. Part of me truely feels that way. If I KNEW for certian that I could prevent an attack that would be easy.

Does anyone have a problem with killing terrorists? I doubt most people would want the CIA to pass on the opportunity to take out Osama.

I agree that hurting innocents of any race, color or crede is unacceptable, I am from the crowd that would rather set 3 guilty men free than send one innocent man to prision. That's why the system is setup the way it is.

But when faced with the responsibilty of preventing terrorist attacks on a nation and it's interests where do you draw the line between preserving the rights of the "suspect" and preserving the life of the innocent citizen of YOUR country? That's the stakes of the "game". There is a well funded and obviously very capable and highly motivated group of people in this world that would love nothing more than to publicly kill you or your family in some spectacular fashion. Just because it hasn't happend doesn't mean they have stopped trying.

Is a cell phone call to a known terrorist enough to "justify" an interrogation?

How about financial records? Being caught with explosives? Being seen in the background of a terrorist training video?

What? Where is the line? What is the evidence that is required before this person is considerd a criminal, outside the expectations of society and therfore outside of it's protections?

Society locks up people for life all around the world for taking one life. Yet we are outraged when someone gets "locked up for life" for being a part of one of the larger crimes in history?

I know, I know......we all get squeamish (myself included) when big brother steps in and gets all draconian, passing a sentence without due process, using less than pleasent methods to extract information from people etc.....we don't like the sounds of that, we are free in the west... that's the very thing that has made us a target.

I am playing devils advocate here because talking about our government and expressing opinons about it is the pinnacle of a free society. This is one of the greatest things we can do. We don't like what we see, we can change the guard in our political capitals. And be completly free to live with the consequences.

 

[Mongo the Mutterer]

Sanctuary

Bill Whittle at EjectEjectEject.com has a two part essay called Sanctuary here, which I think is absolutely excellent.

Here is my view. When the guilty elect to "blend in" with the innocent, and the innocent allow it to happen, the innocent are no longer innocent. If they are caught in the crossfire, so be it.

They should have cleaned up their neighborhoods or picked different friends.

We can help them clean up their neighborhoods.

We had 3,000 innocents lose their lives in the the 9/11 attacks, and hundreds more killed in various and sundry attacks. If we herd up some innocents and they get misidentified as BGs, I'll deduct it from the innocent total we have lost.

Oh, and if you are going to flame me with the 100,000 number the left keeps floating around, please do me a favor and give your claim some attribution...

 

[Don't Tread On Me]

Well, the 100,000 number, at least when referring to the innocent Iraqi casualities is probably pretty close to accurate. The government and pentagon deserves to have numbers like these slung at them so long as they BAN Iraqi hospitals from reporting any statistics....hmmm why would they do that?


Besides, we all use estimates don't we? We use them to push our concealed carry agenda. We use them to make points against gun-control. Were there exactly 20,000,000 million killed by Stalin? Or 18? Does it matter?

 

[Mongo the Mutterer]

Don't know. But I do know about the 10 million Ukranians he killed in the winter of 1932 - 33 which the New York Times covered up for him...

 

[Don't Tread On Me]

That's because they were FDR's chronies. FDR was in love with Stalin, and his policies.


Sounds absurd doesn't it? But it's the truth. And it wasn't taught in public (government) schools.

 

[MikeIsaj]

I have personally experienced and survived two terrorist actions against the U.S. I have no problem with secret prisons and whatever they do there to these animals. Let me know where they are and I'll gladly come work off some long held anger.

Don't Tread On Me; Let me know what you think after you spend a few days digging your friends bodies out of the rubble.

 

[The Real Hawkeye]

Is a cell phone call to a known terrorist enough to "justify" an interrogation?

You are missing the point. You should have put the quotation marks around the word "interrogation," instead of "justify." If it were a mere arrest and questioning, that would be perfectly ok. We are not talking about that. We are talking about inflicting punishment prior to a determination of guilt according to some legitimate legal process. The punishment consists of loss of liberty combined with torture and isolation. We don't even allow that for people who have been judged guilty of mass murder by a jury of their peers after a fair trial, let alone those who have been merely implicated in a crime. You, like so many, fail to grasp that governments cannot generally be trusted to determine guilt in a crime. That's why we have juries, the presumption of innocents, the right to face your accuser, to know what crime you've been accused of, to have an attorney present during questioning, etc. These are not just nice ideals. These are what we live and die by as Americans. These are principles, in the defense of which, untold thousands of my countrymen have gone to the grave. You treat them so lightly that it makes me sick to read your posts, and the posts of those who think like you. You do a grave dishonor to our forefathers. You need to rethink your position.

 

[The Real Hawkeye]

I have personally experienced and survived two terrorist actions against the U.S. I have no problem with secret prisons and whatever they do there to these animals. Let me know where they are and I'll gladly come work off some long held anger.

Don't Tread On Me; Let me know what you think after you spend a few days digging your friends bodies out of the rubble.

Were I violently mugged by a Hispanic gang, I'd probably want to hunt down everyone who even looked Hispanic and shoot them dead. This is the reason we don't allow people to seek their own justice in our society. It usually results in an injustice. Because you have been harmed by real terrorists, you would be willing to kill or torture anyone who has even been accused of being connected with terrorism. Same thing.

 

[coylh]

MikeIsaj, it works both ways.

"I have no problem bombing Americans. They killed my family. I would gladly kill myself and many Americans to work off some long held anger. Let me know what you think after you spend a few days digging your friends bodies out of the rubble."

 

[roo_ster]

One Thing Is Not Like The Other...

Originally Posted by MikeIsaj
I have personally experienced and survived two terrorist actions against the U.S. I have no problem with secret prisons and whatever they do there to these animals. Let me know where they are and I'll gladly come work off some long held anger.

Don't Tread On Me; Let me know what you think after you spend a few days digging your friends bodies out of the rubble.

Were I violently mugged by a Hispanic gang, I'd probably want to hunt down everyone who even looked Hispanic and shoot them dead. This is the reason we don't allow people to seek their own justice in our society. It usually results in an injustice. Because you have been harmed by real terrorists, you would be willing to kill or torture anyone who has even been accused of being connected with terrorism. Same thing.

Uh, not same thing. Being hispanic is not something you can control. You just...are. Being a terrorist or aiding terrorists is an action over which the person has a choice. And choices have consequences...

This also applies to coylh's repsonse, as being born on American soil is another accident of birth.

 

[coylh]

jfruser, does this one make more sense?

"I was beaten and raped by a Catholic priest. Being Catholic is a choice and choices have consequences, so I'm going to kill a lot of Catholics."

 

[Don't Tread On Me]

I have personally experienced and survived two terrorist actions against the U.S. I have no problem with secret prisons and whatever they do there to these animals. Let me know where they are and I'll gladly come work off some long held anger.

Don't Tread On Me; Let me know what you think after you spend a few days digging your friends bodies out of the rubble.

Hey no problem! Let's throw away our liberties because you dug up your friends after a terrorist attack. What a novel idea.


I bet they'd be ecstatic to find out that their deaths amounted to limited freedoms in America if you could speak to them today. Jeesh, If my life was ended by terrorists, the last thing I'd want is for those who remain living in this nation to throw away their rights because of that. If I am going to die, at least use my death as a call for liberty, not oppression.


Now, spare me the strawman argument please. I never argued that we should be kinder or gentler to the terrorists. All I am saying is, don't detain them in secret prisons for years, in a manner that violates everything that America is suppose to be.


Sentence them, free them, or exectute them. Don't hold them indefinately, don't torture them.

 

[antarti]

These are principles, in the defense of which, untold thousands of my countrymen have gone to the grave. You treat them so lightly that it makes me sick to read your posts, and the posts of those who think like you. You do a grave dishonor to our forefathers. You need to rethink your position.

+P+

You can trust our principles of government, or the people in government. Guess which one won't let you down?

I've been a few minutes from meeting my maker thanks to terrorists (Chechen lunatics with car bombs). I despise them, and "despise" doesn't even begin to do justice to how I feel about them.

So now you can begin to imagine my indignation. When we do the equivalent of the Afghans locking up people in cargo containers and leaving them to rot, or worse, torture them and then leave them to rot, without any jurisprudence or even oversight.

 

[gulogulo1970]

As long as there are no American citizens in them I really don't have a problem with it.

Really, I didn't think this was news. Everybody deep down knows, we have places where we hold and "talk" to our captive enemies.

 

[blackguns]

hawkeye

I am obviously conflicted about this topic, I can see both sides. I feel strongly about the inherent rights of all of humankind. I also fear any government that has the attitude that we kill them all and let God sort them out.

If we had a way to absolutely determine guilt and only persue those found to be guilty we would. How do we make that decision? Juries? Many a jury has convicted an innocent man. The system will never be perfect. If there are only a few hundred suspects in these prision as the story reports then i would contend that the US justice system has put more innocent people behind bars than the CIA.

And just an FYI....it is nieve to believe that this hasn't been going on for a very long time. Do you honestly think that suspected spies during WWII weren't treated in this manner?

We rounded up thousands of Japaneese AMERICANS after Pearl Harbor. We deprived them of their freedom, we isolated them from society and we interrogated them for information.

The world is not all candy canes and lollypops. Ideals are great and valuable, they serve to show us where we should strive to be. However, how do you reconcile two opposing values. Do you capture a terrorist leader, give him a lawyer and put him into a justice system that could take years to provide any outcome while his partners are blowing up trains, knocking down buildings, planting roadside bombs and blasting nightclubs around the world? That person has knowledge that could prevent those attacks and dealths. Does the purportrator of those crimes have the same rights as the victims? Should he? Should that terrorist get to sit warm and fed in a prision cell in Iowa all the while watching his handy work on CNN?

It's an honest question....I'm not trying to "make you sick". I'm asking what should we do with people that we are "sure" are terrorists. (sure is in quotes because I admit that we might never be truely sure)

I agree that many good people have died defending our principals, that in and of itself make them very valuable. I believe our "rights" are inherrent in all mankind, they are natrual rights. I also believe that the world as a whole has very little respect for those rights.

How do we protect our own while dealing with a brutal and evil world?

Think you have a better way? Lay it on us.

Use your disgust of my opinion as fuel and light me a path to a more enlightened way.

 

[antarti]

Do you capture a terrorist leader, give him a lawyer and put him into a justice system that could take years to provide any outcome while his partners are blowing up trains, knocking down buildings, planting roadside bombs and blasting nightclubs around the world?

...

How do we protect our own while dealing with a brutal and evil world?

Think you have a better way? Lay it on us.

I can only speak for myself, TRH is far more eloquent than I.

Can't we admit there is a WIDE GULF between "giving terrorists access to ACLU/Lawyers/The Media/3-squares/ etc. and opening detention centers where the public has no idea who may (or may not) be interred, and for what reasons, and for how long?

"Congressional oversight" is already a term that (deservedly) attracts laughs of derision, but when even they can't get access beyond "generalities" granted only to 2 members, don't you think we've gone a little too far?

Only those pleased at the TSA, Patriot I & II, and all the other abominations we have inflicted on OURSELVES in the name of "War on Terror" could possibly applaud this. It is one of the most UN-American things I've ever heard of.

Remember, when the Income Tax was first passed, it was levied on those making something like $500,000/yr and up, and only taxed them at a flat 5%. I may have the historical data slightly wrong, but I think you get the gist of where I am going with this. It will be abused. Count on it. At least the income tax was done in plain sight, these Gulags aren't.

Do you not value your right to know what your government is doing? Wouldn't we all applaud if we could see the progress being made?

On the flip side, do you really think any jury would acquit a real terrorist?

I am really trying to make this simple, I just don't have the words.

 

[The Real Hawkeye]

The world is not all candy canes and lollypops.

Indeed not. The world is a damned dangerous and deadly place, with lots of grave evil, most of it perpetrated by governments on their own people. The depth of the evil done by governments is hardly imaginable, and this is why I take our Constitution so deadly seriously. It was designed with this very fact in mind. No, the world is not all candy canes and lollipops. What an absurd suggestion. It is precisely because the world is a damned serious and deadly place that we keep our government in the chains of the Constitution. Failure to do so, as the Founders well knew, is a mistake you only get to make once, and at your own almost certain peril.