Return of the Gulag

November 2, 2005 - 9:21am

The rationalization is always the same. For the security of the homeland, or the fatherland, or whateverland, the government needs the freedom to act with no "interference" or accountability.

NEW YORK (AP) -- The CIA has been hiding and interrogating some of its most important al Qaeda captives at a Soviet-era compound in Eastern Europe, according to U.S. and foreign officials familiar with the arrangement, the Washington Post reported.

The secret facility is part of a covert prison system set up by the CIA nearly four years ago that at various times has included sites in eight countries, including Thailand, Afghanistan and several democracies in Eastern Europe, as well as a small center at the Guantanamo Bay prison in Cuba, according to current and former intelligence officials and diplomats from three continents, the paper said Tuesday....

The existence and locations of the facilities -- referred to as "black sites" in classified White House, CIA, Justice Department and congressional documents -- are known to only a handful of officials in the United States and, usually, only to the president and a few top intelligence officers in each host country, it said.

The CIA and the White House, citing national security concerns and the value of the program, have dissuaded Congress from demanding that the agency answer questions in open testimony about the conditions under which captives are held. Virtually nothing is known about who is kept in the facilities, what interrogation methods are employed with them, or how decisions are made about whether they should be detained or for how long....

Although the CIA will not acknowledge details of its system, intelligence officials defend the agency's approach, arguing that the successful defense of the country requires that the agency be empowered to hold and interrogate suspected terrorists for as long as necessary and without restrictions imposed by the U.S. legal system or even by the military tribunals established for prisoners held at Guantanamo Bay....

Click here to read the whole story

The Gulag

We all have our own reasons for respecting the basic, unalienable rights bestowed on humanity by the Creator. In my case, my spiritual tradition will not allow me to view humanity and human rights along national lines. My love of democracy has taught me that everyone deserves a fair trial of some kind. My God, what if someone is in there by mistake? What if someone grabbed the wrong person? And even if some of those detained are guilty, do we not still bear some responsibility to see that basic human rights are upheld?

Secret prisons, secretive interrogation methods, no accountability, no provisions made for even the most basic of human rights. We treat serial killers better than this. Is this my country, the land that I love? Is this the United States of America, the beacon of hope and freedom and the champion of individual rights?

What the hell is going on here?

rlp

Submitted by Anonymous User on November 2, 2005 - 9:36am.

If not for God's strength, wisdom, and love we will always become what we despise. Somebody smart said that. I know people who have attended President Bush's prayer breakfasts. They say he is not capable of this stuff. I believe them, but marvel at the people in government who somehow rise to author evil in all our names.

Shaken in the flesh, more assured the spirit -- Raider

Submitted by Anonymous User on November 5, 2005 - 12:40am.

And you think Bush is innocent in all this? You believe those who say he is not capable? Rather, he is culpable (as are we all), but he more so because of his position.

Oh, Bush is quite capable, of this, and more. Stay tuned.

Submitted by Scog Blog on November 2, 2005 - 9:38am.

Here in the UK the government is seeking approval for new legislation to allow people to be held for 3 months without being charged. They argue that this is the only way to protect our country from those who seek to destroy us. Since July 7th when suicide bombers blew up the London transport system the government have hyped up the fear element so that we will sit back and allow our freedom to be eroded.
There is no justification for holding a potentially innocent person for up to three months without proper access to the courts and legal system. If our governments are protecting us from terrorists who is protecting us from the government?

Submitted by Scog Blog on November 14, 2005 - 4:36am.

Hurrah! The Government was defeated in the House of Commons and the 90 days will not become law. MP's voted for 28 days up from the current 14. Not great but better than 90.

Submitted by Kevin Powell on November 2, 2005 - 10:31am.

RLP,

This article made its way into our local newspaper here in Lethbridge. Terrible stuff. The USA has the opportunity to show the world was freedom looks like. That freedom "works." That tyranny has no place in a free and democratic society. Sadly, by cases such as this one, it's almost as if some elements in the gov't are conceding that freedom doesn't do what the American constitution and the founding father say it does.

kgp

Submitted by mattman on November 2, 2005 - 10:55am.

For me, such information only confirms what I have long argued in the face of Christian nationalism. The United States may have a disproportionate number of its citizens who profess a trust in Jesus Christ. But a nation that puts people to death and operates facilities such as the one you name, does not follow the Christian imperative not to return evil for evil, and should not be deluded into thinking it is a "Christian" nation.

Submitted by Anonymous User on November 2, 2005 - 10:57am.

I used to have a spiritual mentor who was a criminal defense attorney. I learned from her that her job was about ensuring that the rights of her clients were respected whether or not the client was guilty. Very wise woman.

Stan

Submitted by scout on November 2, 2005 - 11:41am.

"Whoever claims a right for himself must respect the like right in another" -- James Bryce

In political philosophy, this is the fundamental principal of democracy.  Sadly, when faced with fear, we quickly forget this notion.  Although ironic, the only thing that will keep us honest is the democratic system with which we govern.  Let's hope that those of us within this system will have the courage to face our fears come midterm elections.   
Sara

Submitted by Anonymous User on November 2, 2005 - 12:30pm.

"What the hell is going on here?"

My sentiments exactly, on an almost daily basis, followed by panic that we won't be able to turn things around for the better. I'm far more afraid of my fellow Americans these days than I am of terrorists -- and so very very sad. Reading your blog brings me back to hope, to reality, and away from fear. Thanks.

btw did you see the episode of 'commander in cheif' where they tried to deal with this issue?

Kristina

Submitted by Wandering Willow on November 2, 2005 - 1:27pm.

I do think that more of us need to post articles such as this, to be sure that every American is aware of the radically scary changes going on over the last couple of years. I don't know the answer, except to bring continual awareness of these hidden activities and make them as public as possible. It's very bad news, and its in our hands - as average citizens, as the general populace - to bring the country back into balance. (Wish I knew exactly how to do that!)

http://blogs.salon.com/0003947
www.wanderingwillowblog.blogspot.com

Submitted by Anonymous User on November 2, 2005 - 1:35pm.

And Jesus wept.

It's like the President and his cronies skipped the part in their Bibles that said "Whatsoever you do unto the least of these ... "

Submitted by The Token Catholic on November 2, 2005 - 2:05pm.

Or they conveniently forgot about passages such as yesterday's Gospel...

Submitted by JoKeR on November 2, 2005 - 2:08pm.

In the nation building computer game civilization there are multiple types of government, each with advantages and disadvantages.  One of the advantages presented for Democracy as a government type is that there is no corruption since the dealings of the government are open for inspection so that any attempt at corruption would be noticed.  While this presents a simplified view of politics, it is clear that power can lead to corruption and one of the best antidotes to that corruption is sunshine, letting the actions of the government be freely observed. All attempts to keep government activities secret and hidden from outside review need to be kept to a minimum and controlled as tightly as possible in order to prevent abuses of the power we, the people, have bestowed on our leaders.
Peace,
JoKeR

Submitted by Anonymous User on November 2, 2005 - 2:37pm.

RLP, as a Christian, but also as a former soldier, I have a number of mixed opinions on this matter. I have friends who were wounded by IED's. I know people who are over in Iraq and Afghanistan who have come within a few feet of being killed by a suicide bomber. I remember holding my 3 day old daughter when the towers fell, and cringing when civilians were beheaded, their heads sawed off. And I have heard these men who are now locked up broadcast praises over the men, women, and children who were slain at their hand or by their order. Perhaps it's true that two wrongs do not make a right. Maybe our government should hold itself to a higher standard, even maintaining that laughable Geneva convention that no one else follows anymore. But I cannot honestly say how I feel about people taking away all the rights of these individuals, even to the point of bringing them pain. Maybe sometimes violence has to be used to combat evil on such a large scale. Again, I'm not sure. I'm sorry if that makes me a bad person. Now if you'll excuse me, I'm going to go read the book of Judges.

"People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf." --George Orwell

Submitted by Little Green Friend on November 2, 2005 - 2:40pm.

Oops...forgot to login. This one was mine.
Come check me out at http://littlegreenfriend.blogspot.com or my movie reviews at http://littlegreenreviews.blogspot.com 1 John 4:19-21

Submitted by rlp on November 2, 2005 - 3:05pm.

LGF,
 
The point is, no one knows if these people are terrorists or not. You act as though they have been tried and convicted. Even if we KNEW that these people engaged in the sort of activities you've described, it would still be a question of whether or not we leave justice up to a CIA agent in a closed room with no witnesses. EVEN IF we knew they were guilty I would have a problem with that.
 
But we do not know. These are people who have  been rounded up. The articles says there is no accountability for WHY they were arrested, HOW they are being interrogated, WHAT crimes if any they have committed, nor HOW long they may be kept there. Seriously, you're okay with this?
 
If a man in a turban cuts someone's head off, you can't just run around in countries where people wear turbans, arresting and torturing people in a vain hope of stoping it. If the CIA wants to come forward and give us names and tell us why these people were detained, we'll listen. For some reason, they don't want to do that. Scares the hell out of me. Sounds like the Old Soviet Union.

Submitted by Little Green Friend on November 2, 2005 - 9:26pm.

You act as though they have been tried and convicted. Even if we KNEW that these people engaged in the sort of activities you've described, it would still be a question of whether or not we leave justice up to a CIA agent in a closed room with no witnesses.
RLP, God bless ya brother, but if you read my original comment carefully, you will see that I said very clearly that I had not yet made a judgement. My intent was not to act as if anything were anything.  As for your question asking whether or not I'm seriously ok with this, no, not 100%. But I'm also not so adamantly against these individuals losing their freedoms at this point. See, I was there when the US government was training Iraqis in Hungary to help run the new Iraq before we even set foot there. I helped package toys and medicine for some of the orphans. I trained with people who are over there right now getting shot at. Not by soldiers, not by people in uniform, but by ordinary citizens. Am I saying that what happened in the military prison was right? No, absolutely not. But look what happened when those MP's were caught. They're in jail now.  I'm sorry that you're "really starting to get frustrated", but I never said that we should go around arresting all people in turbans, and we're not, not by even a stretch.  Most of the people over there are recieving help and or training. Believe me....I've seen it. ALL I SAID was that I have seen both sides of the coin, and right now it's balancing on its edge. If that gets frustrated with me, then I'm sorry, but I'm just being honest.
 
Come check me out at http://littlegreenfriend.blogspot.com or my movie reviews at http://littlegreenreviews.blogspot.com 1 John 4:19-21

Submitted by Anonymous User on November 5, 2005 - 7:05am.

If we are not careful, our fear of terrorism will cause us to erode so much of what we value.The right to a fair trial, and fair treatment until and found guilty. In western europe we do not have the death penalty, so for us, fair treatment after being found guilty is important too.

we do NOT fight evil with evil - we fight evil with the love of Jesus Christ.

Submitted by see through faith on November 5, 2005 - 7:08am.

sorry I forgot to sign in. That was me :)

Submitted by scout on November 2, 2005 - 3:56pm.

LGF, since we both opted for quotes from brilliant minds in our posts, I offer you these to consider:
"Beware the leader who bangs the drums of war in order to whip the citizenry into a patriotic fervor, for patriotism is indeed a double-edged sword. It both emboldens the blood, just as it narrows the mind. And when the drums of war have reached a fever pitch and the blood boils with hate and the mind has closed, the leader will have no need in seizing the rights of the citizenry. Rather, the citizenry, infused with fear and blinded by patriotism, will offer up all of their rights unto the leader and gladly so. How do I know? For this is what I have done. And I am Caesar."  --Marcus Aurelius
Put more simply:
 "Those who are willing to sacrifice their basic liberties to assure their security deserve neither."  --Benjamin Franklin
Sara

 
Submitted by scout on November 3, 2005 - 4:23pm.

Whatever.  Marcus Aurelius could so kick John Stuart Mill's ass.  Just kidding.
Seriously, you are citing the works of a utilitarianist.  You might want to rethink that one, even if he did write "On Liberty." 

Submitted by Little Green Friend on November 3, 2005 - 7:47pm.

Thanks, but I'm fully of aware of who Mill is, and the works that he wrote, and I had a reason for quoting him.  There was no irony in my quoting a utilitarianist, believe me.  
 
Come check me out at http://littlegreenfriend.blogspot.com or my movie reviews at http://littlegreenreviews.blogspot.com 1 John 4:19-21

Submitted by sanityman on November 4, 2005 - 5:35am.

So:

  1. is there such thing as a just war? Sadly, yes, in the world we live in.
  2. Is it true that leaders use patriotism and fear to "boil the blood and narrow the mind" of the populace, making it easier to take away their liberties? Certainly (see history, passim).

The question is, even supposing that the "war on terror" is a just war, is your (and my) government justified in setting up concentration camps to indefinitely detain/interrogate/torture people that they do not even know are the enemy?


We aren't the "good guys" because we wear white hats. We're only the "good guys" if we behave in a way that morally differentiates us from the "bad guys." This sort of thing is making it harder to tell the difference.

Submitted by scout on November 4, 2005 - 1:01pm.

Alright alright.  Take it easy.  You just don't strike as much of a utilitarianist given your previous statements. 
Still, I think your quote from Mill overstates the point.  There isn't nothing for which we will fight.  Its just that this isn't it.  And these secret prisons?  It doesn't get much more unAmerican than that.  Our war on terrorism must be a war for hearts and minds.  We don't win hearts with secret prisons....or bombs for that matter.
Sara

Submitted by RickinVa on November 2, 2005 - 2:54pm.

I'm not quite ready to join the rest of you in the blanket condemnation of a behavior we've yet to prove to be actually taking place.

What I am ready to do however is posit the opinion that in a vacuum, dehumanizing treatment is always anathema. Always.

In. A. Vacuum.

But we're not in a vacuum...

We live in a terribly sinful world where evil people, for the sake of their beliefs (steeped in hatred) will kill as many innocents as they are able to just so their ideology is furthered, their political goals are achieved.

I hope to God that these reports turn out to be false. I pray that we don't have to reach a point where some are tortured to save others.

But who amongst us here would be willing to sacrifice our loved ones because we can't go far enough to extract information from evil people aiming to kill them?

RLP, I know you have two lovely daughters. I have two college age boys and a bride of nearly 25 years. What would I do to prevent their murders? What would they (my loved ones) want me to do?

I know we are to be holy as He is holy. I know it's written that we are to be perfect as our Heavenly Father is perfect.

I also know that I'm not going be holy or perfect this side of heaven.

So yes, we are so very quick to condemn an alleged action (and I underscore the word alleged) and part of me says that quickness is right, that quickness is of God.

And then there's that part of me that stares into the eyes of those I love and wonders what I might do to prevent their harm.

I might do a lot that is less than holy and less than perfect and then plead for the mercy of God.

Put yourselves in the shoes of those sworn to defend us.

Carry on.

-Rick
http://www.brutallyhonest.org

Submitted by rlp on November 2, 2005 - 3:16pm.

Rick, I'm getting real frustrated here. I want you to read my reply to LGF above. Both of you act as though we know that these folks are guilty. You sound as if the CIA detaining people in secret prisons is equal to stopping evil and murder and injustice in the world. THE POINT IS - we have NO idea who they are detaining. And given what we saw in Abu Graib, it's clear that some Americans will go over the line in questioning suspects. Some of the men in those photos were not guilty of anything other than having brown skin and being Iraqis. We won't really ever know because there was limited accountability until the pictures got out.
 
You're still in favor of secret prisons? That's how Sadaam and his boys ran Iraq.
 
 
Our country stands for human rights. We always try to anyway. We can't have a government agency rounding up people, torturing or "interogating" them with NO accountability. THAT'S the point. If we are going to imprison people and hold them for questioning (and we both know what that means. My God, Abu Graib is what we do openly and take pictures of. What do you suppose is going on in these secret prisons with no cameras?) then someone better damn well be making sure we know the limits and boundaries. Otherwise we are no better than any regime in history who has rounded up Jews, Gypsies, or other so called "undesirables" and kept them in prison all for the good of the State.
 
What's at issue here is not the actions of terrorists, which everyone decent abhores. What's at question is whether or not we want the CIA running around the world taking people into custody and detaining them and perhaps torturing them with no accountability. Are you saying that you want to give the CIA carte blanche with this?

Submitted by PeWi on November 3, 2005 - 6:55pm.

"Otherwise we are no better than any regime in history who has rounded up Jews, Gypsies, or other so called "undesirables" and kept them in prison all for the good of the State."
there was this scandal some months back about Dick Durbin disgracing the senate floor asking exactly this question. he got rebuked and some people where delighted. But the point he made was fundamentally right. The comparison is not that the matter on hand here is that people behave like Nazi's but they don;t behave sufficiently different from them. When you remove the time and the names and just describe behaviour, attitude and methods, it becomes difficult to distinguish.

and one more word: assumption of innocence till proven guilty, where are we getting to?

Submitted by Anonymous User on November 2, 2005 - 3:57pm.

I love the assumption you make here - and which runs through every attempt to validate this that I've seen so far - that torture is a viable way to get reliable information out of people in the first place. The fact that it isn't notwithstanding, I don't want to be defended by anyone who thinks maiming alleged "terrorists" in secret detention camps is somehow a good and fitting thing. Besides, those people aren't defending the ideals they claim to stand up for in the first place. Justice for all, indeed.

-Zibblsnrt
http://www.nukefreezone.net

Submitted by AnonyMoose on November 2, 2005 - 3:15pm.

I sometimes wonder how history would view George Bush, if he used money stolen, to train children to walk into crowded markets or buses, and set off explosives, while he hid in caves and told people there just wasn't enough beheadings this week of people who think differently than him.  Or if he used his countries most precious resource to build himself a bigger house, and invaded Canada because they also had vast amounts of that particular resource, or if he decided to gas Portland, Maine because of the high number of Lutherans in that city.  Maybe the next president should run on that platform.  Sadly, they could probably beat anyone the President endorses.

Submitted by Anonymous User on November 2, 2005 - 3:28pm.

no instead george uses our money to train our grown children to walk into a foreign death trap all on a presumed mandate to bring democracy to the world. on this he spends money while poor are dieing by the thousands in the streets who stomachs are filled only with the American dream of someday. Instead of invading Canada, he invades Iraq and Iran. Instead of gassing Portland, he gasses innocent children, innocent mothers, working poor just like our citizens in Iraq and Iran on an assumption of "oh well if we kill em all eventually all terroists will be gone." Instead of it being Lutherans, he created an unfounded stigma against Muslims, or Arabics. We simply do not need the next president to run on a platform that has already been excercised by Both Bush men.

Submitted by Anonymous User on November 2, 2005 - 3:21pm.

When did we become immune to judgement... when did we cross the line between bowing to God and putting him on the dashboards of our cars and touting him as a political figure? When will Americans realize we are not the only Christians that exist on the planet, and is not our job to police the world. We have been given no moral, spiritual mandate that makes us higher than those across our globe. How is our killing of Iraqi people any less murder than the people who ran the planes into the World Trade Center... And yet we stand around with our mouths open in suprise our noses curled in disgust at the rest of the world, when we my friends do the very thing we judge others of.. apparently bush also forgot the scripture about removing the plank from our own eye before we stoop to get the sawdust out of a brothers eye. Why are we suprised at the hate against Americans and hostility against faith, when our nation uses a judeo-christian stick to beat the crap out of the rest of the world?

Submitted by Chuck Sigars on November 2, 2005 - 3:25pm.

What the hell is going on has been going on for a while now, sorry to blow some sunshine up your skirt. Children have been raped and prisoners have died from torture, torture committed in our name, and some of us have been reading about it for a while now. John McCain, who knows something about torture, and military law, is currently fighting against an administration that wants to make its own rules. The revelations you write about today are just a little more public.

Not Internet rumor, not conspiracy theory, just hard facts, and still I wonder how many of your readers know about Ian Fishback, the straight-arrow Army officer who currently is held in seclusion, last I heard, because he had the temerity to be appalled at what was being condoned by his leaders.

Yeah, I'm angry today, and sad. And disgusted at the lack of available information, and the desire to investigate a little more on all of our parts. This isn't about stringing up Osama in a public square. This is about innocent people, many of them, and children, and our soldiers and sailors and Marines being given orders that repudiate everything we've always been.

You want to wonder at the horror of it all? Wonder yesterday. Cpt. Fishback was. And some of us heard about it then.

Submitted by goatmeal on November 5, 2005 - 9:58pm.

What is your most reliable source on Fishback being held in seclusion? 
I've read his letter, a good letter, but I find it hard to believe that he is currently locked up for writing it.  I googled him and came up with some blog entries, but nothing that I would say is a reliable news source that mentions him being incarcerated.  It is hard for me to believe that something like this would happen in this country, and I think I need more proof.
 

Submitted by Lisa in Austin on November 2, 2005 - 3:42pm.

It scares me [and has scared me for some time now] that so many citizens of our country don't seem to have a problem with these type of prisons. It scares me even more than so many Christians don't seem to have a problem with them. I have heard the argument that "they" are beheading Americans so what "we" are doing isn't that bad. Even my eight year olds know that it is not okay to do something wrong just because someone else has done something wrong. I certainly believe that we should hold ourselves to a much higher standard than that. And Preacher's point is well-taken: these people are accused or suspected of something. For all we know, they could all be innocent.

Submitted by Anonymous User on November 2, 2005 - 6:49pm.

I'm not a Christian, but I really don't understand how anybody calling themselves one could be for torture. Jesus wanted *peace* even for his enemies, and endured suffering even for their sake, didn't he?

I'm not a pacifist like I think Jesus was, I belive in what we did initially in Afghanistan (and am appalled at our lack of follow through that is causing the largest drug-export state in the world).

But if America needs torture to survive, needs to inflict pain on people to defeat its enemies, I'd rather take the beating and go down fighting than become that. If evil takes evil to beat it, then I'll accept defeat, but not concede it.

Submitted by Anonymous User on November 2, 2005 - 7:03pm.

What the hell is going on here? That's really the question isn't it? Has anyone read "1984" by George Orwell. If you have, you're probably as scared as I am about the direction of this country. "War is peace" is the main tenet of the fictitious government in the book. Eerily similar to George W. and his cronies.

Submitted by Anonymous User on November 2, 2005 - 7:21pm.

Leaving any issues of humanity aside for the moment, if you are inclined to believe that torture is a useful tactic, I recommend that you read this article:
A Useful Way to Think About Torture

In short, while torture tactics profoundly hurt the innocent, they do almost nothing to help us apprehend the guilty.

Submitted by Anonymous User on November 2, 2005 - 7:23pm.

Of course this must be true, the Washington Post said it is. And of course we must be torturing people, after all, this is the United States we're talking about. Why is it that we shouldn't assume all of the prisoners are guilty, but we must assume our Gov't is up to no good, and that they are torturing people. Maybe, we should take them all to Disney and ask them nicely for some information...

Submitted by Anonymous User on November 2, 2005 - 7:42pm.

Thank you for your comment. Interogations save the lives that so many anti-war people are trying to protect. Are there innocent people in America's prisons? The problem with trying people is that the information we need to stop the terorism in Iraq (and yes it's terrorism. Road side bombs that kill civilians, suicide bombers targeting mosques and market places, it's terrorism no matter how you look at it) is held by the people we are captureing. Some might be innocent, but as a service member in the U.S. Military, I feel more comfortable knowing that someone is trying to gather the information we need to fight the war, and protect the lives of us who may be assigned there.
P.S. I am so tired of seeing the word "crony, cronies". Please look behind the headlines, and see where the info is coming from. Don't jump on the bandwagon to flame Bush everytime you can. If torture is going on, it's wrong, it's not projecting the "American" way of life. I'm not advocating it. But in the back of my mind, some form of forcefull interrogations may save my life in the future. It's not pretty, and I hope to never be put in a situation where I have to make that decision.

Submitted by Anonymous User on November 2, 2005 - 7:55pm.

Interrogations can be and are done in America all the time.

This isn't interrogation we're talking about, not even forceful. This is using the laws OF OTHER COUNTRIES to abuse people. If there was any legitamacy to this at all, at all, it could be done just as easily on American soil. The only reason its being done in other countries it is illegal by our own laws, and not theirs.

Submitted by sanityman on November 4, 2005 - 6:05am.

Gathering information is necessary - as previous posters mentioned, indiscriminate physical torture is not a good way of doing this. To quote from The Marine Corps Small Wars Manual, "Torture only creates more recruits for the rebels."
And more worryingly, reports from members of the army suggest that it's not just "bad apples" mistreating prisoners - there's a culture of permitting abuse, and it coming from a lack of moral guidance from higher up.

Submitted by Anonymous User on November 3, 2005 - 5:15pm.

Err I think the pretty damning photos and the people who admitted to engaging in torture are probably tipping the balance here.

My understanding of government is that the very merest hint of impropriety requires rigorous investigation as those with the most power should be held to the highest standards, does America not work this way?

Submitted by visual-voice on November 2, 2005 - 8:23pm.

A shining city on the hill we aren't any more.

Submitted by Carli on November 2, 2005 - 10:15pm.

Amen!

Submitted by Anonymous User on November 2, 2005 - 11:05pm.

Preach-
What do you think of the following quote:
Criminals thrive on the indulgence of societies’ understanding.

It has a certain resonance with me; I hear about the recidivism rate of convicts, and it makes me wonder whether harsh pre-emptive measures might have a greater effect than societal hand holding.

-Evan

Submitted by rlp on November 2, 2005 - 11:53pm.

Okay, let's be harsh and justice-minded with criminals. But how about we make sure we have a careful set of procedures in place to insure that we indeed have criminals in custody before we start with the tough love. You see, that's what I keep saying here. The CIA has no accountability with these secret prisons. When you are rounding up terrorists, you sometimes round up some innocent people. More often than we probably want to know. I'm fairly certain that a number of the folks incarcerated at Guantanamo are not terrorists. Do you ever wonder what their families are doing without a husband or father around?
 
I'm saying that if the CIA is on our payroll, and they are, and if their actions will help our hurt the reputation of our nation, and they do, then how about we add a layer or two of accountability so that we the people know who we are detaining and why they are being deprived of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.
 
I'm concerned for the innocent person who is mistakenly taken. I'm concerned that if the CIA is not accountable, they just may not bother worrying too much about one or two innocent people that they have taken into custody.
 
And I don't think that a little accountability is too much to ask of the CIA.

Submitted by Little Green Friend on November 3, 2005 - 9:45am.

I can bend on this particular issue. I do agree the CIA should be held accountable......to someone. I think that certain individuals outside of the CIA should be privy to this information. However, I don't think that Joseph Baker of Kilgore TX should be one of those individuals. If you are saying that you think that they should have an authority who keeps tabs on them to make sure that they are not committing war crimes, then I will grant you that. I do not think that it should be the American people as a whole however. That's one of the reasons we live in a republic as opposed to a full out democracy.
Come check me out at http://littlegreenfriend.blogspot.com or my movie reviews at http://littlegreenreviews.blogspot.com 1 John 4:19-21

Submitted by Anonymous User on November 3, 2005 - 2:56pm.

And "Who watches the watchmen" resonates just as much with me.

I'm sure there were people in Russia who were convinced that those held by the KGB were getting exactly what they deserved...

Submitted by Anonymous User on November 3, 2005 - 6:03am.

When my husband and I returned to the US from Siberia, we were pretty familiar with wiretaps, terrorism, and people following us. Not just in Siberia, either- My husband worked for a while at an electronics manufacturing facility in NJ that hired a lot of people from all over the world- My husband is american,m but he looks Arabic, Hispanic, chechen, whatever: and, of course he and his brother live all over the world at one point or another;
He's staunchly in favor of our ability to have facilities like this.
Ironically, he fits the profile of the kind of guy they could erroneously lock away for a very long time.
And I would never know what happened to him. Or have recourse to address the error.

The consititution and the bill of rights and the declaration of independence all refer to "persons" in these matters- the distinction is made between citizens, and all persons- whether they are citizens or not- have recourse under the law, accordiung to our founding fathers. And they should know- after all, they knew exactly what terrorism could do. They had been the terrorists, at one point in time.

Submitted by Anonymous User on November 3, 2005 - 7:57am.

Virtually nothing is known about who is kept in the facilities, what interrogation methods are employed with them, or how decisions are made about whether they should be detained or for how long …
…To do so, officials familiar with the program told the Post, could open the U.S. government to legal challenges, particularly in foreign courts, and increase the risk of political condemnation at home and abroad.
Wow, that is one scary little rationalization. It seems to me a bit like the BTK killer saying to police, hey, let’s just keep this between you and me, I’m a deacon at my church and all, and if my actions see the light of day, some might think I’m a cold blooded killer.

Submitted by mattman on November 3, 2005 - 8:59am.

I am inclined to favor the Preacher on this, but for conversation's sake I want to engage LGM and the soldier who raise a different point of view. Perhaps the most difficult balance there is to find is that of love and justice. There have been some snide comments about "hand holding" and "accomodating" those suspected of terrorism. I understand this point of view. I understand the desire to punish those who have hurt others. Too often I see more tough than love in such an approach. The end of eliminating, or neutralizing a threat justifies whatever means that takes. Okay. But is this a sustainable ethic for someone who seeks to follow Jesus, and be his disciple? Is it okay to destroy a life in order to save a life? Jesus seems to be pretty clear on this- you can live by the sword, but don't expect it to bring you peace. The problem with trying to overcome evil with evil is that we take the side of evil, we become evil ourselves in order to preserve our family or our way of life. The way of Christ is the way of sacrifice, but that word is forbidden in our consumer-driven, self-justifying, pleasure seeking culture.
Aw, I'm just rambling now.

Submitted by spidey on November 3, 2005 - 11:01am.

Bias. It is the first thing you learn in anthropology AND in communication. You all have your biases, so do I. Some of them are so deep we don't even see them for what they are. Sometimes they look like "George Bush is wrong no matter what he does." And, yeah, a LOT of people seem to hold that one. For some people it's "Only Americans count as actual people."  We base our views of events on these biases we hold. I personally am sick of both these extremes. 
One more bias for the day, and then I'll shut up. This one is mine. "The American media has an agenda and cannot fully be trusted." Instead of wasting energy arguing over what we've read, if we're responsible, we'll try to find out the truth of the situation. I think we can all agree that justice is good, but it needs to be very carefully handled. It does no one any good if we fight our own war here over it.

Submitted by rlp on November 3, 2005 - 11:50am.

Well, I think an associated press story is something I can trust to give me some basic facts. In this case, given the point I tried to make, the media source should be trusted. Apparently the existence of these prisons is not in question. Nor is the assertion by the CIA and the Bush administration that they don't want them monitored. What actually goes on inside is unknown, and I'm not making any claims about that.
 
If I or the news source had made guesses about what was happening inside the prisons, your point would be well taken. But I haven't made any hard claims about that. My point is that prisons, detention units, whatever, ought to have some layers of accountability. I don't like the idea that our country imprisons people without being accountable to someone for the cause, treatment, and duration of that imprisonment.
 
Frankly, it's amazing to me that any reasonable person could have any objection to that simple claim. It's the only claim I made and I stand by it.

Submitted by Paladin Phil on November 3, 2005 - 12:51pm.

Ironically, here in Canada, we allow our citizens to be tortured. Some of us Canadians may be familiar with William Sampson's detention in Saudi Arabia, and the details of the Maher Arar case. What struck me was the similarity of these foreign "fundamentalist" governments holding and "interrogating" citizens without a trial, and the US government doing the essentially the same thing.

Submitted by spidey on November 3, 2005 - 2:19pm.

I wasn't particularly questioning you, rlp. I pretty much figure that you probably have checked out your sources before posting about them. Mostly my comment was directed more to those who posted reactions rather than responses. It's a fine line sometimes. I actually don't doubt that this is happening, and honestly, I'm horrified by it. But playing the blame game, as some have done here, doesn't change the fact that it is happening. Seems that we all agree that the secrecy of these places is bad. Most of us agree that the probable torture is also bad. I think, though, that if we honestly believe this is wrong, we then have the responsibility to do something. Those of us who are under the American government can contact congress people if we choose. Any of us can blog about it. Arguing will change nothing. Using our voices might. Thank you, rlp, for using yours!


Submitted by Wandering Willow on November 3, 2005 - 2:29pm.

This is an excellent discussion. RLP, you've done good here, by bringing this into a forum for airing various views. Knowledge and thought on the part of the citizens will be extremely helpful in bringing these situations into check. Each of us needs to take responsibility: do something towards the end of righting wrongs and steering the country back to what it has historically stood for. As a country, we've never fully lived up to our reputation - our history is full of oppression, slavery and slaughter - but as a collective of residents, we believe in that reputation for freedom and justice, and hope to make it as true as possible. It's up to each of us to do our part, as we see fit, as we feel called. I agree with Spidey, letters and phone calls to senators and congressmen is a good way to start; letters to the editor too.

http://blogs.salon.com/0003947
www.wanderingwillowblog.blogspot.com

Submitted by Anonymous User on November 3, 2005 - 3:08pm.

http://blogs.salon.com/0002687/2005/10/12.html

Submitted by Anonymous User on November 3, 2005 - 8:12pm.

We teach our children that the stove is hot. Don't touch. They grow some and we teach them to use the stove. Touch carefully. They grow some more and we punish them if they don't use the stove to cook dinner like we told them to. Touch it now, Mr.
There is really no fast rule about the stove. It depends on the situation and the age and needs and responsibilities of the person.
There is killing and injuring people. We teach our kids not to do it. Then they grow up and we teach them to take physical action in certain circumstances to help the weak or innocent, for instance. They grow some more and we train them with automatic weapons and sidearms and make them kill and injure. We call it soldiering and policing. It is imperative that they kill if the line of duty calls for it.
There is again, no hard and fast rule on killing and injuring.
We assess the situation. We look at the facts and we decide if the killing or injury was line of duty or justifiable in the circumstances.
We do not, do not, just train in the use of the fire arm and then never check up on the soldier or police officer. We write rules. We do this to protect the innocent and the guilty and even your loved ones. We have laws and rules and common sense and judgement.
We need to use these things in this situation. Someone needs to oversee the use of force. Someone. We delegate this to officers every day in the case of the soldier and police. We have courts and judges when the situation is alledged to have gone too far.
Here is the thing....Who is the someone in the case of those detained outside of our borders? It is in our name, and financed by our dollars, and it is our responsibility. We as good as do it ourselves with our own hands. If you are ok with carte blance, then do nothing. If you are squeamish, ask questions. If you are indignant, speak out. If you are outraged, demand action.
"Here am I, send me"
Old Poet

Submitted by Anonymous User on November 4, 2005 - 8:47am.

Here http://www.metafilter.com/mefi/46390 is a link to a comment thread in Metafilter, which has a wealth of information on this subject. I in no way wish to plagiarize these thoughts, but I do wish repost one part which expressed my opinion as to why what we are doing is so regrettable.

These are not nice men, to say the least. They are alleged to have committed the most diabolical criminal acts. Why, some have argued, should we care about what happens to them? First, because despite the life-saving information apparently gleaned from some of these suspects, overall the U.S. treatment of its prisoners has been a boon rather than a setback for al-Qaeda and has thereby made the world less safe from terror. As the 9/11 Commission recognized, 'Allegations that the United States abused prisoners in its custody make it harder to build the diplomatic, political, and military alliances the government will need.' Second, because the U.S.’s torture and 'disappearance' of its adversaries invites all the unsavory governments in the world to do the same--indeed countries from Sudan to Zimbabwe have already cited Abu Ghraib and other U.S. actions to justify their own practices or to blunt criticism.

Submitted by Little Green Friend on November 4, 2005 - 2:12pm.

(sigh) (tapping foot).......
Sooooooo.....the Asian flu....that's gotta suck, huh?

Submitted by Geodog on November 5, 2005 - 5:43am.

What do we call a state that has its secret police imprision and torture what the rulers of that state unilaterally decides are "enemies of the state"?

It didn't use to be the United States of America.

It's clear from the fact that the Bush Administration doesn't bring their secret prisoners into the US that they know what they are doing is wrong, and would subject the secret policemen to criminal prosecution.

I agree that LGF and others that we are in a new situation, and that America has a new enemey with new and horrible tactics -- new reponses may be called for, we may even need to change some of our laws. But let's openly debate what our response should be, and legislate new laws or new courts if we think we need them, not set up extra-legal state sponsored criminal enterprises.

I weep for this country when the President of the United States has threatened to veto his first bill ever if it includes a provision forbidding American soldiers to torture people. As the pastor of Auburn First Baptist Church asked, Who would be tortured by Jesus?

Peace,
Geodog

P.S.Capt. Fishback's letter is well worth reading, the full text is online.

P.S.S Thanks for speaking out, RLP.

Submitted by Mary L on November 5, 2005 - 7:22am.

The clarion call from the Sermon on the Mount to love our enemies is, perhaps, the most difficult of Jesus' teachings. It requires a new way of thinking and a willingness to let go of our own grief, pain, desire for revenge, etc. Are there just reasons to go to war? Absolutely, as a last resort. But there is never an acceptable reason to treat people as less than human.

Submitted by Anonymous User on November 5, 2005 - 5:35pm.

Perhaps the politically correct crowed has made it so difficult to conduct an honest interrogation that it is just easier to do it in countries where our hands arn't tied by those who would cry abuse because the cell is too hot or too cold, or the diet isn't balanced, or there isn't enough time for recreation... Just a thought. I too do not wan't anyone treated in any way less than human, and abuses such as Abu-Graib do occur; I am not excussing or condoning it, but I do not believe these people are being rounded up indiscriminately. These are bad people, there is a reason they are being brought to secret prisons, (if they even exist), true, some may be innocent, and all deserve a trial if warrented, but by and large, I believe they are thugs. They deserve to be treated humanely, even though they may not have dealt with others humanely. I just do not choose to believe they are not being dealt with properly.

Submitted by Anonymous User on November 6, 2005 - 4:23pm.

Guilty until proven guilty? Deserve a trial "if warranted?"

Submitted by Anonymous User on November 6, 2005 - 7:56pm.

Yes if warranted, some may are released before going to trial...

Submitted by Anonymous User on November 7, 2005 - 12:25pm.

Guilty until proven guilty?

Submitted by see through faith on November 5, 2005 - 7:19am.

thowing a little cold water :)

As a Christian I support all people receiving a right and fair trial. If fairly found guilty, they should be punished according to the law.

I want our world to be safe for myself and my childen and their children. But fighting terror with terror, or hate with hate, is not a compromise I'm willing to make. are you?

It is hard to forgive. I visted ground zero. It was hard to forgive that someone did this, and others rejoiced in it. It's hard to see a red London bus and not think of those whose lives were torn apart in July, and still choose to forgive. Yet it's what we're asked to do. Not condone it, not nlet people off for atrosities, but forgive! And I need all the help God can give me to get there, because in my heart, it seems that it's way too much to forgive

but still I cannot condone torture etc even if it's originally designed to make the world a safer place for my kids and my grand-kids to come.

Submitted by Anonymous User on November 5, 2005 - 3:15pm.

Has it been proven yet that there are those prisons? Several of the countries are denying it.
I sure would hate to be tortured with panties on my head.

Submitted by Anonymous User on November 5, 2005 - 6:15pm.

I'm not sure being beaten to death or violated with a chemical light would be to your taste either.

Just saying...

If this was another country doing this to American soldiers would anyone be making these snide little one-liners?

Submitted by scout on November 7, 2005 - 8:56am.
Submitted by Anonymous User on November 7, 2005 - 12:42pm.

I guess this is on point as well?
http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/english/doc/2004-04/01/content_319686.htm

Submitted by scout on November 7, 2005 - 4:29pm.

That's right.  Two wrongs make a right.  I almost forgot.

Submitted by Anonymous User on November 11, 2005 - 11:13pm.

Doesn't it make you proud that we have a Christian president!

When I see stories like this, I weep...because of all the apocalyptic scenarios I've ever seen imagined, that our "christian nation" would in the name of "all that is decent" embrace inhumanity...

Fleming Rutledge (another great author) said in a lecture I once heard...that the mark of our Character is best measured by how we treat the other, the stranger, the enemy...when he is at our mercy.

... God help us all.

-Been There.

Submitted by Anonymous User on November 15, 2005 - 2:18pm.

Perhaps most impressive of the comments are folks who believe that there are only two extreme choices - either torture or be killed. The events that have happened in the world shake our complacency, that is true. Yet, even in the face of these events we don't have to fear. We don't have to be so angry that we would deny even the perpetrators of writing a bad check basic human needs, or round up every person who fits a profile then turn our backs on them because we think it's "worth it" to save the lives of our children. Folks sneer that "hand holding" won't work, yet we have yet to even try rehabilitation.

Thich Nhat Hanh teaches that the only thing worthy of any of us is compassion. The seeds of hate, fear, and terrorism are in all our hearts - those seeds on both sides have been watered generously of late and those weeds have taken strong root. We're wrong if we think those who engage in terrorism don't have the same, horribly wrong, logic that if they don't strike hard their children will be lost.

"Misunderstanding, fear, anger, and hatred are the roots of terrorism. They cannot be located by the military … To uproot terrorism, we need to begin by looking in our hearts." (THN) The only path to peace is to be peace, to listen deeply, and to realize that the means never justify the ends, the means are the ends.

Peace,
Chân Lac An