Comments on: Happy Hour Roundup: Pelosi To Slap Down Detainee Photo Release Ban

By: Richard Hayes

Richard Hayes — Fri, 12 Jun 2009 16:28:27 +0000

There is only one thing Islamic terrorists and people of the Arab culture respect and that is violent brutality and strength. This was verified by Saddam himself in several statements he made during the Iraq invasion.

By: Yeah, right...

Yeah, right... — Thu, 11 Jun 2009 15:52:33 +0000

I guess “Reconsider” has had access to the classified documents Dick Cheney cites in claiming that torture saved American lives. Nice that you can be so sure of your unimpeachable opinions. Thanks for putting up with the rest of us who aren’t quite sure that Cheney, Tenet, et al are to be trusted.

That reminds me, how did that whole WMDs in Iraq thing turn out?

By: News Reference

News Reference — Thu, 11 Jun 2009 12:17:10 +0000

If “MarkJ” were serious about protecting his relatives in the military he would be the first to repudiate torture.
.
Torture used on the enemy means that torture will be used on American troops if they are captured.
.
Republican torture crimes have made America and American troops less safe.

By: elad

elad — Thu, 11 Jun 2009 02:45:23 +0000

Bush and his DOJ were incompetent. Obama and his DOJ is worse. We’ve traded Tweedle-Dee-Dumb for Tweedle-Dee-CompleteFrickingIdiot.

By: Reconsider

Reconsider — Thu, 11 Jun 2009 02:42:50 +0000

Consider – Enhanced interrogation Techniques (EIT), or “torture” for people of your view, does provide an effective tool for extracting valuable intelligence. This has been confirmed by former CIA Director George Tenet AND Obama’s intelligence Director. Nothing works all the time but effective interrogation is about options and upping the pressure. I realize the anti-torture group needs to believe EIT don’t work and continues to play the “it only makes us less safe” card, but that’s just rhetoric, or denial or pathology in the service of political opinion.

People like you will continue to argue for tying our hands behind our back in the face of a determined enemy. If we yield to such foolishness we will pay for it blood. I can respect—with determined effort on my part—your opinion. But I fervently pray people like you are not in charge of our security.

By: Chris

Chris — Thu, 11 Jun 2009 02:05:17 +0000

Eeewww…feel the power.

By: Consider:

Consider: — Thu, 11 Jun 2009 00:28:43 +0000

Tena:
Agreed, the “Obama DOJ is just like Bush” stuff is nonsense. However, it is true that on some issues it has continued and even extended Bush policies. Any wholistic view of the DOJ or the administration is doomed from the start; it is better to examine single issues and actions one by one and respond to each on its own merit, with praise or condemnation as appropriate.

By: Tena

Tena — Thu, 11 Jun 2009 00:10:13 +0000

” Has the Obama Justice Department ordered FBI agents to adopt a new policy of reading Miranda rights to high value detainees held at facilities in Afghanistan? The Weekly Standard reports that this is what’s happening, and Drudge is going nuts.”

No, really?

I don’t want to hear much more complaining about his DOJ being “just like Bush” cause it isn’t.

By: Consider:

Consider: — Thu, 11 Jun 2009 00:09:56 +0000

MarkJ,
If I understand your implication correctly, you seem to be in support of torture and unlawful detention because you believe they make your children safer. Two things:

1. I dispute the assertion that torture and unlawful detention make anyone safer. I think there is a stronger case to be made that they incite more anger and violence than they prevent. In either case, it is speculation; this is not something that can easily be proven one way or the other.

2. I won’t pretend to know anything about your children, but I suspect that many members of our military (hopefully most) would support upholding the rule of law even if it did diminish their own, and our, safety. They chose to put their lives at risk to fight for their country; it would be a travesty to invoke their names to transform their country into one they can no longer be proud of.

By: Tena

Tena — Thu, 11 Jun 2009 00:06:48 +0000

I did just read that the senate reversed itself on letting Gitmo detainees into the country to be tried here.

As for the photos – I wish there was perfect transparency, but if they aren’t released publicly, it doesn’t mean they can’t be used in an investigation/hearing/another trial – which is where they came from originally, I believe.

By: cb

cb — Wed, 10 Jun 2009 23:55:52 +0000

It has nothing to do with soldiers an civilians being expendable. Just because the FOIA exception is not included in the bill, doesn’t mean the photos will automatically be published. This issue is about process. If Obama thinks those photos should be withheld, he can take it to court on a case-by-case. But the president should not have unchecked powers to unilaterally withhold information from the American people on his say-so alone. This isn’t a dictatorship.

By: MarkJ

MarkJ — Wed, 10 Jun 2009 23:49:40 +0000

Librarian,

“No, it’s not a victory for liberals- it’s a victory for those who believe in the rule of law. By saying “liberals” , you perpetuate the media meme that only the left cares about rule of law.”

Question: How many civilians and soldiers will need to die in order to meet your definition of “the rule of law?” I’ve got a son and a daughter-in-law in the Army–in your view are they expendable?

Think real f***ing hard before you answer, fool.

By: Paul Tenny

Paul Tenny — Wed, 10 Jun 2009 23:01:29 +0000

“and puts the House Dem leadership at odds with the White House on a highly sensitive national security and civil liberties issue.”

I don’t think that’s true or terribly accurate. The President hasn’t argued in court that state secrets applies or that this is a matter of national security strictly speaking, this has always been about the claim that it would “endanger the troops”, which is not a valid FOIA exemption, which is why the courts have turned back such claims unanimously thus far.

This is not and has not been claimed to be a national security issue, it has always been about government transparency and the President’s refusal to make his campaign promises on transparency real.

For the Bush administration, of course, it was always a matter of just ignoring laws that they didn’t like.

By: Librarian

Librarian — Wed, 10 Jun 2009 22:48:12 +0000

No, it’s not a victory for liberals- it’s a victory for those who believe in the rule of law. By saying “liberals” , you perpetuate the media meme that only the left cares about rule of law.

By: rachel

rachel — Wed, 10 Jun 2009 22:18:51 +0000

Wow. Two ridiculous Drudge fantasies bite the dust in one day!