Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

What's Got Them Really Scared

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
babylonsister Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Nov-15-09 05:35 PM
Original message
What's Got Them Really Scared
http://digbysblog.blogspot.com/2009/11/whats-got-them-really-scared-by.html


What's Got Them Really Scared

by tristero


Warning! Link to Fox News::

The Obama administration, in deciding to try alleged Sept. 11 conspirators in a New York courtroom, has said it is setting its sights on convictions, but some critics say a civilian trial -- instead of a military tribunal -- could end up targeting the Bush administration and its anti-terror policies.

One of those five defendants, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, has been at the center of the debate over those Bush-era polices, in particular the harsh interrogation techniques used on Mohammed and others in an effort to obtain information on Al Qaeda and any additional attacks.

"The government is going to try to put Khalid Sheik Mohammed on trial. Defense lawyers will try and put the government on trial," former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani told Fox News.


If only.

But the possibility is what's got the rufftuffcreampuffs on the right quaking in their booties, that American law will actually shine a light on the murderous, torturing, incompetent, insanely frightened, paranoid, corrupt, and completely out of control Bush/Cheney regime.

It is going to be quite an ugly fight, once these trials start.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Bluzmann57 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Nov-15-09 05:37 PM
Response to Original message
1. It may get ugly
But these men should not be set free. Cheney and co. should do time right next to them.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
classof56 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Nov-15-09 05:40 PM
Response to Reply #1
3. Amen to that! n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Rosa Luxemburg Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Nov-15-09 05:38 PM
Response to Original message
2. Let's roll as they say
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
patrice Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Nov-15-09 05:43 PM
Response to Original message
4. You know, it just occurred to me that what you say may defend the trials from disruption
by terrorists trying to "free" the other terrorists.

The only terrorists with a real interest in disrupting these trials would be domestic ones.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
havocmom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Nov-15-09 06:15 PM
Response to Reply #4
8. Yep
Where's Dick?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
patrice Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Nov-15-09 06:28 PM
Response to Reply #8
10. Do you think we are going to find out that torture, as one might expect, will get someone to
say exactly what you want them to say. In this case something like "OBL and Saddam Hussein are best buddies." But even though they got that much out of KSM, they kept on torturing him, because they need corroborating details WHICH HE DID NOT HAVE, because it wasn't true in the first place.

I expect we are going to find out that KSM and possibly others said various things that would have been useful if they could have provided more supporting details, but they couldn't, so we are going to see just how fucked up all of this was.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Sinti Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Nov-15-09 05:43 PM
Response to Original message
5. " incompetent" - I don't think that word means what you think it means n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
obliviously Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Nov-15-09 05:46 PM
Response to Original message
6. They will release them to deal with another day.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bluesmail Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Nov-15-09 06:12 PM
Response to Original message
7. The key sentence: The defense will put the (*) government on trial. EOM
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
me b zola Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Nov-15-09 06:21 PM
Response to Original message
9. This occurred to me as I listened to the news coverage following the announcement
Listening to their dog whistles after a while gives you a pretty good indication of what they're up to--or afraid of.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
glitch Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-16-09 02:57 PM
Response to Reply #9
15. Yup - they are transparent once you know where they are coming from.
I feel like one of the aphasics Oliver Sach wrote about, who howled with laughter when Reagan spoke.

http://dissidentvoice.org/Articles/MickeyZ_BushDamage.htm


"One cannot lie to an aphasiac," Dr. Sacks noted. "He cannot grasp your words, and so cannot be deceived by them; but what he grasps, he grasps with infallible precision, namely the expression that goes with the words, that total spontaneous, involuntary expressiveness which can never be simulated or faked, as words alone can, all too easily."

So, why did those patients with aphasia cackle at Reagan's speech?

"It was the grimaces, the histrionics, the false gestures and, above all, the false tones and cadences of the voice which rang false for these wordless but immensely sensitive patients," explained Sacks.

Conversely, Sacks remarked on a woman with tonal agnosia who was also watching the address-stony-faced. Emily D., a former English teacher and poet, was deprived of any emotional reaction to the speech but was able to judge it in the opposite way the patients with aphasia did. Her response? "He does not speak good prose," Emily D. told Sacks. "His word-use is improper. Either he is brain-damaged or he has something to conceal."

"We normals," concluded Dr. Sacks, "aided, doubtless, by our wish to be fooled, were indeed well and truly fooled. And so cunningly was deceptive word-use combined with deceptive tone, that only the brain-damaged remained intact, undeceived."


I'd like to think it wasn't only the brain-damaged who remained undeceived.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ginnyinWI Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Nov-15-09 06:57 PM
Response to Original message
11. hee hee hee
The prospect is even more satisfying than the prospect of the 9/11 conspirators getting their convictions. That Bushco's crimes would come to see the light of day, and with as little political fallout on Obama. Maybe this is why he's taken a hands-off attitude all of these months! He's got another plan, and all it involves is following the rule of law.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
timeforpeace Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Nov-15-09 07:02 PM
Response to Original message
12. This focus will certainly rejuvinate the questions about whose side we are on.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kentuck Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Nov-15-09 07:06 PM
Response to Reply #12
13. We are looking for justice and a conviction ..
if the truth gets caught up in the battle, then that is just the way it is..
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Swamp Rat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Nov-15-09 07:09 PM
Response to Original message
14. k&r
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Tue May 07th 2024, 08:55 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC