Atty Genrl Ashcroft SUED!

[Excaliber]

BOISE, Idaho - A federal appeals court delivered a stinging rebuke Friday to the Bush administration’s post-Sept. 11 detention policies, ruling that former Attorney General John Aschcroft can be held liable for people who were wrongfully detained as material witnesses after 9/11.

This particular appeal was brought by a Muslim man, detained for two weeks following 9/11. But it could have been any of us depending on the circumstances one might find himself in at the time. I wouldn't be surprised if additional law suits are filed. With Hawaii's large population of Japanese the interments during WW2 are never forgotten here. Then and now, a sad commentary on an over reacting Government.

[Jamo]

Then again, a detainee that was released from Gitmo was the mofo who set off the bomb that killed over a 100 folks at a shopping center in Baghdad recently.

I'd rather have a few lawsuits filed than another bombing on our soil, but that's just me.

[427sharpe]

And lets not forget that the ninth circuit court is not known for centrist policy making....

[Excaliber]

Jamo, I'm sure Chaney would agree with you on that!

Personally I never was a fan of Machiavelli style warfare, but thats just me.

[Jamo]

Ernie, allow me to repeat myself...

[Excaliber]

You make a strong point. Which could also be used to argue Chaneys point on prosecution of so called "torture" techiques or potential abuse prosecutions. I think Obama has made a wise choice to at least politically distance himself from the fall out on these issues.

[Jamo]

I remember you being as angry as the rest of us back then.

[Excaliber]

Still am!

This ruling is a surprise to me and it begs the question: DID the US over react, again, as they did in WW2? During that time (9-11) we saw a LOT of Muslim "hate" going down on many levels. Justified as a result of the fog and haze of war? Perhaps so. Accountability later when things become more clear? Yeah I think it's a needed part of the checks and balances. I will be outraged if the conclusion of this matter results in a substantial reward for the plaintiff! But tend to agree a suit should be allowed to proceed.

I say "tend to agree" because I don't have enough information on the specifics to reach a solid conclusion either way. I could say the same about the current "torture" investigation stuff going on. Absolutely SHOULD be investigated. Prosecuted? Eh, not so much...

[Jamo]

Unfortunately, "investigations" that become part of the spoils in a regime change lack validity.

[Buzz]

I have to side with Jamo here. In terms of profiling, targeting and persecuting Muslims, Middle Eastern Americans or any other group, the US government absolutely did NOT overreact after 911. If anything the official reaction in that regard was almost unbelieveably restrained. I challenge any other nation to truthfully claim that it would or could have done any better from that POV.

I also agree that bad things happen during times of war and it is almost impossible to wage war effectively in modern times without some collateral damage and infringement on some peoples "rights" as they would exist during times of peace. Humans being human and all, mistakes will inevitably be made and focusing on these isolated instances when judging a nation's response to military or terrorist aggression will at best put a fatal slant on the final perspective.

[Excaliber]

Mistakes will happen, given the fog of war. But not every action a person or Government takes will fall under that heading, nor should it. Where do you draw the line? Thats why we have "rules of war".

While I am surprised the court will allow a law suit to proceed on the matter I must conclude, from the ruling, that this detainment went well beyond the level of a "mistake". Personally, I felt the Bush Administration in general was playing "to fast and to loose" with the rules for to long. Cheney's chatter on the matter only reinforces that gut feeling. I am really glad THAT GUY is out of office, he is far more scary than Obama, in my opinion.

He says the Administration saved thousands of lives, maybe, maybe not. I can't help but wonder if the excesses of the Administration didn't cause MORE harm than good, in the long run?

This is where Machiavelli fails, in my opinion. Some actions cannot be justified, no matter how favorable the outcome may appear to be. There MUST be reasonable rules of engagement. Were they violated in this case? The Federal court did not declare Ashcroft guilty, or even condem the Government for it's actions. They only ruled that sufficient evidence exists to allow the issue to be decided by a Jury.

I wonder how "isolated" this incident actually is? Not only on a Federal level, but a State and local community level. There were reports of some pretty serious actions taken against random Muslims during this time frame. What group will be next when a similiar "call to arms" goes forth?

[Anthony]

Originally Posted by Jamo

I'd rather have a few lawsuits filed

I'm always for more lawsuits.

[Paul F]

What's your address.

[Dan40]

Originally Posted by Excaliber

You make a strong point. Which could also be used to argue Chaneys point on prosecution of so called "torture" techiques or potential abuse prosecutions. I think Obama has made a wise choice to at least politically distance himself from the fall out on these issues.

Distance himself?? Are you deaf and blind? He publicly says he does not want to look back. Then he privately ORDERS Holden to run 'harassment' investigations. IF obama IS in charge, then he DID give the order. If Holden is acting on his own then obama is a stupid and ineffective excuse for an executive.
An any case, there is NO distancing, obama is 100% responsible for the actions of his AG.
Why didn't the lawsuit go after Bush? He is/was 100% responsible for the actions of his AG.
You really are NOT going to enjoy any of the many corruption prosecutions of obama and his entire staff once the lying idiot is voted out of office.

[cobra de capell]

We all should remember how we felt on 09/12/01....

Here's a link to Glen Beck's 09/12 project.....http://www.the912project.com/

[427sharpe]

Originally Posted by Excaliber

This ruling is a surprise to me and it begs the question: DID the US over react, again, as they did in WW2?

Ernie, you have outdone yourself with this quote. I take it you mean the internment of the Japanese? An 'over-reaction'? Hmmm, you are attacked by a well armed, effective fighting force which has been waging successful, aggressive, and brutal war for 12 years (recall Nanking or Manchuria?). In this attack you are militarily devastated, and your commanders tell you that it is extremely possible that the enemy could launch not only a Hawaiian invasion, but strike the mainland as well and penetrate as far as Chicago before you are 100% prepared. I suppose history revisionists would argue that FDR should have set up a few dozen committees and talked it all to death, rather than act and try to save the country from further losses? It has been proven beyond a doubt that there were indeed spies on the islands, feeding intelligence to the Japanese government. How would you have found them, and how long would it have taken? 'Over-reaction' IMHO does not exist in war when you are fighting for survival, especially when fighting an enemy as ruthless and brutal as the Empire of Japan circa WWII. Or does your 20/20 hindsight excuse them as it seems to excuse the current fanatics?

[Excaliber]

The internment of the Japanese during WW2 cannot be justified, it was wrong, period. It is just one example of why the current actions, investigations and/or possible law suits are justified today.

Current or past "fanatics" is largely dependant on which side of the road your standing on. One could make a case for we have now driven across the road into the OTHER side of the ditch, from the right, to the left. Finding center is a good idea!

[map]

"torture" Ask Danny Pearl about "torture" I forgot the ****in savages cut his head off!

WWII rules should apply if in doubt shoot em..

[Excaliber]

map, all of them? Sort 'em later? That works fairly well for me in "Call of Duty", the game, not so much on a real battle field.

Afghanistan comes to mind in that regard. The military is constantly weighing the civilian factor in determining when, where to strike. Easy to just kill 'em all, but that will never "win" the war, just the opposite effect will be rendered.

[map]

Originally Posted by Excaliber

The internment of the Japanese during WW2 cannot be justified, it was wrong, period. It is just one example of why the current actions, investigations and/or possible law suits are justified today.

Current or past "fanatics" is largely dependant on which side of the road your standing on. One could make a case for we have now driven across the road into the OTHER side of the ditch, from the right, to the left. Finding center is a good idea!

Bull****!

I didn't see the I'm good guy tattooed on there forehead, So you keep them all in one place just to sort out the Enemy!
Kinda like the American Germans in WWII that went back to fight for the Mother land against the Americans!
Could YOU pick out all the bad guy? But when they were found there was no trial they got a bullet!

The only thing these savages understand is brute force and I think it's way over due!