home

Thursday Open Thread

By Jeralyn, Section Blog Related
Posted on Thu Aug 16, 2007 at 08:37:00 AM EST
Tags: (all tags)
Share This: Digg! StumbleUpon del.icio.us reddit reddit

It's court in the mountains for me today. I've got an early flight there and a late flight back so that means an open thread day for you.

Here's the tiny plane I'll be flying on. No bathroom, no flight attendant. Even with the constant turbulance caused by the heat of summer it beats driving seven hours each way.

What it doesn't beat is getting up at 5am to arrive at the airport an hour and a half before the flight and on the other end, having to worry about whether the flight will be cancelled due to wind conditions or whether weight restrictions will make them bump some passengers. The worst part, of course, is that I like my client and I'll be very sad when for the first time after months of doing court hearings, I leave to go home while he stays in the custody of the Town Marshals.

I hope you all have a better day planned.

< How Chris Dodd Won My Support: By Leading On the Issues Now | Breaking! Petraeus Part of Bush Administration >

  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


    • Display: Sort:
    Thursday Open Thread | 99 comments (99 topical)

    Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment

    Padilla verdict reached... (5.00 / 1) (#7)
    by desertswine on Thu Aug 16, 2007 at 11:46:31 AM EST
    MIAMI (AP) - A verdict was reached Thursday in the trial of Jose Padilla and two co-defendants charged with supporting al-Qaida and other violent Islamic extremist groups overseas.

    The jury verdict was scheduled to be read at 2 p.m. EDT before U.S. District Judge Marcia Cooke in Miami's downtown federal courthouse, according to an announcement from her chambers. The jury of seven men and five women deliberated for about a day and a half following a three-month trial.

    psychology of the pawn (5.00 / 1) (#17)
    by Sumner on Thu Aug 16, 2007 at 12:38:32 PM EST
    From Democracy Now!: An Inside Look at How U.S. Interrogators Destroyed the Mind of Jose Padilla


    Parent
    Guilty (none / 0) (#20)
    by Gabriel Malor on Thu Aug 16, 2007 at 01:34:03 PM EST
    On all three counts.

    CNN.

    Parent

    I should drive by.... (5.00 / 1) (#25)
    by kdog on Thu Aug 16, 2007 at 02:03:53 PM EST
    Lady Liberty after work tonight and look for some tears.

    From the CNN article....

    The verdict is a "critical vindication" for the U.S. Department of Justice and its post-9/11 strategy for prosecuting terrorism cases, said Kendall Coffey, former U.S. attorney in Miami who comments on legal matters for CNN.

    I find the verdict as vindication for torture and unconstitutional actions by our government.  

    Our protections from tyranny aren't worth the paper the hemp paper they are printed on I'm afraid.

    Parent

    Gesh, Kdog. (1.00 / 1) (#28)
    by jimakaPPJ on Thu Aug 16, 2007 at 02:15:54 PM EST
    The guy got off the plane with a list of al-Qaeada email/cellphone numbers and $10,000 in cash..

    What do you want? For him to walk in and surrender??

    Parent

    What I want is Liberty..... (5.00 / 1) (#40)
    by kdog on Thu Aug 16, 2007 at 02:48:40 PM EST
    plain and simple.

    I don't want to live in a place where having 10 grand and some phone numbers is punishable by indefinite confinement and torture...I'm sorry buddy.  I know it might make us less safe from a terror attack, but it would make us more safe from our government.


    Parent

    Kdog (1.00 / 1) (#42)
    by jimakaPPJ on Thu Aug 16, 2007 at 03:11:44 PM EST
    First of all, I think that is alleged torture.

    And it doesn't have to be terror related to make sense.

    Secondly, if you are carrying around a list of telephone numbers and email addresses of dope dealers, numbers runners and/or known bookies, people are apt to conclude you do dope, may sell dope, gamble or run illegal games.

    Thirdly, if in addition to the above,you have much more cash when returning from a trip to Vegas than when you left, people will be further convinced that you are either one of the two, or both.

    Fourthly, if your fingerprints are found on a stash of dope and/or a deck of cards, you will be further suspect.

    Parent

    Or I could simply..... (5.00 / 1) (#48)
    by kdog on Thu Aug 16, 2007 at 05:45:11 PM EST
    have a friend who also happens to sell dope or take bets.  Or maybe he ain't even a friend, just somebody I met on the road who gave me their number. As for cash, my money is my business, I shouldn't have to prove how I acquired it, the state should have to prove I acquired it illegally.

    I've said all along I have no clue if he is what the govt. says he is, or just some unlucky clown.  But once you get locked up without due process and more than likely tortured, the point should be irrelevant.  You get let go, no matter how heinous the alleged crimes, case closed...unless the Bill of Rights is toilet paper, which appears to be the case.  

    C'mon buddy, this is fundamental liberties here.  

    Say I get hot in the biggest game of my life overseas, the cops are waiting for me at JFK, tax my roll and my rolodex, slap the "enemy combatant" label on me, lock me in a hole, "allegedly" torture me, and its 3 years or so till I see a courtroom.  You wanna live in such a place?  Seriously...

    Parent

    Kdog (1.00 / 0) (#57)
    by jimakaPPJ on Fri Aug 17, 2007 at 08:35:08 AM EST
    Uh, all of the evidence obatined by use of alleged torture was not used during the trial.

    And there were multiple telnos and email addresses, so you would have had to multiple friends who were bookies and/or dope dealers.

    He was guilty.

    BTW - As I noted to edger, day before yesterday about 500 innocent men, women and children were killed by terrorists in Iraq. These are the people Padilla was wanting to join with in common cause.

    Parent

    Vindication (1.00 / 1) (#29)
    by Gabriel Malor on Thu Aug 16, 2007 at 02:17:46 PM EST
    I find the verdict as vindication for torture and unconstitutional actions by our government.  

    The verdict is no such thing. One can complain about the Administration's treatment of Padilla without indicting innocent jurors who were called to make a decision.

    Their choice is not "vindication" for anything other than the case the prosecution made. Especially since questions of torture and other unconstitutional actions were not even part of the case.

    Parent

    The jurors.... (5.00 / 1) (#47)
    by kdog on Thu Aug 16, 2007 at 03:56:04 PM EST
    ain't innocent anymore....not in my eyes.  They are complicit.

    Parent
    Sigh. (1.00 / 1) (#50)
    by Gabriel Malor on Thu Aug 16, 2007 at 06:19:49 PM EST
    As Volokh Conspiracy commenter Anderson (who I rarely agree with) wrote:

    Sigh. How hard is it, people?

    (1) Signing up to join terrorist groups is a serious crime

    is not inconsistent with

    (2) deliberately tormenting a prisoner for years is wicked.

    You really can think both at the same time. Try it!



    Parent
    Anything to avoid the point (5.00 / 0) (#55)
    by Edger on Fri Aug 17, 2007 at 07:23:17 AM EST
    of what kdog and others say about what they plainly see.

    Take of the blinders kid, before you get blindsided.

    Parent

    Why is it.... (5.00 / 0) (#56)
    by kdog on Fri Aug 17, 2007 at 08:33:39 AM EST
    that Padilla's crimes (if he even did anything)are being punished so severely, and the governements crimes are not being punished at all?

    Doesn't that bother you in the slightest?

    Parent

    kdog (1.00 / 0) (#60)
    by jimakaPPJ on Fri Aug 17, 2007 at 10:06:15 AM EST
    Could we please have a list of the alleged crimes, and what proof there is that they happened.

    Parent
    Violation of due process.... (5.00 / 0) (#72)
    by kdog on Fri Aug 17, 2007 at 11:00:38 AM EST
    is one crime.  Torture is another.  The evidence is available if you look.

    Parent
    Well, obviously he just doesn't get it (5.00 / 0) (#78)
    by Alien Abductee on Fri Aug 17, 2007 at 01:03:05 PM EST
    Handling an application form has to be identical to signing up to join a terrorist group if the government says you have. You've got to watch out what you touch in this new world, people!

    Padilla is clearly guilty of thoughtcrime. Even if he didn't actually do anything, three years of torture and a lifetime of being entombed alive is too good for the likes of that sort of crime.

    Parent

    The Irony is (5.00 / 2) (#32)
    by Peaches on Thu Aug 16, 2007 at 02:22:55 PM EST
    Now that he is insane, he agrees probably agrees with the verdict and the goal of the Bush Administration. A life prison sentence for him is gravy after what he went through at the brig.

    Let's not forget, we were told he was part of a plot to bring a dirty bomb into America but was charged with providing material support to terrorist organizations. Guilty, pehaps, but not as guilty as our government. From Sumner's link to Democracy Now.

    DR. ANGELA HEGARTY: I think there's two things, really. Number one, his family, more than anything, and his friends, who had a chance to see him by the time I spoke with them, said he was changed. There was something wrong. There was something very "weird" -- was the word one of his siblings used -- something weird about him. There was something not right. He was a different man. And the second thing was his absolute state of terror, terror alternating with numbness, largely. It was as though the interrogators were in the room with us. He was like -- perhaps like a trauma victim who knew that they were going to be sent back to the person who hurt them and that he would, as I said earlier, he would subsequently pay a price if he revealed what happened. So I think those would be the two main things.
    Also he had developed, actually, a third thing. He had developed really a tremendous identification with the goals and interests of the government. I really considered a diagnosis of Stockholm syndrome. For example, at one point in the proceedings, his attorneys had, you know, done well at cross-examining an FBI agent, and instead of feeling happy about it like all the other defendants I've seen over the years, he was actually very angry with them. He was very angry that the civil proceedings were "unfair to the commander-in-chief," quote/unquote. And in fact, one of the things that happened that disturbed me particularly was when he saw his mother. He wanted her to contact President Bush to help him, help him out of his dilemma. He expected that the government might help him, if he was "good," quote/unquote... Well, I think one of the things you have to realize is he was adamant that he would not reveal any quote/unquote "classified information." He in fact refused to provide a narrative of his account... How to capture that in an apt metaphor? He was terrified. For him, the government was all-powerful. The government knew everything. The government knew everything that he was doing. His interrogators would find out every little detail that he revealed. And he would be punished for it... He was convinced that -- I mean, I think in words he endorsed -- even if he won his case, he lost, because he was going back to the brig if he managed to prevail at trial. And essentially, if hypothetically one were to offer him a really long prison sentence versus -- with a guarantee that he wouldn't go back to the brig -- versus risking going back to the brig, the chance that he might go back to the brig, he would take the prison sentence for a very long period of time. I think he would take almost anything rather than go back to that brig... What happened at the brig was essentially the destruction of a human being's mind. That's what happened at the brig. His personality was deconstructed and reformed.
    And essentially, like many abuse victims, whether it's torture survivors or battered women or even children who are abused by parents, as long as the parents or the abuser is in control in their minds, essentially they identify with the primary aims of the abuser. And all abusers, whoever they are, have one absolute requirement, and that is that you keep their secret. I mean, it's common knowledge that people who abuse children or women will say, "Look at what you made me do," putting the blame on the victim, trying to instill guilt. "People will judge you. People will think you're crazy if you tell them about this. You will be an enemy. You will be seen as an enemy. You will be seen as a bad person if this comes out. There will be dire and terrible consequences, not only for you." Jose was very, very concerned that if torture allegations were made on his behalf, that somehow it would it interfere with the government's ability to detain people at Guantanamo, and this was something he couldn't sign onto. He was very identified with the goals of the government.

    We live in a very sick society and its not Padilla that gives evidence to this, but our government.  

    Parent

    Peaches (1.00 / 0) (#63)
    by jimakaPPJ on Fri Aug 17, 2007 at 10:20:26 AM EST
    This guy is faking.

    Parent
    the judge didn't think so ... (5.00 / 2) (#70)
    by Sailor on Fri Aug 17, 2007 at 10:51:17 AM EST
    ... but I'm sure that ppj could stand up to 3.5 years of torture and isolation ... at least it would be informative to watch.

    Parent
    Jim, (5.00 / 1) (#71)
    by Peaches on Fri Aug 17, 2007 at 10:57:40 AM EST
    Let's see you spend 3 years on isolation. or even a month and see what it does to you.

    I don't think anyone, even the government, disputes he was held in isolation and sensory deprivation techniques were used against him for long periods of time. The goverment's position is that these techniques are not torture.

    I don't think he was faking, but I think it might be the only plausible explanation for some who hold onto the belief that our government is pure.

    Parent

    Pretty sad judgment and conviction (none / 0) (#21)
    by Edger on Thu Aug 16, 2007 at 01:48:47 PM EST
    of the Bush Administration, of all of his supporters, and of the Justice System.

    If they ever come for you Gabe, it will not be Neocons and Bush supporters supporting you.

    But you knew that.

    Parent

    Eh? (1.00 / 1) (#23)
    by Gabriel Malor on Thu Aug 16, 2007 at 02:01:20 PM EST
    Edger, why would "they" come for me? I'm not in the habit of engaging in terrorist activities (unlike Padilla).

    Parent
    You know (none / 0) (#26)
    by Edger on Thu Aug 16, 2007 at 02:08:02 PM EST
    exactly what I mean, Gabe.

    Parent
    Heh. (1.00 / 1) (#31)
    by Gabriel Malor on Thu Aug 16, 2007 at 02:22:52 PM EST
    I'm particularly enjoying your prior pronouncements on this case.

    Here's a nice one.

    This is not a trial of Jose Padilla. It is the continuing trial of the government and the Bush Administration, and more specifically it is a trial of George W. Bush, who leads that government, and of Bush's supporters.

    It looks like the Bush Administration, George W. Bush, and Bush's supporters won their trial!

    This one, too.

    Today's [competency] hearing was also a hearing on the competency of the justice system itself.

    Have you anything to add about the competency of the justice system?

    Parent

    Only from the far side of the looking glass can it (5.00 / 0) (#39)
    by Edger on Thu Aug 16, 2007 at 02:47:16 PM EST
    be said that the Bush Administration, George W. Bush, and Bush's supporters won their trial.

    They lost. You lost. I lost. The country lost.

    And the whole world lost.

    Parent

    I understand your thought process (1.00 / 1) (#41)
    by jimakaPPJ on Thu Aug 16, 2007 at 03:00:07 PM EST
    From your past:

    Posted by edger at December 4, 2005 08:12 AM

    I had written:

    Insurgents don't use car bombs to kill civilians or give booby trapped dolls to children. That is terrorist work, edgey. (quoted from my previous comment)

    Edger replied:

    That is not "terrorist work" in the way you try to twist it to mean, at all. It is the work of the Iraqi people - the very people BushCo thought would throw flowers - fighting to kick the US out of Iraq":

    In the past 36 hours somewhere between 175 and 500 innocent civilans in Iraq have been murdered by terrorists.

    The government's case was that it was Padilla's intent to join, be trained on how to kill, and to assists such terrorists.

    Parent

    It was the old, old story of (none / 0) (#27)
    by Edger on Thu Aug 16, 2007 at 02:11:31 PM EST
    the sacrificial lamb.

    What about those of us who knew better, we who knew the words were lies and worse than lies? Why did we sit silent? Why did we take part? Because we loved our country. What difference does it make if a few political extremists lose their rights? What difference does it make if a few racial minorities lose their rights? It is only a passing phase. It is only a stage we are going through. It will be discarded sooner or later. Hitler himself will be discarded -- sooner or later.  The country is in danger. We will march out of the shadows! We will go forward. FORWARD is the great password.



    Parent
    Jose Padilla (none / 0) (#30)
    by Edger on Thu Aug 16, 2007 at 02:21:02 PM EST
    could have been your neighbor, or your brother...... or you.

    The case of Jose Padilla is one of the most despicable and outright un-American travesties the U.S. Government has perpetrated for a long time. It is impossible to defend that behavior, let alone engage in it, and claim with any legitimacy that one believes in the principles that have defined and guided this country since its founding. But there has been no retreat from this behavior. Quite the contrary. The atrocity known as the Military Commissions Act of 2006 is a huge leap forward to elevating the Padilla treatment from the lawless shadows into full-fledged, officially sanctioned and legally authorized policy of the U.S. Government. The case of Jose Padilla is no longer a sick aberration, but is instead a symbol of the kind of Government we have chosen to have.
    So I Remember Ev'ry Face - Of Ev'ry Man Who Put Me Here

    Parent
    Indeed. (1.00 / 1) (#33)
    by Gabriel Malor on Thu Aug 16, 2007 at 02:25:08 PM EST
    It is impossible to defend that behavior, let alone engage in it, and claim with any legitimacy that one believes in the principles that have defined and guided this country since its founding.

    However, it is possible to oppose torture and other international law violations and still believe in the efficacy of the criminal justice system.

    The Bush Administration would rather have not put Padilla in the criminal justice system, but it's nice to see that it still functions.

    Parent

    It is possible to oppose torture (5.00 / 0) (#36)
    by Edger on Thu Aug 16, 2007 at 02:39:29 PM EST
    You should try opposing it sometime.

    Gabriel Malor on Mon Nov 13, 2006:

    Do you believe that the United States should live up to the Geneva Convention, to which we are signatories, which prohibits torture of any prisoners, whether or not they are considered "prisoners of war, "unlawful combatants," or any other term of convenience to the imprisoniong power"?

    [GABE]: Yes, though I suspect we have very different definitions of torture.

    Do you believe that prisoners at Guantanamo should be observed by international human rights organizations to assure the world that we do not torture them?</font>

    [GABE]: No. I have no problem with instituting self-administered monitoring (perhaps Congress could get off its ass and create a program), but "international human rights organizations" are not inclined to give Guantanamo objective scrutiny. I also worry that these organizations could compromise the security and safety of the facility and give aid to the prisoners.

    Do you believe the president had the authority to hold American citizen Jose Padilla for several years without a trial or access to a lawyer?

    [GABE]: Yes.



    Parent
    The Extinction of Iraqs Minorities (5.00 / 1) (#49)
    by john horse on Thu Aug 16, 2007 at 06:15:05 PM EST
    The recent attack against the Yazidis illustrates in the village of Qahataniya illustrates the violence and genocide being committed against Iraq's minorities.  Whereas once they constituted a significant part of Iraq's population (as much as 10 percent) the UN now estimates that as many as half have fled.  Those not fleeing are being killed.  For example for the Mandeans "The killing is equal to three deaths for every one person left alive."  

    Groups under attack include Christians, Yazidis, Turkomans, Palestinians, and Jews. (link to article by Patrick Coburn in the Independent)

    The irony is that these minorities were protected from persecution by Sadam Hussein.  In getting rid of Saddam we released the forces of intolerant Sunni and Shiite fundamentalism.  George Bush says that he talked to God before invading Iraq.  I wonder if God told him that because of his invasion Iraqi Christians would face persecution.

    Aren't the Kurds a minority??? (1.00 / 0) (#84)
    by jimakaPPJ on Fri Aug 17, 2007 at 01:32:36 PM EST


    Parent
    in a way ... (none / 0) (#86)
    by Sailor on Fri Aug 17, 2007 at 05:10:08 PM EST
    ... Kurds make up 15 - 20% of Iraq's population; but in another ... not.

    They have their own geographic area and their own government, (i.e. Kurdistan) and there they are by far the majority. It's similar to saying Californians are a minority ... but not in California.

    Parent

    Sailor loves strawmen (none / 0) (#98)
    by jimakaPPJ on Mon Aug 20, 2007 at 08:37:11 AM EST
    Iraq is a country.

    The Kurds are either a minority in that coutry, or they are not.

    Parent

    Bush (none / 0) (#61)
    by Edger on Fri Aug 17, 2007 at 10:09:47 AM EST
    may have talked to some god. But he didn't listen.

    Parent
    The Journalists who fell (1.00 / 0) (#37)
    by jimakaPPJ on Thu Aug 16, 2007 at 02:45:20 PM EST
    from grace with the Internet.

    A few weeks ago I commented that the Internet has lots of facts, some of them actually true.. Let me say that I thought that original, but who knows? ;-)

    Either way, here is a list you should find interesting. 62 who have sinned.

    Scott Beauchamp was the last straw. I realized that I need a scorecard to keep track of all the fallen journalists, journalistic mistakes and major and minor screw-ups in the media.  I couldn't find one already made, although Wikipedia came close, so I started my own.  I apologize if there is a good list already out there, but I looked and could not find.

    Link

    When was Beauchamp discredited? (5.00 / 0) (#46)
    by Militarytracy on Thu Aug 16, 2007 at 03:51:07 PM EST
    Last I had heard the Army had only hushed him.

    Parent
    When was Beauchamp hushed? (none / 0) (#51)
    by roy on Thu Aug 16, 2007 at 09:19:43 PM EST
    Last I heard, he was free to talk to the media but hasn't chosen to.

    Parent
    Indeed. (1.00 / 0) (#53)
    by Gabriel Malor on Fri Aug 17, 2007 at 12:09:17 AM EST
    Beauchamp's comm privileges were restored after the investigation. He has the same opportunities to use the phones and computers as the rest of the troops in Iraq. We know at the very least that he's been in contact with his wife, a staffer at TNR. One would think that if he had something else to say, he would have said it.

    Parent
    Crack up time (5.00 / 1) (#54)
    by Militarytracy on Fri Aug 17, 2007 at 06:52:53 AM EST
    Here is what was emailed to the Weakly Standard as Sailor calls it.


    His command's investigation is complete. At this time, there is no formal what we call Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) actions being taken. However, there are other Administrative actions or what we call Non-Judicial Punishment that can be taken if the command deems appropriate. These are again administrative in nature and as such are not releasable to the public by law.

    We are not stonewalling anyone. There are official statements that are out there are on the record from several of us and nothing has changed.

    We are not preventing him from speaking to TNR or anyone. He has full access to the Morale Welfare and Recreation phones that all the other members of the unit are free to use. It is my understanding that he has been informed of the requests to speak to various members of the media, both traditional and non-traditional and has declined. That is his right.

    We will not nor can we force a Soldier to talk to the media or his family or anyone really for that matter in these types of issues.

    We fully understand the issues on this. What everyone must understand is that we will not breach the rights of the Soldier and this is where this is at this point.

    So Beauchamp isn't formally charged for anything he said which in the Army means he didn't lie.  He said a whole bunch of things the Army didn't appreciate and if they could have had his head on a pike they would have.  They investigated though and discovered that they really didn't want to go there if they were looking for a nice kitchen table discussion and subject matter.  And they aren't preventing him from saying anything that he wants to say but there are things that the Army would really like for him not to say and he has no civil rights where the Army is concerned. So the words However, there are other Administrative actions or what we call Non-Judicial Punishment that can be taken if the command deems appropriate in the military is the long version of STFU.  You guys continue to charm and entertain me.

    Parent

    Tracy - You leave out the part (none / 0) (#58)
    by jimakaPPJ on Fri Aug 17, 2007 at 09:54:01 AM EST
    where they interviewed his squad and platoon... who, in case you didn't know, are the soldiers  with him 24/7, and stated that what he wrote did not happen, and where his claim re the female happened in Kuwait, not Iraq.

    You write:

    So Beauchamp isn't formally charged for anything he said which in the Army means he didn't lie
    .

    No. It means that the offense does not rise to the level that the punishment would require a court-martial in the opinion of his Commanding Officer.

    Non Judicial Punishment (NJP) is called a Captain's Mast in the Navy, Office Hours in the Marines. I do not know what it is called in the Army. It is defined in Article 15 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice.

    To initiate Article 15 action, a commander must have reason to believe that a member of his/her command committed an offense under the UCMJ. Article 15

    The Commanding Officer may:

    dispose of such charges by dismissing the charges, imposing punishment under the provisions of Art. 15, UCMJ, or referring the case to a court-martial.

    Here is Article 15.

    Beaucamp can also appeal the NJP to the next higher court, which would be a court martial.

    That his Commanding Officer after an investigation decided he was guilty of a violation and administered NJP and that Beaucamp did not request a court-martial should be enough proof to any reasonable person. That many of his claims were also outlandish and demonstratable wrong should satisfy anyone.

    As I have noted before, I find your defense of Beaucamp strange. His actions obviously have contributed to a lowering of morale and good order within his immediate group, if not larger. In addition this has to encourage the terrorists by demonstrating to them the political confusion and attacks within various political factions in the US. The terrorists know they can not defeat our military, so they must rely on a political defeat.

    Parent

    I haven't read any interviews with (5.00 / 2) (#59)
    by Militarytracy on Fri Aug 17, 2007 at 10:01:33 AM EST
    his squad and platoon.  Can you share the links?

    Parent
    I am not your researcher (1.00 / 1) (#75)
    by jimakaPPJ on Fri Aug 17, 2007 at 12:42:59 PM EST
    Hint - It was in TalkLeft within the last 10 days and you made several comments in the thread.

    Parent
    Bull, if you had an actual interview (none / 0) (#91)
    by Militarytracy on Sun Aug 19, 2007 at 08:48:38 AM EST
    you would have pulled that card.  Here's a bit from this WaPo article though Jimbo that I'm sure you don't want to read.

    In military circles, the reaction to Beauchamp's stories has been mixed. Some of my friends were disturbed by the article, but very few questioned its basic truth. His tamer reports echoed my own experiences of Iraq and mirrored stories I'd heard from other soldiers there. The third dispatch, however, struck me as too fantastic to believe, in part because I could not imagine soldiers making fun of anyone who had been wounded by an IED, especially an infantryman like Beauchamp who himself faced the dangers of these bombs. But as an old combat veteran reminded me last week, American soldiers have certainly done worse in wars past. Anyone who finds Beauchamp's story incredible merely because it's upsetting has no idea what war can do. The truth will eventually come out in this case, but larger questions about the credibility of incredible wartime narrative will remain.


    Parent
    TracyO (none / 0) (#95)
    by jimakaPPJ on Mon Aug 20, 2007 at 08:19:47 AM EST
    Still can't find the thread, eh?

    Well keep looking. It's there. Maybe I'll link to it as a Christmas present.

    BTW - You left out one or two things from the article.

    I am deeply skeptical about the veracity of Beauchamp's dispatches

    Military spokesmen in Baghdad declined to confirm this or provide any more details to me about their investigation, saying that interviews with Beauchamp's unit found that "no one could substantiate his claims," and that this was a closed issue for his unit to handle administratively.


    Parent
    Two words everyone in the military (none / 0) (#101)
    by Militarytracy on Mon Aug 20, 2007 at 11:56:45 AM EST
    knows........Blue Falcon........don't be one if you don't have to.  Still not impressed with your proof Jim. And being skeptical is fine, let us not forget though that soldiers in Vietnam ran around with necklaces made of ears okay?  Dancing around a bit with a portion of childs skull that you didn't kill on top of your head, stupid but far from the worst thing we know our soldiers have done.  American soldiers have done much worse in different wars that were less than or equally as stressful.  They are human beings Jim, not flawlessly beautiful robots of patriotism delivering democracy to far away lands they have liberated.

    Parent
    And I know all about Non Judicial Punishments (5.00 / 1) (#62)
    by Militarytracy on Fri Aug 17, 2007 at 10:14:19 AM EST
    so save the lecture.  I know far better than you as to what your commander can tell you to do and not do if he feels that something you are doing is jeopardizing the mission in any way AND I MEAN IN ANY WAY, SHAPE, or FORM.  He can tell you that you can't talk to the press and you also can't admit to being told you can't talk to the press because you are destroying troop morale.  An NCO working with my husband was just reprimanded yesterday for having an extramarital affair with a local waitress. He is not permitted personal contact with the woman ever again or more serious actions will be taken against him.  He has failed to mentor other soldiers properly and brought disorder and chaos to his unit because of the stress and chaos he has caused within his family and thereby other military families that share friendship with them.  He was also told that what he was doing was destroying troop morale.  If the military doesn't want you to talk or want you to fool around on your wife.....buddy you aren't doing it, period, end of discussion!  And they can try to shut military dependents up but I'm living proof that is one attempt at control that they can't enforce but hey, I am a horrible military wife huh?  If there is any justice though, someday I'll get to wear a big scarlett letter on my bodice.  

    Parent
    Tracy (1.00 / 0) (#79)
    by jimakaPPJ on Fri Aug 17, 2007 at 01:12:33 PM EST
    I know far better than you as to what your commander can tell you to do and not do

    Hmmm. I didn't know you were an expert on military law. Especially since you demonstrated the opposite in your lengthy defense of Beaucamp.

    And I guess those 10 years I actually SPENT in the military, rather than my wife, taught me nothing. (That's sarcasm boys and girls.)

    Oh well. Tracy will be Tracy.


    Parent

    Your ten years weren't spent in combat (1.00 / 1) (#92)
    by Militarytracy on Sun Aug 19, 2007 at 08:51:43 AM EST
    and if you weren't such a yellow coward you would be putting in the rest of your twenty.  You would rather be a cheerleader though, it is safer, the most that can happen is a sprain.

    Parent
    TracyO (none / 0) (#96)
    by jimakaPPJ on Mon Aug 20, 2007 at 08:32:26 AM EST
    Be careful who you call coward. I served 10 years. You have served none. Even those who served only a day have done more than you.

    And no, your husband's service is not an excuse for you not serving.

    UMS would have done wonders for you.

    As for cheerleading, yes I guess you can say I cheerlead. I know that our troops are on the side of the angels, even if a few sin. I prefer to punish the sinners quietly, and praise the others loudly.

    You do not. You complain and mutter and make claims that are false and incorrect. I try to understand people such as you. I find it impossible.

    Parent

    And you left out this part (5.00 / 3) (#66)
    by Militarytracy on Fri Aug 17, 2007 at 10:33:54 AM EST
    New Republic Investigation Clears Military Columnist

    Parent
    Huh??? (1.00 / 1) (#74)
    by jimakaPPJ on Fri Aug 17, 2007 at 12:16:52 PM EST
    That's funny.

    Parent
    Now that I have stopped laughing (1.00 / 1) (#80)
    by jimakaPPJ on Fri Aug 17, 2007 at 01:14:31 PM EST
    You do realize that link is two weeks old....? And that the Army doesn't agree???

    Parent
    Put your link up or shut up. (none / 0) (#93)
    by Militarytracy on Sun Aug 19, 2007 at 08:52:31 AM EST


    Parent
    Shut up?? Great comment. (none / 0) (#97)
    by jimakaPPJ on Mon Aug 20, 2007 at 08:35:20 AM EST
    What's next, a threat to spank me??

    The fact that your memory is so poor that you don't remember the thread is funny. Especially since you was blathering in the middle of the discussion.

    Parent

    personal isults instead on links (none / 0) (#102)
    by Sailor on Mon Aug 20, 2007 at 12:28:20 PM EST
    the army can't be trusted to investigate itself (see tillmam, see rape, murder, torture) and beachamp, contrary to your assertion, has been held incommunicado since the alleged 'investigation.'

    And seeing how he was treated and other whistleblowers were treated, can you blame his fellow soldiers, who did confirm it to TNR, for not coming forward during the army's witchhunt?

    Parent

    And the terrorist have defeated our military (5.00 / 2) (#67)
    by Militarytracy on Fri Aug 17, 2007 at 10:39:38 AM EST
    I just go on and on replying to your ridiculous post.  The terrorist have defeated our military Jim because they broke it and our national security is at risk right this minute.  THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA IS NOW A JIHADIST TERRORIST ORGANIZATIONS WET DREAM!  They won Jim.  They won because we were too stupid to know when to hold em, know when to fold, know when to walk, and know when to run!

    Parent
    Wow (1.00 / 0) (#81)
    by jimakaPPJ on Fri Aug 17, 2007 at 01:15:58 PM EST
    The terrorist have defeated our military Jim because they broke it and our national security is at risk right this minute.

    Even Harry Reid didn't say that.

    Parent

    What is that supposed to mean Jim? (none / 0) (#90)
    by Militarytracy on Sun Aug 19, 2007 at 08:42:04 AM EST


    Parent
    And I am apalled that you refuse to hear (5.00 / 2) (#68)
    by Militarytracy on Fri Aug 17, 2007 at 10:48:02 AM EST
    how stressed and messed up the existing troops you have are.  What kind of soldier were you.......not even one is what I say!  I don't know how you can be so overly focused on faux morale issues for an Army you don't even have anymore!  And the morale the real day by day humping it in 130 degree sniper Iraq heat that the tatters you have left has just sucks all by itself and nothing you do on any given day makes it any better for them. And I doubt Scott whoever he is and whatever he has to say matters more than a mouth full of spit to those soldiers.  GET A CLUE!

    Parent
    Hmmmm again.... Let me try to help you. (1.00 / 0) (#83)
    by jimakaPPJ on Fri Aug 17, 2007 at 01:31:54 PM EST
    I have never said that some soldiers and sailors and marines and airmen weren't having problems. That is true now and has been true in every war. What I have said is that your constant attacks on the war causes additional problems by hurting the morale of the troops and encouraging the terrorists because they see political conflict in the US as a win for them.

    So if you support the troops, support. Don't attack their mission. It is important to them.

    Parent

    You are NUTS, totally NUTS (5.00 / 1) (#89)
    by Militarytracy on Sun Aug 19, 2007 at 08:38:24 AM EST
    America IS about questioning all missions to include military missions.  It is the cornerstone of democracy..........to question and debate.  I don't question the troops unless they have broken the laws of the UCMJ.  I fully support them.  I am an American citizen and it is my DUTY to question all missions of our troops.  Our military is under civilian authority Jim.  You get so damned nuts sometimes and say totally crazy things.  This isn't a dictatorship and you my friend are out of your mind.

    Parent
    Tracy (1.00 / 1) (#99)
    by jimakaPPJ on Mon Aug 20, 2007 at 08:41:12 AM EST
    How many people do you think questioned the mission of our troops in WWII?

    Your attacks are counterproductive.

    Parent

    DA - Prove that he did not receive NJP. (none / 0) (#100)
    by jimakaPPJ on Mon Aug 20, 2007 at 08:42:32 AM EST
    I say he did.

    Parent
    What's the photo? (none / 0) (#1)
    by oculus on Thu Aug 16, 2007 at 02:55:12 AM EST


    It looks like the courthouse in Aspen (none / 0) (#2)
    by Militarytracy on Thu Aug 16, 2007 at 08:09:03 AM EST


    Parent
    I looked through google (none / 0) (#3)
    by Militarytracy on Thu Aug 16, 2007 at 08:16:10 AM EST
    From those it looks like Telluride.  I've never been to Telluride.

    Parent
    Yup. (none / 0) (#4)
    by locomule on Thu Aug 16, 2007 at 09:21:32 AM EST
    That's the main street of ToHellYouRide.

    Here's a shot from the top of the mountain in the background (Black Bear Pass).

    Parent

    Beautiful photos (none / 0) (#5)
    by Militarytracy on Thu Aug 16, 2007 at 09:48:24 AM EST


    Parent
    The WH is writing Petraeus Sept report ... (none / 0) (#6)
    by Sailor on Thu Aug 16, 2007 at 11:00:37 AM EST
    ... and trying not to let him appear in public sessions as mandated by the law.
    links here, and here.

    If Sailor had been there in 1944 (1.00 / 0) (#8)
    by jimakaPPJ on Thu Aug 16, 2007 at 11:51:54 AM EST
    Congressman: General Eisenhower, what are your plans??

    Eisenhower: We will do a joint allied landing on the beaches of France early morning of June 6.



    Parent
    A more spurious comparision... (none / 0) (#14)
    by Dadler on Thu Aug 16, 2007 at 12:21:55 PM EST
    ...would be hard to make.

    Petraeus has already done interviews and stated his opinion, why aren't you after him for talking in the press like that?

    A White House this failed, this incapable of respecting or being truthful with the American people, so pathologically addicted to secrecy, sure, it's no problem they're going to write their own review.  I mean, back at the University of California, my professors always let me choose what grade I'd get in their classes.

    Parent

    If Dadler had been alive in 1944: (1.00 / 1) (#18)
    by jimakaPPJ on Thu Aug 16, 2007 at 12:52:46 PM EST
    Reporter: General Eisenhower, how do you think things are going?

    Eisenhower: Overall I think things are improving, although we still need more troops. And it appears that we will still need to invade the continent.

    See the difference?


    Parent

    Nope (5.00 / 2) (#19)
    by Dadler on Thu Aug 16, 2007 at 01:17:38 PM EST
    You are equating what Petraeus "will be" reporting (he already has in interviews) with the invasion of Normandy.

    I repeat, a more spurious comparison would be hard to make.

    Parent

    Dadler (1.00 / 1) (#22)
    by jimakaPPJ on Thu Aug 16, 2007 at 01:49:44 PM EST
    No, I am noting that Eisenhower would, and did, give general information to Reporters..as you claim Petraeus has done.

    But he would never give detailed plans the way Sailor, and I guess you, wants him to.

    Parent

    I don't expect him to give me any detailed (5.00 / 1) (#34)
    by Militarytracy on Thu Aug 16, 2007 at 02:33:05 PM EST
    information.  I'm pretty sure he wakes up every morning wondering what the hell to do now, especially since yesterday genocide began consuming the happiness of the once happy North ;)  He's a good egg though, still in the saddle even after this has gone way past eight seconds.  This may be the best rodeo ride I have ever seen when they finally blow the horn.

    Parent
    Tracy, why do you find it funny (1.00 / 1) (#43)
    by jimakaPPJ on Thu Aug 16, 2007 at 03:19:46 PM EST
    that the terrorist attack killed 500 or so people??

    especially since yesterday genocide began consuming the happiness of the once happy North ;)

    Is the basis of your happiness that you think this is a failure of the evil Bush's policy, thus you are "winning" and war supporters are "losing?"

    Surely you understand that this not a game.

    Parent

    Her post expresses no "happiness" (5.00 / 2) (#44)
    by glanton on Thu Aug 16, 2007 at 03:29:42 PM EST
    She sounds pretty bitter to me.  And rightfully so.  

    Parent
    I don't find it funny (5.00 / 2) (#45)
    by Militarytracy on Thu Aug 16, 2007 at 03:30:15 PM EST
    I only find my president and his ideas about how to best help oil rich Iraqis stupid to the point of tears.  Sometimes when you can't cry anymore all you can do I relish the irony.

    Parent
    Tracy (1.00 / 0) (#64)
    by jimakaPPJ on Fri Aug 17, 2007 at 10:26:47 AM EST
    The use of the "smiley" indicates a smile.

    Perhaps you would be better served to use a ;-/ which many people consider a smirk.

    Or just a comment that you find "it" ironic, as you do in your response to my comment.

    Which actually doesn't respond to your comment about the terrorist killings of between 175 and 500 people. Instead you wonder off to "oil."

    Parent

    BTW (1.00 / 0) (#65)
    by jimakaPPJ on Fri Aug 17, 2007 at 10:28:56 AM EST
    I just noted the "wonder off." At first I thought I should correct it to "wander."

    But on second thought, I was correct the first time.

    ;-)

    And yes, that is a smile.

    Parent

    Sometimes all you can do is laugh (none / 0) (#73)
    by glanton on Fri Aug 17, 2007 at 11:12:17 AM EST
    Just a brief tour of the news over the last six years, domestic and internationbal, gives rise to deep-seated feelings of criticism, outrage, and protest.  

    There is and there will continue to be a real place for such sober reactions.  But sometimes, it is not only appropriate but necessary as you look at the situation, to metaphorically throw your hands in the air and give a good ole fashioned

    ;-)

    So to speak

    Parent

    Glanton (1.00 / 0) (#77)
    by jimakaPPJ on Fri Aug 17, 2007 at 12:58:55 PM EST
    What you speak of is irony..

    the use of words to express something other than and especially the opposite of the literal meaning b : a usually humorous or sardonic literary style or form characterized by irony c : an ironic expression or utterance

    Tracy belatedly claims that was her intent.

    BTW - Been a while. How are you?? Did you give the quit smoking drug a shot be discussed??

    Parent

    Jim (5.00 / 0) (#82)
    by glanton on Fri Aug 17, 2007 at 01:19:40 PM EST
    Currently my struggles to quit smoking are on the upswing, but my insurance didn't cover the drugs; they're not THAT expensive, but in my position it was still best to economize so I decided to go with the patch.  Over a month and counting... knowck on wood.

    By the way, anybody looking for a company to invest in I strongly suggest whoever makes Life-Savers for the next several months!

    As for the serious matters under discussion here, I instyantly and instinctively grasped the frustration undergirding Tracy's post.  Is it possible that things between you and she have brought you to the point that you can no longer even read what she's writing?

    And then, my own commentary on the matter doesn't presume to speak for Tracy.  My two-cents on the matter is, from the Greek theater own down we have been turning to laughter as a last resort in the face of humilation, outrage, embarassment, fear, etc.  

    For my part I have not toally given up on the human race, nor could I ever imagine myself doing so.  But geez, whether you're talking about untbags overseas blowing each other up over stoopid dogmas, or whether you're talking about our own elite group of rulers smugly sending soldiers into the middle of it even as they Institutionalize Torture (for example), the decent people almost always seem to wind up like Charlie Brown, always trusting Lucy, never getting to kick the football.  Protest, complain, vote, etc.  But sometimes you jyst gotta laugh.

    Personal disclaimer:

    One of the things that makes it hard for me to not be a bigot towards Islam, Judaism, and Christianity alike (though continue to fight the urge) is that in none of the Holy Texts on which those religions are founded, do smiling or (God Forbid) laughter get their due, if they get mentioned at all.    

    Parent

    is China setting an example? (none / 0) (#9)
    by Sumner on Thu Aug 16, 2007 at 12:00:51 PM EST
    from TheRegister: China jails 'subversive' net dissident

    I got my eye on you (none / 0) (#10)
    by Sumner on Thu Aug 16, 2007 at 12:03:03 PM EST
    from Slashdot: DHS To Share Spy Satellite Data Over the US

    did you check under that rock over there? (none / 0) (#11)
    by Sumner on Thu Aug 16, 2007 at 12:05:50 PM EST
    from UPI: Homegrown terrorists called serious threat

    TL/JM re: Westword Cover 8/16 (none / 0) (#12)
    by Oliver W Holmes the 3rd on Thu Aug 16, 2007 at 12:12:54 PM EST
    I know you have in the past featured (for lack of a better description) posts about SuperMax in Florance, CO.

    While in Denver on a brief vacation, I noticed the new Westword cover story titled The Caged Life and a sidebar story titled Fortress of Solitude.

    While the articles discuss the well known names hosed at "ADX", both articles are quite telling and reveling.

    Maybe you can find a copy for your "ride" home (and I would NEVER fly the plane you pictured, I have enough difficulty flying large jets).  Safe travels and thanks for TL.

    government housing projects (none / 0) (#16)
    by Sumner on Thu Aug 16, 2007 at 12:32:50 PM EST
    OFFICIAL: "I hereby inform you under powers entrusted to me under Section 47, Paragraph 7 of Council Order Number 438476, that Mr Buttle, Archibald, residing at 412 North Tower, Shangri La Towers, has been invited to assist the Ministry of Information with certain enquiries, the nature of which may be ascertained on completion of application form BZ/ST/486/C fourteen days within this date, and that he is liable to certain obligations as specified in Council Order 173497, including
    financial restitutions which may or may not be incurred if Information Retrieval procedures beyond those incorporated in Article 7 subsections 8, 10 & 32 are required to elicit information leading to permanent
    arrest     - notification of which will he served with the time period of 5 working days as stipulated by law. In that instance the detainee will be debited without further notice through central banking procedures without prejudice until and unless at such a time when re-imbursement procedures may be instituted by you or third parties on completion of a re-imbursement form RB/CZ/907/X ..." -- from the movie, Brazil


    Parent
    Thanks, Oliver (none / 0) (#52)
    by Jeralyn on Thu Aug 16, 2007 at 10:08:51 PM EST
    It was pretty bad flying. The pilot called in sick and they didn't have another pilot with the extra credentials needed to fly into the mountain town I was going to, so they flew us to an airport two hours away and shuttled us in a van.  The same pilot was scheduled to fly the return flight so I had to wait 3 hours in the tiny airport for the next flight home which had an experienced pilot. All of which pales, of course, in comparison to what my client is going through tonight in jail, en route to prison.

    As for the Supermax articles, I'll take a look. Thanks for letting me know about them.

    Parent

    more from Brazil (none / 0) (#13)
    by Sumner on Thu Aug 16, 2007 at 12:14:42 PM EST
    INTERVIEWER: "Mr. HELPMANN, what would you say to those critics who maintain that the Ministry Of Information has become too large and unwieldy ...?"

    HELPMANN: "David ... in a free society information is the name of the game. You can't win the game if you're a man short." -- from Brazil (1985), screenplay by Terry Gilliam and Tom Stoppard
    The Florida Gator report (none / 0) (#15)
    by Dadler on Thu Aug 16, 2007 at 12:31:34 PM EST
    BTD will be glad to know that even while school is out of session, the University of Florida still managed to pick up another couple of NCAA championships over the summer -- in freestyle beer bonging and breast implant handball.  Talk about a dynasty.

    Guilty (none / 0) (#24)
    by jimakaPPJ on Thu Aug 16, 2007 at 02:02:31 PM EST


    Can he just go home now (5.00 / 1) (#35)
    by Militarytracy on Thu Aug 16, 2007 at 02:34:49 PM EST
    for torture served?

    Parent
    He has a new home. (none / 0) (#38)
    by jimakaPPJ on Thu Aug 16, 2007 at 02:45:52 PM EST


    Parent
    So do we.... (5.00 / 2) (#88)
    by kdog on Sun Aug 19, 2007 at 08:30:48 AM EST
    It ain't the home my grandfather's fought for anymore.

    Parent
    Nobody during WWII (none / 0) (#103)
    by jondee on Mon Aug 20, 2007 at 12:46:49 PM EST
    ; the War of 1812 or, the siege of Troy would've said that, kdog.

    There's a time to criticize and a time to support whatever right wing, white supremacist, facist regime is currently in power.

    Parent

    Getting for free (none / 0) (#104)
    by jondee on Mon Aug 20, 2007 at 12:48:16 PM EST
    what they used to pay Jeff Gannon to do to them.

    Parent
    Thursday Open Thread | 99 comments (99 topical)

    Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment