Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Bush Regime Asks Judge To Gag Gitmo Detainees To Prevent Disclosures On CIA Torture Prisons

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 (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) Donate to DU
 
bigtree Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-04-06 11:55 AM
Original message
Bush Regime Asks Judge To Gag Gitmo Detainees To Prevent Disclosures On CIA Torture Prisons
Edited on Sat Nov-04-06 11:57 AM by bigtree
Bush Administration Wants Terror Detainees Silenced on Secret CIA Prisons

By VOA News
04 November 2006


The Bush administration says suspected terrorists who were held at secret CIA prisons overseas should not be allowed to discuss interrogation techniques used by their captors.

In court papers filed last week with a federal judge in Washington, the U.S. Justice Department says the detainees must be prevented from revealing the techniques, even to their attorneys, because they are among the nation's most sensitive secrets. The administration argues the information could help terrorists develop tactics to counter the CIA's efforts to extract vital intelligence about potential terrorist attacks.

The administration filed the papers in response to efforts by a civil liberties group seeking access to one of 14 high-value terror suspects transferred to the military prison at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba in September.

The administration says detainees have no right to speak to an attorney under a new law signed by President Bush last month authorizing the use of military commissions to prosecute suspected terrorists.

report: http://www.voanews.com/english/2006-11-04-voa15.cfm


http://journals.democraticunderground.com/bigtree
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
texpatriot2004 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-04-06 12:01 PM
Response to Original message
1. Kick it for exposure nm
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bigtree Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-04-06 04:23 PM
Response to Reply #1
14. ditto
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Vinca Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-04-06 12:04 PM
Response to Original message
2. Sometimes you have to wonder just how low they can go.
What, exactly, do they plan on doing to the detainees who blab that they haven't done already?? How much more can this regime embarrass our nation?? I'm furious . . . again. Recommend.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bigtree Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-04-06 01:21 PM
Response to Reply #2
8. They are desperate for the full account of their abuses to remain secret
because they HAD to be approved at the HIGHEST levels of the Bush regime.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
merh Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-04-06 12:05 PM
Response to Original message
3. Doesn't there exist a question as to whether or not GWB's
failure to sign the law before Congress adjourned in effect was a veto (pocket veto) and therefore the law the is NOT in effect?

Guess this case could resolve that question.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bigtree Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-04-06 12:17 PM
Response to Reply #3
4. Padilla has an active challenge to the law outside of the commission system
in regular criminal court.

Other challenges to the law are pending, mostly revolving around the attempts by the Bush regime to suppress defendant's testimony and that of any witnessess the court allows them.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
merh Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-04-06 12:33 PM
Response to Reply #4
7. The law itself may not be in effect
GWB's failure to sign it before Congress adjourned may have in effect been a pocket veto. His arrogance may again, have gotten in the way of his purpose. He is such a dweb with some pretty stupid advisors.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tommy_J Donating Member (668 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-04-06 12:27 PM
Response to Original message
5. Kicking and recommending

Wouldn't it be great if the mainstream picked this up...

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bigtree Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-04-06 01:31 PM
Response to Reply #5
9. you never know
shit happens :kick:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The Backlash Cometh Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-04-06 12:30 PM
Response to Original message
6. They gag tortured prisoners like they gag environmentalists.
When the Democrats come back into office, please include open government in the first 100 days? But be sure you give the documents to people who will share it with the public for the good of society.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bigtree Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-04-06 02:31 PM
Response to Reply #6
10. this law will have to be unwraveled in the courts
I think
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TexasLawyer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-04-06 02:34 PM
Response to Original message
11. "they are among the nation's most sensitive secrets..."
'cause these bastards don't want to go to the Hague for crimes against humanity.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bigtree Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-04-06 03:14 PM
Response to Reply #11
12. that's clearly the reason they were so desperate to have the law passed
to try to get Congress to cover THEIR asses. They pretended it was the agents they were defending, but THEY gave the orders.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Straight Shooter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-04-06 03:23 PM
Response to Reply #11
13. Ding ding ding!
We have a first prize winner.

And plenty of runner-ups, too. :)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Swamp Rat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-04-06 04:25 PM
Response to Original message
15. Trying to cover up crimes against humanity.
:eyes:


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bigtree Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-04-06 05:14 PM
Response to Reply #15
16. not enough whitewash in the world
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Disturbed Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-04-06 06:03 PM
Response to Reply #16
17. Detainees do not deserve any rights.
These Detainees are Terrorists. They are guilty of Terrorism. There is no need for any sort of Trial because they are guilty of Terrorist Acts. Why is this so hard to understand? The Glorious Leader has explained this. Why is anyone questioning The Glorious Leader? Anyone that questions The Glorious Leader needs to be arrested immediately because they are aiding these guilty Terrorists.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lumpy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-04-06 06:13 PM
Response to Reply #17
18. Kick
Can't say this is unbelievable, but oh for God's sake! amazing how far the little dictaor has gone in reaching his fascistic goals.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
blogslut Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-04-06 06:15 PM
Response to Original message
19. KICK
Bastards
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
vixengrl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Nov-05-06 10:27 AM
Response to Original message
20. God, these people are brazen! "most sensitive secrets"!
Putting nuclear secrets in Arabic on "the internets" is totally fine (even if it's "instant proliferation": just add materiel and experiment!), but discussing the treatment that terror detainess receive is beyond the pale because:

The administration argues the information could help terrorists develop tactics to counter the CIA's efforts to extract vital intelligence about potential terrorist attacks.

Counter-tactics, like, I dunno, lying to the interrogators or dying before they say anything--or my personal favorite (as in, no, I don't relish this thought), simply not having anything to say in the first place? It doesn't seem to me that these tactics wouldn't already be pretty well-known.

No, it seems to me the administration simply isn't eager to have their methods exposed, because they are criminal.
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 Sat Nov 16th 2019, 05:26 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) 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