Long-Term Imprisonment

Long-Term Plan Sought For Terror Suspects (washingtonpost.com) By Dana Priest

Administration officials are preparing long-range plans for indefinitely imprisoning suspected terrorists whom they do not want to set free or turn over to courts in the United States or other countries, according to intelligence, defense and diplomatic officials.

The Pentagon and the CIA have asked the White House to decide on a more permanent approach for potentially lifetime detentions, including for hundreds of people now in military and CIA custody whom the government does not have enough evidence to charge in courts. The outcome of the review, which also involves the State Department, would also affect those expected to be captured in the course of future counterterrorism operations. …

As part of a solution, the Defense Department, which holds 500 prisoners at Guantanamo Bay, plans to ask Congress for $25 million to build a 200-bed prison to hold detainees who are unlikely to ever go through a military tribunal for lack of evidence, according to defense officials.

Lifetime imprisonment for people for whom there is insufficient evidence for a trial. A clear violation of our constitution. Everyone in the Bush Administration is guilty of violating our constitution — I recommend long-term imprisonment for them all. mjh

[Thanks, Lisa T!]

Bush is the first to present himself explicitly as the warrior hero

War and Peace: Campus engaged in great dichotomy – Words on war By Carolyn Gonzales

David Margolin, adjunct research assistant professor of linguistics in the College of Arts and Sciences, says that language tactics used by United States presidents during wartime have changed. “We have gone from Franklin D. Roosevelt’s ‘The only thing we have to fear is fear itself,’ to the current administration telling Americans, ‘Be afraid, be very afraid,’” Margolin said.

Cal Thomas is a selfish idiot

Cal Thomas

More than 40 million children have been killed legally in America since the Supreme Court imposed Roe vs. Wade on the nation 32 years ago next month. Democrats seem unconcerned that so many discarded members of the human family are not with us.

“Unconcerned”? Does Cal really mean Democrats are sub-human baby killers? Doesn’t he really think we delight in killing and crave more babies to quench our endless satanic appetites?

Idiot. Cal Thomas is a selfish idiot. No one wants abortion; no one likes abortion. What we want is freedom and control over our own lives. We want to decide for ourselves if and when we are ready to be parents. We don’t want our children born by accident. We don’t want our children born into dire poverty. We don’t want our children born into homes without a father or with an abusive mate. We don’t want children having children. We don’t want 50 year old women forced to bear children. We don’t want anyone forced to bear a child she isn’t able to love and care for. We don’t want our sisters, mothers, daughters, wives, girlfriends to die. We want the freedom to decide our own medical options. We don?t want old men who will never have to face this terrible choice deciding our fate.

Cal, it’s none of your goddamn business. I suggest you work to reduce poverty and to make sure everyone has access to birth control and the knowledge to use it. Then we will respect your “concern.”

Cal ends with: What would be wrong with laws that empower women through additional information, even while abortion remains legal?

What a disingenuous ass. Cal knows fully well that the Radical Right is working every day to deny information to women and to deny options. He is in no way interested in empowering or informing women. But, like the snake in the bible, he speaks pleasantly and reasonably. He says what he needs to say to advance his cause: the destruction of your freedom and rights. mjh

Get out and protect your rights:
January 22, 2005
2pm to 5pm
Albuquerque Civic Plaza
Read more….

Rally on Civic Plaza

Gracious Republicans

Rossi calls for another election By CHRIS McGANN

“A revote would be the best solution for the people of our state,” [Republican Dino] Rossi said at a news conference in Bellevue. “The people of Washington deserve to know if their governor was elected fair and square.” …

Rossi’s spokeswoman, Mary Lane: “I don’t think the voters in this state have an appetite for an illegitimate governor.”

Neither the state constitution nor state statutes provide for a second gubernatorial election. …

“There is a process in place and you can’t just willy-nilly set up new elections,” [Seattle University political science professor Erik] Olsen said.

Asked what advantages or pitfalls might await Rossi should he refuse to concede, Olsen said, “There is something to be said in a democratic political culture for being gracious when you lose — but I would not second-guess him if he has some legitimate legal challenges.”

However, Olsen said there is a danger that Rossi could be seen as a sore loser.

“There is a real risk for Dino Rossi if he contests this election too much — that he’s excessively partisan, excessively ambitious and that he doesn’t respect the process,” Olsen said.

So much for graciously accepting defeat, as Al Gore and John Kerry did. Republicans never stop fighting — and they think that’s a positive attribute. mjh

"It does not require a majority to prevail, but rather an irate, tireless minority keen to set brush fires in people's minds." — Sam Adams