Posted on 08/02/2002 12:57:53 PM PDT by Brian Mosely
MSNBC NEWS BULLETIN Judge orders names released All detainees in 9/11 probe Details to come ...
To: TrappedInLiberalHell
This is so stupid....this will tip off Al-qaeda who we have......dumb damn judge!!!!
# 6 by Dog
I support Judge Gladys Kessler’s ruling.
How can having the government admit that they’ve arrested someone “tip off” anyone? If a terrorist member disappears, the other members will know that he’s arrested anyway. That kind of “secrecy” doesn’t fool anyone.
An innocent accused and arrested for terrorism is a different story. Then, all that friends and family know is that something’s wrong. They go to the authorities, and are told, “We’ll look for him. We’ll get back with you if we find out anything.”
The only people inconvenienced by secret arrests are innocents. The guilty already know that happened.
To: Brian Mosely
Who is this Judge???
# 2 by Dog
U.S. District Judge Gladys Kessler.
A woman we can be proud of.
I live in rural Alaska and so the only radio station here is "public" radio. The NPR news at the top of last hour actually had a soundbite from Larry Klayman about this. Larry talking about the great barricade that was thrown up by the Bush Administration to hide those names.
Now I ask you, did you EVER hear Larry Klayman on NPR during the Clinton regime?
Bias? Naaaaahhh! Just move on.
So you base how a person is on how old and attractive a person is?
If she were young and fat but had a pretty face would you think the same thing about her?
To: Brian Mosely
How many people are we talking about (those whose names haven't been released)?
Is this a major story?
# 3 by TrappedInLiberalHell
Citizens arrested without due process? Secretly?
Just the possibility makes me nauseous.
Yes, it’s a major story.
I wonder how much more of this will have to go on before Dubya gives serious consideration to suspending habeus corpus?
Lincoln did it in the Civil War, much to the dismay of the judiciary and a good many of the citizenry who were held without trial. But then, when there are traitors on the bench. . .
To: Brian Mosely
Does he mean by detainees in US jails, or in Guantanemo?
# 8 by Satadru
From the article-
“…The detainees at issue in this case are separate from the 600 or so being held at the U.S. naval base at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. Another federal judge ruled Wednesday that they had no right to trial before the U.S. courts because Cuba is outside the United States.”
What treason? She ruled on something brought to her court.
No, Dubya needs to arrest Clinton for treason. Dubya said for us to move on.
How far left does he want us to move?
To: Brian Mosely
Damn the judge to hell
# 10 by OldFriend
Only if you have an example of something she’s done wrong.
This is a good ruling.
Good point!
They have no lawyers, no access to family or media.
How can they give out their own names?
To: Dog
It will be appealed.
# 11 by rintense
Yes, it will be appealed by our government.
In the meantime, the government will just ignore the ruling.
Tyranny doesn’t ask permission.
LOL, there are over a 1000 in jail and no one knows where they are.
I 'magin that the ones that are terrorists are known to their leaders.
You think they don't notice when an operative is missing for months?
To: Brian Mosely
Now the lawsuits can start; a veritable deluge.
And, whatever assets of alqaeda we have in custody will be available to CAIR, AMC, and other jihadi groups all around the world…”
# 12 by swarthyguy
Maybe I misunderstood the government's reasoning. I understood that they wanted secrecy to “protect” me, and to avoid letting the terrorists know that their members had been found out.
Now you tell me that the government wants secrecy to avoid lawsuits. Goodness! You mean that this “war” is about money?!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.