Boards > Current Events > NEWS: Destroying Your Freedom In Order To Save It

zarth

Seattle, WA

December 2004

OCT 10, 2007 12:43 AM

POLITICS: Destroying Your Freedom In Order To Save It

Khaled el-Masri grew up in Lebanon, but he had been a German citizen for nine years when he was detained by Macedonian officials while on vacation in Skopje on New Year's Eve in 2003.

They questioned him for three weeks, for no other very credible reason than that he happened to share the same name as the pseudonym of an allegedly Central Asian al-Qaeda operative who was believed to have been active in Germany in 1999 (little if anything is known about "real" el-Masri).

More consequentially, the Macedonians notified the CIA that they had a "Khaled el-Masri" in custody. When they released him (without charges) in late January of 2004, a CIA team was already standing by to capture him.

The broad outlines of what followed are not seriously disputed. He was bagged, stripped, and flown to Afghanistan, where he was frequently interrogated. El-Masri claims he was tortured and raped - an account that the CIA, naturally enough, will neither confirm nor deny. But the details of his treatment have been independently corroborated by others who have undergone similar experiences.

Moreover, it is known that he remained imprisoned for over a month even after George Tenet (a Medal of Freedom holder) knew for a fact that the CIA was detaining the wrong el-Masri. Tenet, incredibly, recommended that el-Masri just be dropped back in Macedonia without even informing the German government that the United States had wrongfully imprisoned one of their citizens for three months.

Once the mistake reached Tenet, he laid out the options to his counterparts, including the idea of not telling the Germans. Condoleezza Rice, then Bush's national security adviser, and Deputy Secretary of State Richard L. Armitage argued they had to be told, a position Tenet took, according to one former intelligence official.

"You couldn't have the president lying to the German chancellor" should the issue come up, a government official involved in the matter said.

Senior State Department officials decided to approach [German] Interior Minister Schily, who had been a steadfast Bush supporter even when differences over the Iraq war strained ties between the two countries. Ambassador Coats had excellent rapport with Schily.

The CIA argued for minimal disclosure of information. The State Department insisted on a truthful, complete statement. The two agencies quibbled over whether it should include an apology, according to officials.

On 28 May 2004, he was released on a lonely road in the middle of the night in Albania, without apologies or any money with which to return home.

With predictable difficulties, el-Masri has since been trying to piece his life back together. Part of this has included seeking some kind of justice from the government which indisputably fucked him over.

Today that was finally and irrevocably denied by the United States Supreme Court.

The justices refusal to take the case of Khaled el-Masri let stand a March 2 ruling by the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit, in Richmond, Va. That court upheld a 2006 decision by a federal district judge, who dismissed Mr. Masris lawsuit on grounds that trying the case could expose state secrets.

We recognize the gravity of our conclusions that el-Masri must be denied a judicial forum for his complaint, Judge Robert B. King wrote in March for a unanimous three-judge panel. The inquiry is a difficult one, for it pits the judiciarys search for truth against the executives duty to maintain the nations security.

The ordeal of Mr. Masri, who is of Lebanese descent, was the most extensively documented case of the C.I.A.s controversial practice of extraordinary rendition, in which terrorism suspects are abducted and sent for interrogation to other countries, including some in which torture is practiced.

That the government's arguments of "national security" could possibly hold when the case in question is one of such well-established incompetence is chilling, to say the least. What makes democracy functional - indeed, what constitutes its very essence - is its commitment to accountability and transparency. To be sure, there are legitimate causes for compromising on these principles under extraordinary conditions, but in the absence of an immediate, existential threat any such justification must itself be extraordinary in order to satisfy legitimacy.

The Supreme Court issued no comment in declining to hear the appeal.

Democracy doesn't always die to thunderous applause. Sometimes it just dies with a shrug.

FearTheReaper

NEWSWIRE

I'm lost

OCT 10, 2007 01:01 AM

Meh.

The Court's refusal to hear the case affirms the decision of the Appeals Court, which ruled against El-Masri on the grounds that allowing him to seek judicial redress would expose state secrets. The court's opinion relied heavily on the precedent of United States v. Reynolds%u2014the 1953 case that legally enshrined the State Secrets Privilege. Though not based in the Constitution, the Reynolds precedent allows the government to withhold evidence from a legal case if its disclosure would endanger national security%u2014a privilege most notably invoked by Richard Nixon and George W. Bush.

In Reynolds, the Court held that the widows of three Air Force contractors who died in a 1948 crash could not be compensated, because litigating the case would expose military secrets. But in 2000, the documents related to the crash were declassified, revealing that what the military sought to conceal was not in fact a state secret, but instead evidence of the Air Force's culpability in the men's deaths. The Court ruled without ever seeing these documents, since they were, at the time, classified.

Bicycle_Samurai

York, ON

September 2003

OCT 10, 2007 01:10 AM

Existential threat? That would be, like, God appearing and saying, "actually guys, you ARE just my imagination."

Heh, but seriously. Just saw this on the news channel, and it's pretty glaring. When are the big wigs going to be held accountable for all the b-s?

freezerburrn

La Habra, CA

May 2004

OCT 10, 2007 01:28 AM

Reading about these kinds of things makes me sick to my stomach. It's all just a fucking game to these big wigs.

jpaul256

Spring, TX

June 2006

OCT 10, 2007 01:43 AM

"The broad outlines of what followed are not seriously disputed."

Funny how criticisms of our government are often reduced to "broad outlines which are not seriously disputed." Why bother with details when we can discuss actual events in "broad outlines". Why bother to engage in serious debate when we can just dilute differing points of view as not being "serious".

The merits of the case brought by Khaled el-Masri are in dispute. A concern regarding the exposure of state secrets was but ONE of the reasons why the case was dimissed. This case has been reviewed at every level of our judicial system and was found at each level to be seriously flawed.

There are enough REAL problems in this world. We don't need to waste our time and resources fighting windmills seen only by those that sit on the left of the political spectrum.

FearTheReaper

NEWSWIRE

I'm lost

OCT 10, 2007 01:54 AM

jpaul256 said:
"The broad outlines of what followed are not seriously disputed."

Funny how criticisms of our government are often reduced to "broad outlines which are not seriously disputed." Why bother with details when we can discuss actual events in "broad outlines". Why bother to engage in serious debate when we can just dilute differing points of view as not being "serious".

The merits of the case brought by Khaled el-Masri are in dispute. A concern regarding the exposure of state secrets was but ONE of the reasons why the case was dimissed. This case has been reviewed at every level of our judicial system and was found at each level to be seriously flawed.

There are enough REAL problems in this world. We don't need to waste our time and resources fighting windmills seen only by those that sit on the left of the political spectrum.

Wow, a fucking idiot in Texas. Who would have guessed?

FearTheReaper

NEWSWIRE

I'm lost

OCT 10, 2007 02:21 AM

And this:

Officials have neither confirmed nor denied el-Masri's story, but rather invoked the state secrets privilege to derail his lawsuit. The courts shouldn't be so quick to accept such blanket secrecy. The privilege was invoked only six times from 1953 to 1976, according to OpenTheGovernment.org, a coalition of good government groups. President George W. Bush has used it 39 times since 2001. The courts need to guard against the act's abuse.

Ridley

SUICIDEGIRL

California, USA

OCT 10, 2007 02:36 AM

jpaul256 said:
"The broad outlines of what followed are not seriously disputed."

Funny how criticisms of our government are often reduced to "broad outlines which are not seriously disputed." Why bother with details when we can discuss actual events in "broad outlines". Why bother to engage in serious debate when we can just dilute differing points of view as not being "serious".

The merits of the case brought by Khaled el-Masri are in dispute. A concern regarding the exposure of state secrets was but ONE of the reasons why the case was dimissed. This case has been reviewed at every level of our judicial system and was found at each level to be seriously flawed.

There are enough REAL problems in this world. We don't need to waste our time and resources fighting windmills seen only by those that sit on the left of the political spectrum.

So our government kidnapping and torturing innocent parties is not a real problem? (especially since torture does not work at all ) Not wanting to tell other countries of whom we want to maintain good ties with of our mistakes is not a real problem?

What's you idea of a real problem then?

code_red

Portland, OR

July 2005

OCT 10, 2007 02:39 AM

Well said, FTR. I smiled in between my heaving episodes.

I am so disgusted with what is happening...

d20

San Francisco, CA

September 2003

OCT 10, 2007 02:43 AM

jpaul256 said:
There are enough REAL problems in this world. We don't need to waste our time and resources fighting windmills seen only by those that sit on the left of the political spectrum.

that's funny, because i could have sworn they were called "human" rights. you're saying these jokers no longer even qualify for that label?

hmm... come to think of it:

SPOILERS! (Click to view)

erleichda

Germany

May 2003

OCT 10, 2007 03:56 AM

And it looks like there will be no justice for El Masri in Germany either.

The German government has said it will not pursue extradition requests for 13 CIA agents charged with kidnapping a German citizen and taking him to Afghanistan for interrogation and abuse. Relations with the US government, Berlin says, are more important.

link

"Will you give those kidnappers to us, pretty please?"

"No."

"Uh. Well, okay then."

Disgusting.

punk

Phoenix, AZ

January 2004

OCT 10, 2007 05:10 AM

jpaul256 said:
"The broad outlines of what followed are not seriously disputed."

Funny how criticisms of our government are often reduced to "broad outlines which are not seriously disputed." Why bother with details when we can discuss actual events in "broad outlines". Why bother to engage in serious debate when we can just dilute differing points of view as not being "serious".

The merits of the case brought by Khaled el-Masri are in dispute. A concern regarding the exposure of state secrets was but ONE of the reasons why the case was dimissed. This case has been reviewed at every level of our judicial system and was found at each level to be seriously flawed.

There are enough REAL problems in this world. We don't need to waste our time and resources fighting windmills seen only by those that sit on the left of the political spectrum.

Deerrrrr.

Sorry, that's all I could think up in response.

SnowgodCCR

Derry, NH

November 2006

OCT 10, 2007 05:17 AM

"The inquiry is a difficult one, for it pits the judiciary's search for truth against the executive's duty to maintain the nation's security."

Excuse me? Are you saying that the Judicial branch of government, the branch that is above all others, supposed to dole out Justice and maintain accountability for the other two branches, is now saying "uh...sorry, you suck, and we can't pit ourselves against the executive branch, because that would be difficult"
ISN'T THAT THE FUCKING POINT OF CHECKS AND BALANCES? For fucks sake...what happened to the country that I was days from swearing to defend?

DhD_No_Pants

Katy, TX

May 2006

OCT 10, 2007 05:54 AM

jpaul256 said:
"The broad outlines of what followed are not seriously disputed."

Funny how criticisms of our government are often reduced to "broad outlines which are not seriously disputed." Why bother with details when we can discuss actual events in "broad outlines". Why bother to engage in serious debate when we can just dilute differing points of view as not being "serious".

The merits of the case brought by Khaled el-Masri are in dispute. A concern regarding the exposure of state secrets was but ONE of the reasons why the case was dimissed. This case has been reviewed at every level of our judicial system and was found at each level to be seriously flawed.

There are enough REAL problems in this world. We don't need to waste our time and resources fighting windmills seen only by those that sit on the left of the political spectrum.

What is sad is that even the 'broad outlines' on their own are enough for any real American to be upset about. What part of 'we kidnapped an innocent man, fucked him over for a while, and dumped him in the middle of Albania with a big fuck you' don't you get?

Exactly how much slack are you going to allow this government to have? At what point do you think that the basic principles that this country were founded on will be completely thrown out the window?

Fuck, we may kill the shit out of you in Texas, but at the VERY least you get a chance to a trial before that happens. And guess what? They have taken that right away from you if they deem you to be a threat. And this case very clearly highlights the fact that intelligence is often flawed, misconstrued, or flat-out wrong.

How are we supposed to uphold these ideals of personal freedom and protection against abuse from our judicial system when people like you sit back and think that it is irrelevant? It makes me sick that my husband may deploy to Iraq under the guise of freeing the people there, when our own country is slowly stripping away the same exact rights that he is supposed to be fighting for.

FearTheReaper said:

Wow, a fucking idiot in Texas. Who would have guessed?

Wow, another tired, cliched jab at Texas. Who would have guessed?

zarth

Seattle, WA

December 2004

OCT 10, 2007 06:09 AM

Well said, DhD. That was exactly what I meant when I used the phrase "broad outlines." Even if he wasn't tortured, what happened to him was a profound and unjustifiable violation of his human rights.

FearTheReaper said:
Meh.

The Court's refusal to hear the case affirms the decision of the Appeals Court, which ruled against El-Masri on the grounds that allowing him to seek judicial redress would expose state secrets. The court's opinion relied heavily on the precedent of United States v. Reynolds%u2014the 1953 case that legally enshrined the State Secrets Privilege. Though not based in the Constitution, the Reynolds precedent allows the government to withhold evidence from a legal case if its disclosure would endanger national security%u2014a privilege most notably invoked by Richard Nixon and George W. Bush.

In Reynolds, the Court held that the widows of three Air Force contractors who died in a 1948 crash could not be compensated, because litigating the case would expose military secrets. But in 2000, the documents related to the crash were declassified, revealing that what the military sought to conceal was not in fact a state secret, but instead evidence of the Air Force's culpability in the men's deaths. The Court ruled without ever seeing these documents, since they were, at the time, classified.

Good addendum.

We all know that the only "state secret" being concealed here is admissible evidence of CIA incompetence and abuse.

TheAngrySloth said:
Existential threat? That would be, like, God appearing and saying, "actually guys, you ARE just my imagination."

You're probably too young to remember the Soviet Union. That was an existential threat to the United States. "Terrorism" is not.

wereduck

I'm lost

July 2007

OCT 10, 2007 06:09 AM

jpaul256 said:
"The broad outlines of what followed are not seriously disputed."

Funny how criticisms of our government are often reduced to "broad outlines which are not seriously disputed." Why bother with details when we can discuss actual events in "broad outlines". Why bother to engage in serious debate when we can just dilute differing points of view as not being "serious".

The merits of the case brought by Khaled el-Masri are in dispute. A concern regarding the exposure of state secrets was but ONE of the reasons why the case was dimissed. This case has been reviewed at every level of our judicial system and was found at each level to be seriously flawed.

There are enough REAL problems in this world. We don't need to waste our time and resources fighting windmills seen only by those that sit on the left of the political spectrum.

I have to agree here. There are enough REAL problems in the world, who gives a crap that some innocent bystander was kidnapped and tortured by our government? After all, they keep doing it, and eventually they will get the real terrorists, right?

Fucking liberal pussies, they don't understand what's at stake here. Why, if we don't waterboard as many non-terrorists as possible, then Osama bin Laden will kill us all!

failure_face

I'm lost

September 2007

OCT 10, 2007 06:23 AM

jpaul256 said:
"There are enough REAL problems in this world. We don't need to waste our time and resources fighting windmills seen only by those that sit on the left of the political spectrum.

Maybe someday your name will be used as a terrorist alias, and you'll be renditioned somewhere. Then cosmic justice will be served.

Subrosa

San Francisco, CA

July 2004

OCT 10, 2007 08:06 AM

What you guys aren't realizing is that the cost of your freedom is at an all-time high. Sure, it's a sad situation, but some people just can't afford freedom. Unfortunately, that's the way the market works. I'm not here to subsidize the costs of other people's constitutional rights.

SPOILERS! (Click to view)

LostLucy

USA

December 2006

OCT 10, 2007 08:08 AM

I think part of what we see here again is the incredible fucking collision of apathy and entitlement that exists among Caucasian middle-class Americans. Really, because these things happen to "others" more often, does it not matter?

Few care to take the time to register to vote, inform themselves, and vote.
Without engaging in the process it is easy to 1) either take the child's car seat in the back, let big daddy Cheney drive, and blindly defend all actions of our govt.,
e.g. jpaul256 and we3_pirates' take on this...

Or 2) blindly ignore that Democracy and the so-called checks & balances of the three branches of our government came to a crashing halt the day the

republican thug

(credit Alan Dershowitz)
[Then] Supreme Court Chief Justice Rehnquist (Gilbert and Sullivan chorus anyone?)ordered a halt to the counting of the votes in the 2000 election and handed the presidency to George W. Bush, who effectively was able to stack the court in his favor by appointing Roberts and Alito.

PEOPLE WAKE UP!!!

Yes, Virginia, there is really is a devil who persecutes randomly and whimsically anyone dark of skin and odd of surname, with the idea that any means justify the end.

And that Devil is our GOP government, as this executive branch continues to behave more like a monarch or dictator than democratically elected official.

PLEASE Register to vote people!!!

The GOP is always going to have more money and media presence, and we must fight back!

LostLucy

USA

December 2006

OCT 10, 2007 08:10 AM

I'm going to say vote for Barack Obama or Ron Paul as two sane voices of reason in all of this insanity!!

zarth

Seattle, WA

December 2004

OCT 10, 2007 08:14 AM

For the record, I'm pretty sure we3_pirate was being ironic. Subrosa I'm not so sure about.

SPOILERS! (Click to view)

LostLucy

USA

December 2006

OCT 10, 2007 08:24 AM

damn.

What's all this about Irons and the government? can't we get cleaning ladies to do their ironing??

oh Irony??

Nevermind!!

zarth

Seattle, WA

December 2004

OCT 10, 2007 08:25 AM

I knew I liked you for a reason.

Formus

Milwaukee, WI

May 2007

OCT 10, 2007 09:08 AM

Democracy doesn't always die to thunderous applause.

Who says that movie isn't good?

Formus

Milwaukee, WI

May 2007

OCT 10, 2007 09:12 AM

Zarth said:
For the record, I'm pretty sure we3_pirate was being ironic. Subrosa I'm not so sure about.

Dude, lawyers are never ironic. They can't comprehend the concept.

BOARDS:

TOPICS:

zarth

Seattle, WA

December 2004

OCT 10, 2007 12:43 AM

NEWSWIRE

I'm lost

OCT 10, 2007 01:01 AM

York, ON

September 2003

OCT 10, 2007 01:10 AM

La Habra, CA

May 2004

OCT 10, 2007 01:28 AM

Spring, TX

June 2006

OCT 10, 2007 01:43 AM

NEWSWIRE

I'm lost

OCT 10, 2007 01:54 AM

NEWSWIRE

I'm lost

OCT 10, 2007 02:21 AM

SUICIDEGIRL

California, USA

OCT 10, 2007 02:36 AM

code_red

Portland, OR

July 2005

OCT 10, 2007 02:39 AM

San Francisco, CA

September 2003

OCT 10, 2007 02:43 AM

erleichda

Germany

May 2003

OCT 10, 2007 03:56 AM

Phoenix, AZ

January 2004

OCT 10, 2007 05:10 AM

Derry, NH

November 2006

OCT 10, 2007 05:17 AM

Katy, TX

May 2006

OCT 10, 2007 05:54 AM

zarth

Seattle, WA

December 2004

OCT 10, 2007 06:09 AM

I'm lost

July 2007

OCT 10, 2007 06:09 AM

I'm lost

September 2007

OCT 10, 2007 06:23 AM

San Francisco, CA

July 2004

OCT 10, 2007 08:06 AM

LostLucy

USA

December 2006

OCT 10, 2007 08:08 AM

LostLucy

USA

December 2006

OCT 10, 2007 08:10 AM

zarth

Seattle, WA

December 2004

OCT 10, 2007 08:14 AM

LostLucy

USA

December 2006

OCT 10, 2007 08:24 AM

zarth

Seattle, WA

December 2004

OCT 10, 2007 08:25 AM