Let’s Get Ready To Reconcile!

Time To Think About Torture

By Jonathan Alter
Newsweek
November 5, 2001

In this autumn of anger, even a liberal can find his thoughts turning to ... torture. OK, not cattle prods or rubber hoses, at least not here in the United States, [my emphasis -- ed] but something to jump-start the stalled investigation of the greatest crime in American history. Right now, four key hijacking suspects aren???t talking at all.

COULDN???T WE AT LEAST subject them to psychological torture, like tapes of dying rabbits or high-decibel rap? (The military has done that in Panama and elsewhere.) How about truth serum, administered with a mandatory IV? Or deportation to Saudi Arabia, land of beheadings? (As the frustrated FBI has been threatening.) Some people still argue that we needn???t rethink any of our old assumptions about law enforcement, but they???re hopelessly ???Sept. 10??????living in a country that no longer exists.

[...]

Short of physical torture, there???s always sodium pentothal (???truth serum???). The FBI is eager to try it, and deserves the chance. Unfortunately, truth serum, first used on spies in World War II, makes suspects gabby but not necessarily truthful. The same goes for even the harshest torture. When the subject breaks, he often lies. Prisoners ???have only one objective???to end the pain,??? says retired Col. Kenneth Allard, who was trained in interrogation. ???It???s a huge limitation.???

Some torture clearly works. Jordan broke the most notorious terrorist of the 1980s, Abu Nidal, by threatening his family. Philippine police reportedly helped crack the 1993 World Trade Center bombings (plus a plot to crash 11 U.S. airliners and kill the pope) by convincing a suspect that they were about to turn him over to the Israelis. Then there???s painful Islamic justice, which has the added benefit of greater acceptance among Muslims.

We can???t legalize physical torture; it???s contrary to American values. But even as we continue to speak out against human-rights abuses around the world, we need to keep an open mind about certain measures to fight terrorism, like court-sanctioned psychological interrogation. And we???ll have to think about transferring some suspects to our less squeamish allies, even if that???s hypocritical. Nobody said this was going to be pretty.

Time To Think About Torture

By Jonathan Alter
Newsweek
November 5, 2001

In this autumn of anger, even a liberal can find his thoughts turning to ... torture. OK, not cattle prods or rubber hoses, at least not here in the United States, [my emphasis -- ed] but something to jump-start the stalled investigation of the greatest crime in American history. Right now, four key hijacking suspects aren???t talking at all.

COULDN???T WE AT LEAST subject them to psychological torture, like tapes of dying rabbits or high-decibel rap? (The military has done that in Panama and elsewhere.) How about truth serum, administered with a mandatory IV? Or deportation to Saudi Arabia, land of beheadings? (As the frustrated FBI has been threatening.) Some people still argue that we needn???t rethink any of our old assumptions about law enforcement, but they???re hopelessly ???Sept. 10??????living in a country that no longer exists.

[...]

Short of physical torture, there???s always sodium pentothal (???truth serum???). The FBI is eager to try it, and deserves the chance. Unfortunately, truth serum, first used on spies in World War II, makes suspects gabby but not necessarily truthful. The same goes for even the harshest torture. When the subject breaks, he often lies. Prisoners ???have only one objective???to end the pain,??? says retired Col. Kenneth Allard, who was trained in interrogation. ???It???s a huge limitation.???

Some torture clearly works. Jordan broke the most notorious terrorist of the 1980s, Abu Nidal, by threatening his family. Philippine police reportedly helped crack the 1993 World Trade Center bombings (plus a plot to crash 11 U.S. airliners and kill the pope) by convincing a suspect that they were about to turn him over to the Israelis. Then there???s painful Islamic justice, which has the added benefit of greater acceptance among Muslims.

We can???t legalize physical torture; it???s contrary to American values. But even as we continue to speak out against human-rights abuses around the world, we need to keep an open mind about certain measures to fight terrorism, like court-sanctioned psychological interrogation. And we???ll have to think about transferring some suspects to our less squeamish allies, even if that???s hypocritical. Nobody said this was going to be pretty.

On Olbermann's show tonight, Friday, April 24, Jonathan, you seemed obviously scared and reluctant to say that you think Cheney wants us to be attacked. you obviously think that, as many wise people do, but you chickened out. please say what you think. thanks. jawaralal s.

It's interesting how Democrats loved the filibuster option when they were the minority. Now, suddenly, these same people who loved it before are now wanting it to be changed. I hear how "if they want to filibuster, they should be forced to speak on an on like the old style filibusters". Yet, I don't recall Democrats doing that when they employed the tactic over and over.

I love the way liberals are all upset about Dick Cheney criticizing Barack Obama. Yet, these same liberals had no problem with the lunatic Al Gore lashing out at George Bush. Mr. Gore did not do his criticizing in private to George Bush, he did it in very public forums. Unless you criticized Al Gore for doing this, you have no credibility critcizing Dick Cheney. Mr. Alter called Dick Cheney "classless" on the leftie Ed Schultz Show. Did he say the same about the truly classless, Al Gore? How about the classless Bill Clinton and Jimmy Carter who broke all precedent by criticizing George Bush in public and while on foreign soil?

Talking of reconciliation brings to mind Pakistan's behaviour.
It appears that there will be attacks in India until Kashmir is free.There has been war , attacks and mayhem first in Kashmir , now throughout India for 62 years now.It also appears that if it takes even a hundred years , why , even a thousand years Pakistan behaviour vis-a-vis India will continue in the same fashion until Kashmir is free.

Talking of reconciliation brings to mind Pakistan's behaviour.
It appears that there will be attacks in India until Kashmir is free.There has been war , attacks and mayhem first in Kashmir , now throughout India for 62 years now.It also appears that if it takes even a hundred years , why , even a thousand years ,Pakistan's behaviour vis-a-vis India will continue in the same fashion until Kashmir is free.

Here what I noticed, in 2000 and 2004, liberals were so angry at losing that they said they would move to Canada or Europe. Now that the conservatives are just as angry at losing, but they have no place to move to. All I see is comments like the end of world is coming. Amazing difference in perspective about losing. One side says, go ahead you can have it, good-bye, the other side says if I can't have it, then you can't either, we both lose

The American Revolution is just beginning. The hell with political correctness. The Constitution is the Law of the Land. Big government is the enemy. Obama and his socialistic and radical policies are the real enemy of the American people.
We are keeping our big gas guzzling cars , we're keeping our guns, we're gonna to pray to God in our schools , we're gonna seek and destroy terrorists , we're gonna throw tax cheatin politicians in jail , we're gonna bomb Iran's and North Korea's nuclear facilities , we're gonna take Pelosi off her whacky drugs she's taking , we're gonna let the banks fail and somebody else can start another bank, we're gonna let the car makers fail and let somebody else step in to make cars and we're gonna turf the big fat porky government out of Washington...OBAMA KEEP YOUR CHANGE !!

A modest question ??? or two.

If there is no significant downside to spending trillions of dollars that don't exist, why have they been holding out on us? Why didn't the federal government simply give Americans everything we wanted and needed years and years ago?

Or, if there is a downside that is anywhere near proportional to this massive, previously unimaginable federal borrowing, why is no one talking about it?

As the honorable and clueless Senator from Iowa suggested in another context: Why don't the Republicans who oppose the will of the people just resign or commit suicide? Really, any system which allows a bunch of senile old men to stand in the way of progress over and over again must be deliberately self destructive. At least the House is entertaining with their extreme and wildly irrelevant debates. The Senate reminds anyone who has visited an old folks home of why the old folks should not be allowed to make important decisions. The Senate mocks the idea of democracy with every consultation among the 'Depends' generation about reality. Their rules are designed to protect their members from the public outrage should it become common knowledge that most of them are too old to remember why they are there in the first place. Only in America would the laws of the land be entrusted to the victims of alzheimers.

Thank you, Jonathan Alter for telling it like it is. For years, the Senate used the filibuster to block civil rights legislation, ruining the lives of millions of Americans. Now a handful of Senators are using the filibuster, holding America hostage like the Somali pirates, until we give in to earmarks, bribery and other "carrots and cookies" just to win their votes. Because of the Senate's archaic procedural rules, the Senate has become the source of much of the corruption in Washington.
It's time for the Senate to join the 21st century, and with global warming moving at a suicidal pace, we cannot afford to play tea party games with an institution created in the 18th century, when the only people with rights were well-to-do white males. Majority rules. It's time for the Senate to enact the will of the people, instead of kow-towing to a handful of bigots, religious fanatics, and ideologues who make up the GOP and whose only goal is the destroly America so they can will the next election.

I really appreciate Jonathan Alter's latest article. He's totally right. For years, the Senate has used the filibuster to veto Civil rights legislation, ruining the lives of millions of people. We live in the 21st century, but we are dominated by an institution that dates from the 18th century when only well-to-do white males were regarded as human beings. In fact, se did not have democratic elections of Senators until the 20th century.
It's time the Senate reflected the will of the people. Right now Democrats control 58 or 49 seats. Obama won a decisive victory in 2008 and he is far more popular than the Senate by any opinion poll. The American people need to stop kow-towing to a minority of embittered religious fanatics, racists, and ideologues, who constitute the core of the Republican party. With the global warming proceeding at a suicidal pace, we cannot allow ourselves to be hamstrung by the GOP whose only goal is to destroy America so they can win the next election. I give Rahm Emmanuel my support. We the people need to move into the 21st century.

This is no time for bi-partisianship. The Republicans had their chance...they thoroughly blew it...and the American people voted them out of office! It is time for reconciliation wherever necessary. The people want health care passed, they want energy reform, they want the rich to pay their fair share of taxes, they want jobs, they want a clean environment, education reform,, they want immigration reform, they want to see an end to the rich getting richer and the poor getting poorer. People voted for change and however the Democratic party needs to push, pull, or cajole the legislation through is fine by me! It's what I voted for, I don't have a problem with how it gets done nor do I care if some fanatical Republicans have their feelings hurt or feel left out...they deserve the right to pout, they have earned it. It's not as if the Republicans have anything constructive to offer anyway. As long as they support a dunce like Palin and would even consider letting a person of that intellect anywhere near Washington, they simply cannot be taken seriously. The Republicans did everything in their power to run our country into the ditch and now they're complaining about the size of the tow truck, go figure? We had to endure 8 years of Bush and his cronies and look at the condition he left us all in..... Now it's time for the Democrats to push, shove, ram etc their agenda through congress ad get it done.....in 7 years we can all ask ourselves "are we better off now that we were when Bush left office????" I am betting the answer will be "yes we are....MUCH better!"

Question for Mr Alter.
If the Democrats use reconciliation to pass say Cap and trade or Health care.
Let's just assume unemployment reaches 12% and stays there.

And the Republican's regain control of the house and Senate. Because casting them as the party of "No" doesn't work if the public WISHES someone could have said no.

What is there to stop them from gutting completely and totally everything passed via reconciliation? Sorry Democrats, no filibuster, after all YOU didn't allow US to filibuster your passing. So you don't get to filibuster our gutting, canceling, and reducing budget for ... oh say ... universal health care to ZERO.
Oh and as an extra dig ... remember that place called ANWAR that you filibuster drilling in? Well you see oil = revenue = budget.
So the day Pres. Obama steps down and we are in control? 500 holes punched through the ice and oil pumping like mad.
No filibuster.

Now Mr. Alter. Doesn't that make it so that everything the Democrats pass MUST ABSOLUTELY DEFINITELY work ... or ... well then they can't TRUST the American people to choose wisely.
because whatever they passed, unlike in the 60s, will end the moment they are no longer in control.

And taken to the worst extremes.
Could President Obama let the next person destroy everything he passed -- NO FILIBUSTER allowed -- quietly?
And wouldn't we ultimately end up with a government that vacillates from one extreme to another ... no Presidential legacy ever. The last legacy would be the Obama Doctrine.
Do what you can while in power because the day you get out of power? Every single thing you believe in can get gutted, canceled, destroyed with no hope of slowing it down.

Could a President ever again take the risk and amicably pass on power to a new President who he knows will use budget reconciliation to destroy his entire legacy?
Or would he have to remove the stupid people's options to select their government because in 2004 and even in 1980 they PROVED they are too ignorant to be trusted with the right to vote?

Spk is right. Democrats overreach. But it works. Gas used to be $1.49, then it shot up to over $4 for no good reason, and now we think we have a good deal at $2.50 a gallon. The Dems will jack the price up, then concede some, and we will be stuck with a huge tax burden. Why do we need health care reform? We have the best in the world. I think the Obama and Clintons should try the British healthcare system before screwing up ours. That system is also why there are private physicians and dentists who op out of the British system, because of the shoddy hospitals and treatment.