Where do we render the white supremacists?

J.C. Christian finds the freepers' reaction to the murder of Judge Lefkow's husband and mother...um...comforting. It's a good thing.

This may be a blessing in disguise. Our country is grappling with judges who do not understand that there is a war, and issues about "torture", rights for enemy combatants and etc, these new threats may wake them up because for the first time in these judges lives, they are vulnerable and threaten. Survival is no longer an academic thing. Make a dumb ruling that undermines the police and military ability to fight criminals and terrorists have personal consequences.
17 posted on 03/05/2005 4:53:40 PM PST by Fee

They know who the left wing judges, reporters and university professors are.

It is simply a matter of each individuals 'activist' choosing a suitable target and then taking action.
5 posted on 03/05/2005 4:42:23 PM PST by BenLurkin

Meanwhile the NY Times reports today on the administration's rule change allowing the CIA to render suspects to other countries without limitation. In the piece, a number of administration officials contort themselves like Cirque du Soleil acrobats in assuring us that they care -- they really do -- about human rights.

In providing a detailed description of the program, a senior United States official said that it had been aimed only at those suspected of knowing about terrorist operations, and emphasized that the C.I.A. had gone to great lengths to ensure that they were detained under humane conditions and not tortured.

The official would not discuss any legal directive under which the agency operated, but said that the "C.I.A. has existing authorities to lawfully conduct these operations."

The official declined to be named but agreed to discuss the program to rebut the assertions that the United States used the program to secretly send people to other countries for the purpose of torture. The transfers were portrayed as an alternative to what American officials have said is the costly, manpower-intensive process of housing them in the United States or in American-run facilities in other countries.

In recent weeks, several former detainees have described being subjected to coercive interrogation techniques and brutal treatment during months spent in detention under the program in Egypt and other countries. The official would not discuss specific cases, but did not dispute that there had been instances in which prisoners were mistreated. The official said none had died.

Raising the pie higher!

The official said the C.I.A.'s inspector general was reviewing the rendition program as one of at least a half-dozen inquiries within the agency of possible misconduct involving the detention, interrogation and rendition of suspected terrorists.

In public, the Bush administration has refused to confirm that the rendition program exists, saying only in response to questions about it that the United States did not hand over people to face torture. The official refused to say how many prisoners had been transferred as part of the program. But former government officials say that since the Sept. 11 attacks, the C.I.A. has flown 100 to 150 suspected terrorists from one foreign country to another, including to Egypt, Syria, Saudi Arabia, Jordan and Pakistan.

Each of those countries has been identified by the State Department as habitually using torture in its prisons. But the official said that guidelines enforced within the C.I.A. require that no transfer take place before the receiving country provides assurances that the prisoner will be treated humanely, and that United States personnel are assigned to monitor compliance.

"We get assurances, we check on those assurances, and we double-check on these assurances to make sure that people are being handled properly in respect to human rights," the official said. The official said that compliance had been "very high" but added, "Nothing is 100 percent unless we're sitting there staring at them 24 hours a day."

And Alberto Gonzalez -- who as Attorney General is the administrative official who would be responsible for investigating violations -- provides strong assurances that torture is not US policy!

In the most explicit statement of the administration's policies, Alberto R. Gonzales, then the White House counsel, said in written Congressional testimony in January that "the policy of the United States is not to transfer individuals to countries where we believe they likely will be tortured, whether those individuals are being transferred from inside or outside the United States." Mr. Gonzales said then that he was "not aware of anyone in the executive branch authorizing any transfer of a detainee in violation of that policy."

What does that mean?