Apparently even representing terrorists in court means you might be a secret terrorist. Liz Cheney, famed expert on terrorism, said so. And the media were all like "well, yes, this is clearly a Serious and Important Question and its merits must be Weighed Carefully" instead of laughing and telling Liz she missed her stop at the HUAC.
Its clever, terrorism. Like a close-contact virus, anyone who has anything to do with it might be a terrarist now. If you sat near a terrarist on a train, YOU MIGHT BE INFECTED. Clearly you see how dangerous this is, and how Liz Cheney only cares for the safety of Amurrica and isn't some paranoid bint with a sociopathic daddy who harbours evil overlord style ambitions.
Is this because of the whole 'Al Qaeda 7' thing?
PS Thank you for confirming my fear that America is basically the 1950's but with mass media. :sad:
Yeah, pretty much. I'm just not sure how much I can wet my pants over LAWYERS WHO REPRESENTED TERRORIST!!!233""! in the Justice Dept. Terrorists working for lawyers, now that....oh, no wait, still not scary. Basically, terrorists and lawyers together are only scary if you're the sort of person who watches old episodes of Dr Who from behind the lounge.
Quote from: Cain on March 10, 2010, 09:58:59 PM
Yeah, pretty much. I'm just not sure how much I can wet my pants over LAWYERS WHO REPRESENTED TERRORIST!!!233""! in the Justice Dept. Terrorists working for lawyers, now that....oh, no wait, still not scary. Basically, terrorists and lawyers together are only scary if you're the sort of person who watches old episodes of Dr Who from behind the lounge.
What's particularly loathsome about this, is the fact that some of the 'unamed lawyers' alleged to be helping teh EVIL MOOSLUMS(tm) are US military attorneys appointed to do a job. (Can you think of a worse assignment?)
Thus hating US military lawyers = NOT SUPPORTING OUR TROOPS! :lulz:
PS I think 'Al Qaeda 7' is a great name for a band.
Quote from: Cain on March 10, 2010, 09:36:27 PM
Apparently even representing terrorists in court means you might be a secret terrorist. Liz Cheney, famed expert on terrorism, said so.
The Solicitor general said it first.
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/24/us/24scotus.html
What if terrorists and their lawyers incorporated? Would they be safe then?
Why does Liz Cheney hate America so much?
But she did allow that "there are not a whole lot of people going around trying to teach Al Qaeda how to play harmonicas."
Why ever not? Perhaps if they had the gift of music, they wouldn't be so hateful!
Or maybe the CIA could lace their harmonicas with LSD?
My favorite part of this is how it makes Kenneth Star look like a good guy. Yeah, he's a conservative, but he's a Conservative LAWYER, and the Lawyer clearly takes priority. He pretty much called Liz Cheney, Kristol, and the rest of that gang a bunch of ignorant fucks. In more lawyerly, and less profanity laden terminology.
LOOK HOW MUCH I HATE TERRORISM:
"ANYONE WHO THINKS A TERRORIST SHOULD GET A TRIAL SHOULD BE SHOT IN THE FACE!"
"ANYONE WHO DISAGREES WITH ME ON THIS IS A TERRORIST."
Prediction: Will fly in NASCAR country.
Who really gives a shit about what Miss Cheney thinks or says?
I don't.
Gives me an idea, "the seven degrees of Osama Bin Laden".
If you're Osama number is less than 4 you win! The prize is a free vacation in a cell!
Quote from: Earthbound Spirit on March 11, 2010, 03:54:37 AM
Who really gives a shit about what Miss Cheney thinks or says?
I don't.
The media, who went around repeating her thoughts on the issue like they merited actual discussion, and now elements of the Republican Party, who can recognize a bandwagon when they see one.
Quote from: Rumckle on March 11, 2010, 07:38:06 AM
Gives me an idea, "the seven degrees of Osama Bin Laden".
If you're Osama number is less than 4 you win! The prize is a free vacation in a cell!
Hah, yes.
Incidentally, two handshakes away from Osama.
Alas, John Adams, we hardly knew ye.
No no no, Marc Thiessen explained this on the Daily Show, Adams was defending people charged with a crime, whereas detainees in Guantanamo are being held as enemy combatants in an ongoing war against the USA. You wouldn't let a Waffen SS POW out on the basis of haebus corpus now, would you? So why should these guys be any different?
(for the purposes of this argument, you must ignore the fact that terrorists are not soldiers and should be tried in civilian courts, that most people in Guantanamo were never even caught on a battlefield and thus the claims that they are Al-Qaeda suspects are dubious and that the VAST majority of those who were defended by these lawyers were in fact innocent and have not been involved in terrorism before or since their time at Camp Xray. In short, ignore reality).
You're frighteningly good at making the argument sound reasonable, before the parenthesis.
Thiessen is a trained sophist. Presumably his job as Bush's speechwriter didn't actually give him much to do at the office, so he could hone his skills at making indefinite detention of probably innocent people (in most cases) without due process sound reasonable instead. He's also been made an Ascended Columnist at the WaPo now by order of Fred Hiatt, so expect to hear more glib arguments along these lines in the near future.