Bush Admits the CIA Runs Secret Prisons

[Ioman]

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/B/BUSH?SITE=LYCOS&SECTION=home&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT

President Bush on Wednesday acknowledged for the first time that the CIA runs secret prisons overseas and said tough interrogation forced terrorist leaders to reveal plots to attack the United States and its allies.

I guess we all knew this was going on, just didn't expect Mr. Egghead (cracked) to actually say it!

[dang]

Well, we are only going to get hammered more by the international community because of this. Isn't it against Geneva conventions?

[Ioman]

I think you are right and it is. I am not against harsh interogations to protect our country, but don't admit it if we signed an agreement that says we would play nice! :)

[jtfields]

The Geneva conventions set forth how you are supposed to treat pisoners taken during war. I don't think it is a violation simply because the prison you keep the prisoners at is not disclosed to the public (i.e. "a secret prison".) In fact only in the U.S. would this be an issue because ALL prisons for prisoners of war would probably be kept secret by most other countries. It's probably not illegal as long as they treat the prisoners in these prisons within the guidelines of the conventions (no torture, etc.).

Can you imagine the difference the media access would be if it were Russia, China or just about any other superpower engaged in this war? A lot of the heat the U.S. government takes is because they allow media so much access. If Russia had invaded Iraq no one would know anything about what was going on inside those borders.

[Ioman]

Well said. I think the media should be controlled when it comes to instances like this - for the sake of national security. And as long as I am not in prison....hehe

[starples]

A major concern is that this type of rendition is usually put in place because they can take prisoners to a third nation that is NOT a party to the Geneva Conventions and where torture IS legal. The administration has said that the US does not engage in torture. But when you've got a suspect in a locked room in Romania, all you have to do is step out for a cup of coffee and leave him there with the local guards for a few minutes.

Besides, part of the Geneva Conventions allows for inspections to confirm that the policies are being enforced. "Secret" prisons preclude those inspections from taking place because they're, well, secret.

The media having the type of access is a GOOD thing. True, if Russia or China had invaded Iraq, we wouldn't know about all of the goings-on. That doesn't mean that they're OKAY, just that nobody knows about it. Look at all of the digging that has to go on to find out about the atrocities that happen every day in China...

The media is having to take up some of the oversight that the administration is not allowing the other branches of government to have.

Or at least that's how I see it. :)

[dang]

just to play devil's advocate, the media can also blow things way out of porportion or even fabricate data, images and videos just to get a story. This has been proven, and of course everyone believes what the media has to say.

[Ioman]

just to play devil's advocate, the media can also blow things way out of porportion or even fabricate data, images and videos just to get a story. This has been proven, and of course everyone believes what the media has to say.

You mean like Dan Rather and CBS?

:)

[nightowl]

Its against the Geneva Convention, Probably againt the U.S. Constitution. If the Democrats take over the House and or Senate Bush may be in big trouble for what he said.

He either is really stupid or thinks he can get away with anything........Jim :censored

[jtfields]

Its against the Geneva Convention, Probably againt the U.S. Constitution.

How can it be against the U.S. Constitution? They aren't U.S. citizens and they aren't even in the U.S. I don't know enough about the Geneva Conventions to say whether they are are in violation or if the provisions of it even applies in this scenario. I really haven't heard much mention of the Geneva Conventions other than here. If it were a clear violation I would think the U.N. and the media would be all over that angle.

Unfortunately Bush gets too caught up in worrying about his approval rating (as all presidents do.) The democrats are making statements like "we are less safe today than we were five years ago" to attack the current administration so Bush felt the need to let us know about the prisons to give the perception that they have been taking action.

Bottom line though...whether a politician is a democrat or republican their main goal is to get re-elected and to gain as much power as possible. Perception is more important to them than reality. Whether we are safer today isn't as important to them as whether or not we believe we are safer. The democrats want us to feel less safe while the republicans want us to feel secure. They want to manipulate us so that they can acheive their political goals.

The media has agendas too. They want to make money by selling newspapers or increasing TV viewership so they say the things that will acheive that goal. Intentionally or not, they are all biased in some way or another and they try to influence the public to align with their beliefs. While I do believe that truth is important to the media, exaggerating, sensationalizing or stretching it to acheive their goals doesn't seem to bother them one bit. The media feels that it is okay to be selective about which facts you present because in their eyes as long as the facts you do present are true then you are still telling the truth. The fact that it's not the whole truth is unimportant to them.

Don't get me wrong, Bush has done many things that I don't agree with. He has also done some things that I do agree with.

All I will say is that today is the anniversary of 9/11 and we are being inundated with coverage of that horrible day. The more I watch the stuff the more I believe that whatever the hell is necessary to keep something like that from happening again is fine by me.

[PiPod]

Geneva convention or not, there are violations of basic human rights going on, and that's immoral and wrong.

[jtfields]

Geneva convention or not, there are violations of basic human rights going on, and that's immoral and wrong.

How do you know there are violations of basic human rights going on? If they capture known or suspected terrorists they have to interrogate them. What else are they supposed to do, slap them on the hand and say "don't do that again" and let them go? You have to detain them in a prison somewhere. Everyone just seem to be freaking out because these prisons weren't disclosed to the media and general public.

Now if it comes out that they are torturing these guys or using other techniques that are considered inhumane then I will agree with you. As of now there is no evidence that these terrorists' "human rights" are being violated. Not that I consider a terrorist human.

[starples]

You have to detain them in a prison somewhere. Everyone just seem to be freaking out because these prisons weren't disclosed to the media and general public.

Now if it comes out that they are torturing these guys or using other techniques that are considered inhumane then I will agree with you. As of now there is no evidence that these terrorists' "human rights" are being violated. Not that I consider a terrorist human.

But that's NOT why people are freaking out. The Foreign Affairs Reform and Restructuring Act of 1998 specifically states that it is unacceptable to transfer people to another country where torture is not illegal.

Secondly, NOT everyone who was subject to this type of rendition turned out to be terrorists. Just this week the story of Canadian Maher Arar came out... terrible.