[emersonbiggins]

I've heard more than once that episodes of 24 are used in military interrogation exercises, but this is the first I've heard of those in charge of interpreting our Constitution explicitly approving of torture in order to manifest intelligence out of suspected terrorists.

This guy has got to go...

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', '
')TV TERRORISM
What would Jack Bauer do?
Canadian jurist prompts international justice panel to debate TV drama 24's use of torture

COLIN FREEZE

June 16, 2007

OTTAWA -- Justice Antonin Scalia is one of the most powerful judges on the planet.

The job of the veteran U.S. Supreme Court judge is to ensure that the superpower lives up to its Constitution. But in his free time, he is a fan of 24, the popular TV drama where the maverick federal agent Jack Bauer routinely tortures terrorists to save American lives. This much was made clear at a legal conference in Ottawa this week.

Senior judges from North America and Europe were in the midst of a panel discussion about torture and terrorism law, when a Canadian judge's passing remark - "Thankfully, security agencies in all our countries do not subscribe to the mantra 'What would Jack Bauer do?' " - got the legal bulldog in Judge Scalia barking.

The conservative jurist stuck up for Agent Bauer, arguing that fictional or not, federal agents require latitude in times of great crisis. "Jack Bauer saved Los Angeles. ... He saved hundreds of thousands of lives," Judge Scalia said. Then, recalling Season 2, where the agent's rough interrogation tactics saved California from a terrorist nuke, the Supreme Court judge etched a line in the sand.

"Are you going to convict Jack Bauer?" Judge Scalia challenged his fellow judges. "Say that criminal law is against him? 'You have the right to a jury trial?' Is any jury going to convict Jack Bauer? I don't think so.
...

[OilsNotWell]

That the second most senior member of the highest court in the land, representative of the third branch of government, expressly condones blatantly illegal, immoral, and unethical behavior dependent upon the situation is abhorent and viscerally disturbing. The ends justifying the means logic dissolves any differences between a nation of laws, and a lawless nation, whose shifting and varying winds of acceptable illegal behavior fan the pyre upon which the Supreme Law of the Land, the Constitution, has just been placed.

He should be impeached immediately.

[MattSavinar]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Gideon', 'O')NW -

Yes, very good. You put it well.

This is very frightening.
.

[Plantagenet]

1. Don't watch "24" if you're sqeamish about fictional torture.

2. Don't read the Al Qaida torture manual, or watch Al Qaida snuff videos if you are squeamish about real torture.

[Cobra_Strike]

At this point...the only real difference between the US gov and its enemies is the shade of brown of their invisible sky wizards...

[katkinkate]

That guy's an idiot if he thinks he can use a fictional story to justify real-life torture. In the story it is all planned out by the writer with the intent to entertain. Of course the torturee spills the beans - the hero has to save the day! That's what makes a good story.

In real life the torturee probably doesn't know enough to save himself and the torturer can't tell what bits his victim says is truth and what is a story. They figured this out ages ago: information from torture is not reliable. Its a waste of time and resources and dehumanises both the victim and the torturer.

The only real result is the fear it generates among the population that victims are picked from. Some people get off on inspiring fear. It's a type of power. Maybe that's the intent.

[Fishman]

Don't get your panties is such a wad. Do you guys EVER read history books? Routinely, when the country has been faced with an enemy that has the potential to cause major harm, the edges of the Constitution are bent a litttle. It take that to survive sometimes. One can be so purist, but reality keeps biting you in the asp. One nuke strike and you whiners will be screaming "why didn't you protect us? BOOO HOOO"

[highlander]

Shows like 24 are designed to condition the public towards the acceptance of torture.
Of course you will get the info you want when you are torturing someone. It just might not be true.
It's a lot easier to use "confidential informants" to break up "terrorist cells"

[mekrob]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Fishman', 'D')on't get your panties is such a wad. Do you guys EVER read history books? Routinely, when the country has been faced with an enemy that has the potential to cause major harm, the edges of the Constitution are bent a litttle. It take that to survive sometimes. One can be so purist, but reality keeps biting you in the asp. One nuke strike and you whiners will be screaming "why didn't you protect us? BOOO HOOO"

[Fishman]

Sorry Mekrob, we haven't been perfect. But I don't think kissing Al Quida's asp would make any difference. I've read some of your Koran verses, taking out "infidels" is acceptable under about any circumstance.

[Plantagenet]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('mekrob', 'S')o yes, if we are nuked or hit again, we will be screaming, "What did you do to make us get hit?"

[jasonraymondson]

The court just said nope, sorry but the government won't release the incriminating evidence, so you all have no case. Seems like pretty standard logic. Like in a murder trial when the defendant won't hand over the blood stained knife to the prosecutor, I believe the judge dismisses the case there as well. Yep, I am pretty sure that is how it goes.
link

[Kingcoal]

Dismissed for lack of subject matter. Where are the leakers and whistleblowers when you need them? Dead?

[jasonraymondson]

I will admit though, that the ACLU is one fucked up organization.

They hate bush * good
They hate the war * good
They hate regligion * good

they support Nambla *WTF
they support Illegal Aliens * bad
They are against firearms * bad


Isn't there an organization out there that supports common fucking sense?

[smallpoxgirl]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('jasonraymondson', 'I')sn't there an organization out there that supports common fucking sense?

[emersonbiggins]

This should end well.

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'C')ourt Says 401(k) Participants Can Sue

13 minutes ago

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Supreme Court ruled Wednesday that individual participants in the most common type of retirement plan can sue under a pension protection law to recover their losses.

The unanimous decision has implications for 50 million workers with $2.7 trillion invested in 401(k) retirement plans.

James LaRue of Southlake, Texas, said the value of his stock market holdings plunged $150,000 when administrators at his retirement plan failed to follow his instructions to switch to safer investments.

The issue in the LaRue case was whether the Employee Retirement Income Security Act permits an individual account holder to sue plan administrators for breaching their fiduciary duties.

The language of the law refers to recovering money for the "plan" rather than for an individual, raising the question of whether a participant can sue solely for himself.
...

[roccman]

Someone older than me once said,

"The end of civilization will be marked when there are more lawyers than architects listed in the phone book."

I think he was right.

[Prince]

I'm heavily invested in a 401k, and I think this is stupid. People need to learn to mitigate risk. I guarantee that same asshole who lost $150k in downtimes, wasn't complaining when his 401k portfolio was artificially inflated from 2003-2007. I don't understand his premise that he couldn't move to safer investments. Most, if not all, 401k programs offer a vast array of investment options from very safe (barely above inflation rate) to very risky. Most of the major indexes (Dow, Nasdaq, Russell 2000, European, Japan) are represented by various fund choices in the 401k pool. The 401k holder should have full control to reallocate or change investments at his free will.

My company has a very good 401k program with a lot of options. We get full control over this, so maybe my view is jaded.

[Tyler_JC]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('emersonbiggins', 'T')his should end well.

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'C')ourt Says 401(k) Participants Can Sue

13 minutes ago

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Supreme Court ruled Wednesday that individual participants in the most common type of retirement plan can sue under a pension protection law to recover their losses.

The unanimous decision has implications for 50 million workers with $2.7 trillion invested in 401(k) retirement plans.

James LaRue of Southlake, Texas, said the value of his stock market holdings plunged $150,000 when administrators at his retirement plan failed to follow his instructions to switch to safer investments.

The issue in the LaRue case was whether the Employee Retirement Income Security Act permits an individual account holder to sue plan administrators for breaching their fiduciary duties.

The language of the law refers to recovering money for the "plan" rather than for an individual, raising the question of whether a participant can sue solely for himself.
...

[emersonbiggins]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Tyler_JC', '
')The people he hired to manage his money didn't listen to his orders.

Why shouldn't they be allowed to sue?

Investors aren't suing because their investments lost money, they are suing because the people they hired to obey their orders did not obey.