Christ. The Great Britian "conspirators" may get off

[CatWoman]

Olbermann explaining that because Bushco pushed so hard for an early arrest, the strength of the evidence has been weakened dramatically.

[C_U_L8R]

1. Evidence?

"we don't nee no steeenkin' evidence"

[Taxloss]

2. Fcking hell!

That's a fcking disgrace! The media should SLAUGHTER Bush for this! I simply cannot believe how stupid someone could be. If one of them is freed and kills someone, the blood is on Bush's hands.

[Kagemusha]

3. Didn't Chertoff whine with envy that the Brits had it so easy?

Detaining people without trial or arraignment and so on...

[sweetheart]

11. wined and dined, he's just playin' politics

"gimme more power" "loook the brits have indefinite detention... 'i want that.'"

[Prophet 451]

33. No we don't

The indefinate detention thing came up in a recent Commons debate. Although the laws have been loosened in recent times, terror suspects can still only be detained for (I think) 45 days without being charged. After that, you have to either charge them or let them go.

[CJCRANE]

44. I think it's currently 28 days (nt)

[Prophet 451]

47. You're right

28 days as standard for terror suspects, possible extension up to 45 (and that has to be justified to a judge). I got confused.

[sweetheart]

46. it appears indefninite detention

was being practiced until the law lords struck it down recently, and i've a feeling that it still exists on some obscure ancient law if they want to use it badly enough.

[Prophet 451]

48. I'm pretty sure it's not

You're right about the Law Lords striking it down but as far as ancient law goes "no free man shall be taken, imprisoned or in any other way destroyed except by the lawful judgement of his peers" and that's from the Magna Carta, the very basis of our constitution. Also, indefinate detention without trial contravenes the Human Rights Act 1998 and additionally, contravenes standing EU law (which the UK is subject to in these matters). That was confirmed by the decision in A and Others v Secretary of State for the Home Department. The Blair government then enacted the Prevention of Terrorism Act 2005 to get around the ruling. That gave the Home Secretary power to impose "control orders" which yes, could lead to indefinate suspension, at which point, the Law Lords smacked them down again. As it stands, "control orders" can impose some restrictions on freedom of movement but they cannot be used for indefinate detention.

Indefinate detention may still go on but the law is very clear that it is illegal to detain someone longer than (at most) 45 days without charging them. Once they're charged of course, a whole different set of legal rules kicks in.

[thepurpose]

4. Here we go again. How can anybody in their right might trust the Bush

administration to not just fuck things up. They can't even leave shit alone they have nothing to do with.

[lonestarnot]

5. Welp. Here we have it again folks.

[rocktivity]

12. This isn't the first bust he screwed up. In fact, it isn't even the second

And all for the same reason--to sieze credit, divert bad news and boost his ratings!

:mad:
rocknation

[lonestarnot]

18. hence..."again."

[MessiahRp]

40. Got a list of examples?

I would certainly like to get a full list of busts he inserted himself into and fucked up. Definitely would be a useful talking point.

Rp

[CJCRANE]

45. The one just after Kerry's

keynote speech at the Dem convention in '04.

They outed an undercover al-Qaeda informant's name which ruined an ongoing investigation in the UK.

[mike_c]

6. in other words, the entrapment was sprung prematurely....

Um, no evidence beyond a lot of talk, maybe? Hey, who wants to blow up some airplanes next week? :rofl:

[don954]

24. watch it! with the standards of prosecution nowadays,

you might wake up in gitmo!

[Bigmack]

37. I'm with you entirely...

I'll bet a lot of prosecutions have failed/will fail because the testimony of the "plant" inside the organization would uncover the entrapment. "Well, your honor, we provided some exposives for them to practice with....."

I'll bet a lot of the agents provocateur have pushed a lot of dumbasses into committing to things they never plan to actually do.

[Janice325]

7. Typical

Why am I not surprised?
What a dumb fuck. Words fail me when it comes to try and say what I feel about his total incompetence. :grr: :argh: :banghead:
Asshole!!!

[bridgit]

8. sounds about right, bush has tainted every other fact he has ever...

come in contact with

[The_Casual_Observer]

9. If they get off, it won't be because of jr.

It will be because they had no case. Another week, or a month or whatever probably wasn't going to help
cook this turkey, bush knew it & decided to take advantage of it before the opportunity dissolved completely. Even if they let them all go, the damage is done, the speeches have been made, he got his moment on the tarmac.

[MissWaverly]

27. yes, this is the Miami 7, all over again

What's next, the Mexico 30?

[Joe Bacon]

10. Standard Operating Procedure for the GOP.

Now you know why Pickles has to be on top because Bush can only CENSORED up!

[patrice]

13. It wasn't stupidity folks. They simply don't care whether they

would damage the British case against these guys by exposing it too early.

They needed the media event to counter Ned Lamont's victory. Period.

[MichiganVote]

14. Well, that's it then. Off to Guantanomo they go.

[BuyingThyme]

15. We're talkin' about the latest airline thing, right?

(I've not followed this one well.)

[babylonsister]

21. Yes. All that terra for possibly nothing. nt

[Virginia Dare]

16. Remember all the people here...

who scoffed and laughed at and otherwise abused and demeaned anybody who suggested this may have something to do with the Lamont victory? Scoff and laugh no more.

[bvar22]

32. Pretty much the same people that scoffed....

...at Lamont's chances for winning the Primary.

[ovidsen]

17. Guilty of thought crimes

I'm not making light of any investigation of people who are discussing the bombing of passenger jets. If someone's talking about blowing up a plane that I might be on, I think it should be checked out.

But these guys had no tickets, no passports, no bomb making materials.... basically they were making very rude noises, but that's about it. WIll this case stand up in court??

Overall, I think the only difference between these suspects and those loonies busted in Miami in June is that at least the Brits weren't seeking donations to buy uniforms and shoes....

[TheCowsCameHome]

19. Everything he gets near turns to shit, doesn't it?

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

20. If True, This Needs To Be Pushed Hard To Show He Continues To Have

inadequate capabilities to protect our nation and has fundamental flaws in his understanding of how to fight the war on terror. We need to hammer home that the democrats won't put our country at risk by using terrorism threats as a political ploy while undermining the entire intelligence community in order to do so.

[Solly Mack]

22. a blast from the past...

Pakistan: U.S. Blew Undercover Operation

http://www.commondreams.org/headlines04/0807-02.htm

Regardless of anyone's opinion on the latest British terror threat - it would seem the Bush Regime is all about damaging sting operations in the hopes of gaining a political advatange.

[babylonsister]

25. Lots of blasts from the past:

http://www.crooksandliars.com/posts/2006/08/14/olbermann-the-nexus-of-politics-and-terror

[Generic Other]

23. Well isn't that precious?

So the government infiltrators hadn't yet convinced them to act?

[bleever]

26. All the bungled anti-terror actions start to look intentional

after five years.

Call me crazy, but how can they be so consistent at failure without some kind of intent?

:tinfoilhat:

[babylonsister]

30. Intent accomplished! Their MO is to scare people. Check out

the blivet's recent poll numbers on terra.
It worked again, but maybe not for long. I do have faith
people are waking up.

[bleever]

31. Hey Sis: did you see TominTib's post?

I bet you did. It's on the Greatest, about his conversation on an airplane.

:hi:

[Prophet 451]

35. Of course

Terrorists are far more useful to teh GOP "out there" scaring people than they are behind bars. Sure, sometimes you need to capture one or two, mostly minnows, for the propoganda value but for the most part, it's both easier and more politically useful not to catch them.

Rule of thumb in the modern world: If you're not paranoid, you're not paying attention.

[The Backlash Cometh]

28. LOL! Let's see, how would a Republican put it...

Bush is helping bin Laden!

[savemefromdumbya]

29. Oh no! Rupert Murdoch is going to be mad!

[upi402]

34. If fucking up is cool- Bush is Miles Davis

[Richard Steele]

36. They SHOULD get off. There ISN'T any damn evidence.

Even with an undercover agent INSIDE this group
for over a YEAR, all we have is some TALK to arrest
them on.

None of them ever made any attempt to actually acquire
any explosives, or made any other preparations to
actually carry out any plot.

My favorite moment was when one of the British officials
described the 'plot' as being in the "pre-planning stages".

_PRE_

Which would mean that they weren't actually even PLANNING...
just that someone thought they were going to start.

[daleo]

38. "Aspirations" is a good one too

That word is usually a sign that there is no real case to be prosecuted.

[TahitiNut]

39. Nothin' but an RPG.

Role-Playing-Game. :shrug:

[Richard Steele]

41. Heh! Made me look!

[fishwax]

42. boy, wouldn't that just top it all

they've always been style and hype over substance when it came to our safety. That would certainly be the final, cynical example.

[sofa king]

43. There is the distinct possibility that the "conspirators" are not guilty.

What evidence do I have in saying this? Well, I could flutter around outdated concepts like "innocent until proven...," but let's skip that and cut straight to the chase.

Just ask yourself the question: when is the last time the Bush Administration told you the truth about anything?

And now they're telling us this.