Wow, Pat Buchanan is an ass. “I’m not arguing for torture… just hurt him real bad until he squeals like a pig.”

For the love of god, why are we still having this discussion about the policy of dealing with captured terrorists?

You did a nice job, and you looked great. Please never look orange!

“You just did.” Thanks for sticking up for the Rule of Law (yes, I tend to capitalize it. Otherwise it tends to get lost in the shuffle.)

Also thanks for mentioning all of the terrorists whom the U.S. has tried and convicted.

You might, though, have asked Pat Buchanan what Constitution he was citing:

The 5th Amendment applies to ANY PERSON, not just to U.S. citizens:

“ No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger;… nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law;….”

Where Buchanan and many others get the idea that the due process safeguards of the U.S. Constitution apply only to U.S. citizens beats me.

Thank God that the U.S. Constitution and Amendments are relatively short. They are nonetheless longer than Buchanan, and all too many of our public figures, can absorb.

This is interesting:

“tell a very interesting story about the boarding of the nigerian at schiphol airport.

here is a newspaper account

http://www.mlive.com/news/detroit/index.ss…_says_at_l.html

but kurt haskell got air on npr’s atc today. a very interesting interview. of interest to me was learning that for 6 years he was an attorney for the irs. and that during the 2 hours the passengers were sequestered and interviewed by the fbi after landing in detroit, he told them this same story.

i must admit, i stopped flying through schiphol in 2002. but from at least 1998 -2002, it was the most security-conscious airport that i traversed. as i recall, security at schiphol from 1998[if not earlier] was managed by ex-israeli military/intell services personnel. as i recall, one could not move from one concourse to another, even as a transiting passenger, without having to produce a relevant boarding pass and a passport. i found this to be the case at heathrow as well.

so, let us consider the haskell’s story. the alleged jihadi shows up at the gate in the company of an elegantly dressed older and taller man. who haskell overhears trying to bully the gate agent to board the nigerian without a passport. the gate agent refuses and sends the pair to her manager.

somehow, the nigerian, with no passport, gets boarded. if haskell’s overhearing is accurate[and i think it is], the nigerian is boarded without producing a passport.

several questions are raised, according to the haskells, the tall elegant companion that they observed, overheard, did not board the aircraft. one must ask a question, how was this individual able to enter that concourse? you cannot access a concourse without a boarding pass and a passport. which also invites the question, how did the nigerian enter the concourse without a passport?

in my relations with spookdom, i would submit that the nigerian’s companion was a “handler”.

haskell identifies this “handler” as appearing to be an “indian”[i.e., from the subcontinent]. i interpret that to mean that the companion was of an olive complection. could have been an israeli. an employee/manager of the israeli-managed schiphol security operations. this would allow him to move, with his nigerian companion, throughout schiphol unquestioned, unstopped.

several weeks ago, i read an article in the nyt, i think, where an ex-cia officer predicted another terrorist event before the end of the year. was this that event?

another false flag operation?

another bit of terrorism orchestrated by israel and the usa?

if the haskells heard it accurately, and i think that they did, then i sure think so.

what will be interesting will be the disposition of the film record from all the security cameras. as i recall, schiphol was the first major international airport to be overwhelmingly cameraed. there should be film tracking every bit of the nigerian’s transit through schiphol. through every security check-point. his “no passport” rendezvous with the gate agent. to his entry to the manager’s office. to his eventual boarding.

what i heard from kurt haskell this afternoon was how the swarthy, elegantly dressed companion identified the nigerian as sudanese and informed the gate agent that sudanese had been allowed access to flying without papers routinely. makes one wonder if this is how israeli intelligence moves its agents around without any record of their transit. also makes me wonder how often it is that the airline industry succumbs to this fraud.

what i really vouchsafed haskell’s story for me was when he was asked if anyone heard what he heard, saw what he saw. his response, “no one else was paying attention”.

and that has been my experience when flying. i am always paying attention. i do not go through life as if in a dream state. most do, however.

finishing up, haskell has reported a reality. watch how his report goes down the rabbit hole, lubricated by the mossad operatives that are running the usa. it should never be forgotten that israeli firms were running[as i recall] security at bos, dia, on that day in september, 2001.

was it an israeli false-flag bit of catastrophic homicide that misfired? i think so. “

deleted duplicate post

Bravo Spencer!

More discussions like this please.

oooh thanks Spencer – as I mentioned in an earlier thread, I caught the tail end of your segment and am so glad to see it here

I shoulda gone to law school. Actually I shouldn’t have. But good point!

“muslim heat vision” god damn that was good

So the Nigerian bomber wannabe did it because of drone attacks, so the U.S. response is more drone attacks. Brilliant.

Great work, Spencer. I admire your ability to keep your head with Buchanan.

You wanna make Buchanan really snap? Duct tape his hands/arms to the table so he can’t wag them while trying to make his specious points. Yeah. That should do it…

Yes, Spencer, great job of keeping your cool and using Buchanan’s words against him. What part of “getting all the information we want” did he not understand?

Minor TV tip: get antiglare coating on your eyeglasses.

thanks. i am glad pat is there to advocate for that constituency because we need to remember how differently people see things, but damn…be sceerd o’ those turrurists, ma, cause they is super bad. run tell people cause pat buchanan says we at war.

they are thugs. the president has my absolute support in not raising them to the level of super villains by racing to a camera everytime one of these morons blows up his own shoes, let alone blows his own balls off.

Buchanan is a disgusting old relic from the Nixon shithouse, an unindicted coconspirator who should have been jailed then, oughta be pilloried now, not paid for being on the teebee. Not gonna get better when the turds at Comcast own NBC. Tx, Obamco “antitrust” unit at DOJ.

Hostile interrogation, what a dick.

Looks like you’ve got the hang of it!

My one regret is that my makeup doesn’t make me look as orange as a Jersey Shore cast member.

Oh is THAT Boehner’s excuse for the Man-Tan?

Merry Christmas, Spencer.

;-)

Nicely done, all the way around.

The biggest threat to American security are Republicans. Especially big mouth ones like Buchanan who are afforded a constant forum in the media to spout their nonsense. By the way, DeMint. Keep blocking the TSA nominee and putting America in more peril for your stupid ass reasons. TSA employees are underpaid to begin with. What a sorry excuse for a Patroit you are Jim DeMint. I’m pissed off. What an asshole.

Great job Ackerman. But I would have paid any amount of money for Scarborough to be there so you guys could have gone all out over torture. Pat Buchannan really isn’t pro torture and you could tell his heart wasn’t really into it. Scarborough on the other hand thinks its the answer to any and every question and he loves to scream at the women who come on the show but always backs down some when its a man arguing with him. I would have loved to see you make him look stupid on his own show.

As I listen to the arguments in the YouTube, I am struck that no one made the point that one can use criminal law enforcement strategies where one has the capability to do that — and the Christmas attempted bombing was certainly one in which the US has law enforcement capable of handling the situation and seeing it through the courts. Just citing the examples of terrorists currently locked up as a result of law enforcement action apparently is not persuasive. There is a hint of “soldiers are more macho than cops” attitude going in the discussions of pundits.

And not only the US has sufficient law enforcement capabilities to prevent and handle terrorist situations. Other countries have successfully caught and prosecuted terrorists. Which is why the significant nodes of terrorist activity have to move to jurisdictions that are beyond the reach of national laws (either lawless or subject to tribal law of sympathetic tribes.

The demand side question of interest is not exclusively why young adults are attracted to these movements; it also includes why the communities that are sheltering these groups are doing so. Family ties is the first reason for sure. But aside from protecting their own, what other motives might families and tribes have? Independence from a central government and the impositions of that government? Wanting to be left alone? Commercial ties in a trans-national black market? Identity politics of various kinds?

And it includes the question of why the US is their target of choice. Yes, all the obvious reasons. But what are some of the less obvious reasons? And what (besides opportunity and means) determines which of several targets are hit?

At the macro level, it is clear that US withdrawal from Central Asia and the Middle East, US independence of foreign oil, and a just solution to the situation of Israel, Palestine, and Gaza take away much of the motives for attack. What are the downsides of taking direct action on these that trap the US in two significant wars and special operations actions in several failed states and rogue regions?

I’ve made the same recommendation on the anti-glare glasses, too.
Spenser, you did a remarkable job making your points, and you are looking more and more big time grown up on tv. It’s so wonderful that you’re getting coverage which exposes your intelligence and grasp of the subject.
One more teeny, weeny tip. And, seriously this is just to make you even Better! Watch the clip and notice your face during the split screens. If you could try and keep your face a little more “straight” while you’re listening. A little nonverbal eye rolling there. Let’s leave that to Mary Matilen and her type. Hope you take this in the vein it’s given.
Love to see you looking so good. Nice suit, btw.

When all you got is a hammer and and expensive buzz saw, all the little jobs look like nails and all the big jobs look like ripping logs.

pat looks like shit.

in other words, his appearance matches his opinion.

The metal image I like best is the the U.S. approach to terrorism is like trying to swat a fly on a glass table with a sledgehammer.

From what I’ve read, it appears that this recent attempt was “blowback” from our missle and drone attacks on Yemen. How come that was never pointed out?

Also, on the part of some planners, it may have been blowback from years of detainment at Gitmo as well: http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/men-believed-northwest-airlines-plot-set-free/story?id=9434065

SanderO

That is one interesting piece. Here’s an updated link. This needs a post all it’s own, especially after Palin’s, “And there will be more attacks soon,” comment.

Spencer, great job.

That seems to have been a pretext for al-Qaeda, disproven by the timetable of when Abdulmutallab bought his plane ticket — before the 12/17 Yemen strike. Jake Tapper reports.

Could that owman have possibly been more stupid or uninformed?

To suggest that we would have been in a better position if we had subjected this defendant to “harsh interrogation”?

Duh, no, HE CONFESSED under normal LEGAL questioning. He is reported to be cooperating with law enforcement. It seems doubtful at this point that he will go to trial, more likely will plead guilty.

And how was this wonderful result obtained? Yep, by treating him humanely, reading him his rights, getting him a lawyer who no doubt explained to him why it was in his one best interest to tell the truth, by getting him medical care.

THAT is how you 1) make triable cases; 2) win hearts and minds

Well done Spencer. I love the look of Buchanan sidelined while the grown-ups talk.

And I find it interesting that Obama is being blamed for “slow” filling of key security positions such as TSA head yet it is Jim DeMint who put a hold on Obama’s nominee.

What is going on here? Are we looking at intentional holds on these key positions, then a backing of a terrorist act and then Repugs blaming Obama and the Dems?

Quite the interesting bit on the heels of the Palin comment and multiplied by Matalin’s comment to rewrite history that 9-11 was Clinton’s fault.

What the he– is going on? This is way too orchestrated.

A new twist to the “fear, fear” card. Now Repugs are trying to create the “fear, fear the Dems cannot protect the country” fear.

This is sick.

BTW Spencer, you did a really great job. I should have put that in first

Nice job, Spencer.

Great job. Excellence.

I wonder if average viewers notice things like pat’s voice going up 3 octaves as he flails about to sell the most repeatedly discredited bullshit ever seen in my lifetime.

this was great stuff spence

I think you might have missed a great opportunity with pat though, when he was talking about “hard interrogation”;

your point was terrific, “he’s cooperating and we’re getting great information and we got terrible information from Gitmo”

you might have added;

“this demonstrates what the professional interrogators keep telling us you get less information through “hard interrogation” and I wonder why pat wants to continue with the methods we know are counter productive, produce less actionable intelligence and create more enemies against this country”

his head would explode Spence

Yeowee… WHO turned up the spigot on Pat Buchanan’s direct feed from the Cheeeney KoolAide machine ??? He’s a get-the-machetes-out guy all the way in this piece but he’s pretty much like that on every issue..

I propose that Obama nominate Pat as the Ambassador to Iran… send him over to tell them about the new sanctions on the middle-east… tee..heee…

Thanks for disabusing me of a mistaken impression.

Wow! Thanks. I suspected as much but that was just my very tinfoil scalp-mind. I leapt to this almost at once.

Spenser, you were great. I noticed how Buchanan was pretty much left out of the dialog after he advocated denying pain meds. Anyone in their right mind knows you can’t get info out of somebody in tremendous pain.
That parting shot of “Merry Xmas” was disgusting. I guess Buchanan’s Christain credentials are in order/

The 5th Amendment applies to ANY PERSON, not just to U.S. citizens

More proof the right views these folks as somehow not a person or “human”.

That link no longer works, interestingly enough. I found this:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/6902995/Detroit-terror-attack-bomber-assisted-by-second-man.html
&
http://www.detnews.com/article/20091229/METRO01/912290365/1409/Flight-253-passengers-believe-others-involved-in-plot

Yeah, Buchanan was clueless to the end.

Pat: We should not treat them like citizens and ACLU members, so we we can torture them.
Host: Yeah, why not treat him has enemy combatant?
Pat: Yeah, this is war.
Constitution: The Constitution applies to persons, and prisoners of war are also protected by Geneva, the law of the land, even if captured on Mars, you morons.
Pat: Torture works, torture works, torture works, but denying pain medicine to someone with recent extensive burns is not torture.

Spencer: [Thinking] [These people are all friggin nuts! No wonder everyone is trying to kill us!]

Actually, he looks a lot better when he’s wearing his grand dragon hood…

Well, take look at this one if you want to see how those who object to Capitalist expansion are viewed by the Gov:

While we were all out doing our Christmas shopping, the highest court in the land quietly put the kibosh on a few more of the remaining shards of human liberty.

It happened earlier this week, in a discreet ruling that attracted almost no notice and took little time. In fact, our most august defenders of the Constitution did not have to exert themselves in the slightest to eviscerate not merely 220 years of Constitutional jurisprudence but also centuries of agonizing effort to lift civilization a few inches out of the blood-soaked mire that is our common human legacy. They just had to write a single sentence.

Here’s how the bad deal went down. After hearing passionate arguments from the Obama Administration, the Supreme Court acquiesced to the president’s fervent request and, in a one-line ruling, let stand a lower court decision that declared torture an ordinary, expected consequence of military detention, while introducing a shocking new precedent for all future courts to follow: anyone who is arbitrarily declared a “suspected enemy combatant” by the president or his designated minions is no longer a “person.” They will simply cease to exist as a legal entity. They will have no inherent rights, no human rights, no legal standing whatsoever — save whatever modicum of process the government arbitrarily deigns to grant them from time to time, with its ever-shifting tribunals and show trials.

the link is in the quote..just hit it anywhere.

Superior work Spencer, I’m sure they will be inviting you back again. You are just what they are looking for – articulate, good ideas, an interesting character, yet nothing to make their producers mad at them.

You’re cool under fire. Looking forward to your future appearances.

I’m afraid they’ll invite him back as a foil to Pat, because what they’re really selling, is Pat’s views and hysteria.

Osama pulls a “Little Big Man”
Remember the scene when Custer asks Dustin Hoffman’s character before the battle of the “Little Big Horn” what he should do? Every time I hear conservative, neo-conservatives and Republicans reactions to terrorism I’m reminded of that movie scene.

Thanks for this ‘catch’; I think you’re obviously on the right track. (If not, it is still worth the majority of our attention until proven wrong.)

I find it interesting that so few of those commenting on this post have noticed the story you are pointing at.

How can we possibly fight an enemy that we insist on ignoring?

Why is it so easy for the enemy to hide in plain sight?

It’s because of our collective insistence on framing every story in terms that fit conventions that we are comfortable with. We’re all too happy to ignore a possible false-flag operation furthering the mythological Global War on Terror meme because we’re so comfortable with a story that highlights Buchanan’s barbarity.

We’d do well to start understanding that the divisive characters we see on TV are more often than not there to distract us.

But when you say “they” – not a monolith. One thing I learned from the reporters at the Libby trial was there are conflicts within media organizations, yes including Fox, that pit reporters who are eager to get the real story out against higher management.

I don’t think you/we know exactly who or what Al Qaeda is. My suspicion it is laced with intel operatives who are aiding and abetting and then hoping to catch these guys red handed, in addition to using th AQ brand for false flag operations.

In a sense some of our intel operations ARE AQ and created and defined AQ to be the enemy we must fear and fight and they are going to make sure we do… and remind us every few months.

Shocking….you and Richard Engel actually had an interesting, informative dialogue?

On a cable news net, no less!

And Buchanan, midway through, just shut up and let the adults carry the day.

Will wonders never cease?

Most people are completely unaware of the fact that NATO intel was DEEPLY involved with terrorism in operations such as Gladio.

They assassinated Aldo Moro because he was going to work with the PCI and the anti communists in NATO went ballistic and had the red brigades assassinate him. They also did a bombing in Milano and the Bolgna train station.

ALL FALSE FLAGS

Wake up America you are falling for the false flag operations by intel services.

It’s not what really anyone has alleged outside of this show.

Spencer, that was great.

Pat Buchannan is a goddamn sadist. Even after he learned that this kid was talking and telling us everything we asked, Pat still want to torture him or at least withhold pain killers. What an ass! He’d prefer painful stonewalling to cooperative disclosure. Apparently administering all that pain and violence give Pat a thrill in his pee pee.

By the way, there is NO proof that Al Qaeda was behind 9/11. The KSM trial will be a class stalinist show trial… without evidence.

It’s my understanding that AQ (the base) is/was a CIA label which is actually short for the database which dates to the efforts of our Intel community to thwart the Russian occupation of Afghanistan by supporting the Mujahidin.

It seems we kept track of the various characters involved in the operations in a database which lo-and-behold turns out to coincide with the guys who once done with fighting Russians, turned to fighting other infidels.

Meanwhile, we’re busy lapping up the myth that these guys popped out of nowhere, with a bunch of indiscernible motivations and irrational hatreds.

Dutch news is reporting the bomber had a valid visa, and no mention of special treatment?

Yeah Right.

I can answer that. It took me about 7 years and a stray comment from around these parts to figure it out.

It is due to the ‘Doctrine of Determination’.

Pat speaks for the Catholic line. The Doctrine of Determination is a law that is still on our books and ‘legalizes’ rape, murder and torture among other things. Our government seems to be quite addicted to it and yes, it is contrary to constitutional law, that is the ‘culture war’.

People who advocate for it also speak of this as being a ‘Christian’ nation, were concerned about the war on Christmas, and seem to think it is a good idea to try to eliminate the Islamic faith and Islamic people. They seem to fail to realize that is mass murder. That level of denial indicates they are quite nuts.

Here is a web sith that I think does a good job of explaining the doctrine,

http://ili.nativeweb.org/sdrm_art.html

OK..there seems to be lots of talk from the GOP and the right about the WAR on terror and how all the likes of the hot pants guy from Nigeria are “enemy combatants” of war and should not be afforded the rights of the legal system in this country. Color me dense here but when was WAR declared by the US Congress and against whom? Nigeria? Yemen? How can one be an enemy combatant without war being declared? What possible harm can arresting and trying the thugs…and that is what they are, some misguided thugs and radical theocrats..the theology is irrelevant,they could be Baptist for all I care…and what are we afraid of..if we are so freekin proud of the “rule of law” and our fabulous judicial system what shame can it be to put criminal thugs from Nigeria, the UK, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia etc..on trial and give them constitutional rule of law rights?..The right seems to have a law and order fetish so I guess I simply do not understand the terror of the terrorist in court. Are they afraid they will get to spew something …what the hell are they afraid of…if the thugs are thugs and we know they are…and we know that our democracy is superior to anarchy what are we afraid to hear? what they might say or what will happen to them in our rule of law fabulous judicial system of which we are so damn proud, what is the right afraid of? Or is it they want us to be afraid? Not buying it anymore.

It seemed to me that the whole point of his argument was to defend past decisions.

Next time.

You mean like when they were watching my every move and my husband wanted me to mail a birthday card to his brother in Spain for him?

My brother in law never got the card, but the train he takes to work everyday was blown up by terrorists on his son’s birthday.

The only reason he wasn’t killed was because he stayed home for a child’s birthday party.

I bet you would not be surprised to hear my husband got very angry with me when I said the events were probably connected and that my brother in law not only refuses to speak to me, he will have nothing to do with me. The last time we actually socialized he said he was going to have to talk to Condi Rice.

I took that seriously, but my husband insisted it had to be a joke. I don’t think so.

Good job Spencer. Well played indeed. Particular props for the “You just did!”, because there’s too much letting of that stuff go most of the time.

However, after watching you on blogginheads, man, it’s weird to see you in a suit and tie. I’m not sure it works as well for you as the more casual look.

Buchanan, Dobson, Dobbs, Beck … Children of A Lesser God !

Nice work, Spencer !

Heh, I’m actually filming a Bloggingheads in about half an hour…

who are you blogginheads with?

Spencer…good job.

I can’t listen to Buchanan when he is in terroist mode.

Catholics and Mormons are rising in our govt because they are ok with this torture.They have history. Fits nicely with fascism.More trustworthy to out esteemed leaders.

Spencer you did a great job! The eye rolling towards Nixon fossil Pat Buchanan is perfect. You made your points very clearly.

Spencer, you are my new hero.

Uncle Pat came across like an old horse, ridden too long, and left out wet to dry.

You’ll be invited to argue the alleged “liberal side” of arguments such as these in the MSM as long as you couch the conversation with the premise that Al Qaeda actually exists, separate from a CIA-run black-op.

Just as there is no evidence of the existence of Osama, there is no evidence of the existence of an independent organization named Al Qaeda. It is quite simply the rebranding of the Mujahideen, itself a creation of the US Government.

Al Qaeda = US. We find willing dupes to carry out apparent terror attacks to justify our geostrategic goals – killing “useless eaters” and enemies of Israel, occupying territory, stealing resources and establishing bases.

Don’t buy into their premise. Only discuss the things you know to be factual, and for god sakes, question everything else.