Filipino Monkey … Borat … Same Difference
Kudos to LS, who labeled the crazy voice on the US version of the confrontation between the US and Iran "Borat." A pretty close guess, as it turns out. The Navy Times is now reporting that the voice may well have come from a local jokester referred to as "Filipino Monkey" (h/t TPMM).
In recent years, American ships operating in the Middle East have had to contend with a mysterious but profane voice known by the ethnically insulting handle of “Filipino Monkey,” likely more than one person, who listens in on ship-to-ship radio traffic and then jumps on the net shouting insults and jabbering vile epithets.
Navy women — a helicopter pilot hailing a tanker, for example — who are overheard on the radio are said to suffer particularly degrading treatment.
Several Navy ship drivers interviewed by Navy Times are raising the possibility that the Monkey, or an imitator, was indeed featured in that video.
Rick Hoffman, a retired captain who commanded the cruiser Hue City and spent many of his 17 years at sea in the Gulf was subject to the renegade radio talker repeatedly, often without pause during the so-called “Tanker Wars” of the late 1980s.
“For 25 years there’s been this mythical guy out there who, hour after hour, shouts obscenities and threats,” he said. “He could be tied up pierside somewhere or he could be on the bridge of a merchant ship.”
And the Monkey has stamina.
“He used to go all night long. The guy is crazy,” he said. “But who knows how many Filipino Monkeys there are? Could it have been a spurious transmission? Absolutely.”
So when asked if this (or these) jokesters might be responsible for the threats, Chief of Naval Operations Adm. Gary Roughead offered a really lame response.
When asked if U.S. officials considered whether the threats came from someone besides the Iranians when releasing the video and audio, Roughead said: “The reason there is audio superimposed over the video is it gives you a better idea of what is happening.”
What is likely happening, you goofball, is that some guy sitting in the Persian Gulf is laughing his ass off that his pranks almost started World War III. And that no one in the US military (to say nothing of the Administration) is now willing to admit how stoopid they look for releasing transparently ridiculous audio along with the video.
We almost just started a war on the basis of the functional equivalent to a prank phone call.
Heh, many Filipinos work the waterfronts and ships… Interesting…
Hello? Do you have Prince Albert in a can?
Does this further reflect poorly upon our Sigint… Coming on the heels of NSA’s gaff on the ‘Gulf of Tonkin’ and Tet being recently declassified… Hmmm…
So the mighty US Gulf Fleet was terrified and threatened by the Wackiest Ships in the Quds Navy and the Iranian Jerky Boys????
Have you read the blogs linking to you EW in regards to the “Borat” identity of the voice? TPM did and I’ll have to go back and check the others and post links.
Can the hole be dug any deeper on this? No offense bmaz, but I do not think I even need any more bmaz Borat Burlesque (BBB) to keep laughing about this.
Filipino Monkey, chimpy, Filipino Monkey, chimpy….hmmm why am I NOT surprised that a MONKEY reference was involved in this whole…”do humans eat that too?” event.
Hey, EW how about we buy the rights to Filipino Monkey’s story? THIS is a box office comedy hit in the making. Although, Mr. Klynn sees a Broadway comedy musical hit out of this one. Disney has probably beat us to it.
Just when you thought the story couldn’t get any better…it DOES. “Shock Jock of the Open Seas Brings US Navy to it’s Knees.”
Thanks for keeping me laughing!
Chimpy and the Bandit
“Is that a howitzer in your pocket or are you just glad to receive my transmission?”
“Breaker 1-6. We got ourselves a flotilla.”
I can see the reviews already:
“Hilarious hijinks on the high seas”
Where o where is Monty Python’s Flying Circus when you need them? As Rodney Dangerfield would say, “the jokes almost write themselves”.
Main chorus hit for the Tony award winning musical:
bahhahahaha…
Though holding this Administration up to ridicule is an excellent tonic for these stumblebum antics, don’t for a minute think that the Cheney “World War III” faction is going down without a fight (both figuratively and literally). From the BBC:
Manufacturing a causus belli is still the operative Administration plan, and even the purported statements of Centcom Chief Admiral Fallon of “not on his watch” seem to be implacably adrift elsewhere:
I agree that Fallon’s shift in rhetoric is especially chilling. I had held out hope that he could keep things under control.
Thanks for this MD.
Then we need to be listing what gains are made for Cheney and co. in a war that will shut down a port that exports 30% of the world’s petroleum supply.
The U.S. warships need to back off in Hormuz. Especially after this latest embarrassment.
So was the “hope to be” to create an incident while Bush is on peace mission which then turns the peace mission into a war plan mission for the ME?
I read Junya’s trip to the ME, particularly Israel, much differently. Yes, the cover story of solving the Israeli/Palestinian conflict gets much coverage in the ever-fawning and submissive MSM, but I think the real primary purpose was not so peaceful.
Israel wanted to present Junya with their intelligence take on Iran’s nuclear program. A take that was markedly different than that of the US’s unclassified NIE.
And more importantly, Israel wanted a “greenlight” from Junya for their own Iran strike. From the UK’s Timeonline:
One should take the “public” pronouncements of this Administration about Junya’s ME Peace trip with a grain of salt. Perhaps even the entire salt shaker.
If you’d note just who attended with Junya, it included Condi “Still technically a virgin” Rice and National Security Advisor, Stephen Hadley. I’m guessing there were other US national security/spook types in attendance as well.
The issue of Israeli/Palestinian conflict resolution was window-dressing and Junya’s idiotic “Peace before the year is out” bromides serve to confirm this.
Hence the Administration’s warhawk PR campaign wrt to the Iranian speedboats. No incident is too small for Junya and Deadeye to take umbrage with.
This is just another chapter in the Cheneyites’ Marketing plan for War with Iran/World War III.
It is still on!
And as I’ve been predicting since last fall, this Administration is in fact planning on War with Iran.
Timeframe? I’m still going with March 2008. It is sufficiently after the Presidential primaries that Junya and crew expect nominees to have been selected (good luck suckers!), and the plan is to butress the Repug Nominee’s chances by turning on the War spigot. The idea is who in their right mind would vote against a Repug when we’re at war?
Junya is going to be wrong with his last breath…if it kills us all.
“And more importantly, Israel wanted a “greenlight” from Junya for their own Iran strike. “
Ah, how much Cheney and the Neo-Cons miss Ariel Sharon. Georgie boy was putty in his hands. Ariel would call George the Isreali equivalent of a girlie-man unless he showed his manhood in Iran, and George would melt in adoration of such a mensch. But alas, Ariel still lies in a deep coma and is apparently unavailable for comment. Fortunately for the rest of the world.
Bob in HI
Stand-off? The Beeb called this a stand-off? Three huge US Navy vessels, eye-to-eye, toe-to-toe, with a flotilla of Iranian speedboats, staring each other down to see who would blink first. Right.
No, this was no stand-off. It was a harassment. I can understand the Navy being jumpy around speedboats – the USS Cole comes to mind. But this was broad daylight, plain-sight harassment.
Waiting for mainstream media to pick up this “Filipino Monkey” story from Navy Times, but they’ve shown time and time again their absolute unwillingness to show this “administration” for the pack of buffoons it is.
While we’re waiting for that, how about the fact we’ve known and abetted Israel since ‘74 with Nukes, Iran too… Ummm… *crickets*
http://www.armscontrolwonk.com/
And one wonders (I do in particular *g*) whether Israel’s paranoia wrt to Iran’s nuclear program has to do with Israel’s own “untested” nuclear weaponry.
To my knowledge, Israel’s nuclear weapon arsenal has never undergone a reality test. There is a big difference in believing your nuclear bomb will work, and the actual knowledge that it will!
Ask the North Koreans what the difference is between “theory” and reality. Tis a fizzle.
Perhaps this is one reason that Israel dismisses the idea of an ME MAD (Mutual Assured Destruction) strategy. Because in their worst-case fear scenario, they can’t be sure their nuclear arsenal actually works.
In that case, hitting your enemy before they get nuclear weapons is a logical (though not necessarily sane) result.
Many have said that the tail (Israel) wags the dog (United States). It may also be the case that the dog has no real control over the tail. It may wag when the dog wishes it wouldn’t.
A*P*C, PNAC…? Both?
“but on further analysis, what was first reported as the sound of an armored helicopter in the distance on the U.S.S. W tape log turned out to be a high-pitched male voice which seemed to be saying, ‘Woo-woo-woo-woo-woo-woo-woo-woo!’ “
At least one analyst ventured the opinion that the voice emanated from the W itself.
And now we have our answer as to why:
Even more of the world’s oil supply would go out of Hormuz through Dubai’s port while the US would shut down Iran if a war broke out.
http://www.onlinejournal.com/a….._571.shtml
And why Halliburton moved HQ to Dubai…
http://abcnews.go.com/Business…..id=2941931
Oh that Mr. C has all the plans…
The “filipino Monkey” must have some cousins in the states…Bill Kristol, Ledeen, Woolsey, Bolton….”they are coming to get you, you will explode very soon”
Aargh, Hill’s appearance in Commerce, CA, is being aired on C-Span1, she’s regurgitating the Repug memes on Iran, to include the EFP’s… WTF?!
So there’s no chance that this “Filipino Monkey” story is being floated in order to provide cover for a failed attempt to kick off WWIII?
msnbc is reporting that in a separate incident last month, the US boat actually did fire on the Iranians (warning shots.)
Weird upon weird, the Syrians have rebuilt on the site Israel air-struck on September 9. There certainly is a second-bite-at-the-apple sense in the air tonight.
MadDog, as ProfF is stating @25
It appears the evening news is taking your news to “justify” the latest video. Showing the past interactions and stating this is a repeated pattern by the Iranians. Thus, video is “fer reeealll.”
Again, the timing is the question.
If the earlier event was the more extreme one, then why would the USG choose to publicize the later, less extreme one? Especially as doing so risked the successful contradicting evidence that we saw the Iranians produce?
Couldn’t get those @#$%^ video cameras working on the previous incidents.
I always say that it’s the operator’s problem, not the camera.
Bush needs Cover.
A little Sabre Rattling around his visit to Israel, not to mention dropping 40,000lbs of Bombs on a fucking Neighborhood in Baghdad.
Sidenote: If Blackwater shooting-up a plaza filled with Civilians is being investigated for possible War Crimes, how can Decimating a Neighborhood with enough Destructive Power to sink a Carrier Battle Group – how can that Not be a possible act of Genocide?
Back to Bush Needs Cover – Bush Desperately Needs to Dominate the Newswires this coming week during the Torture Tape Revelations.
It sounds like he’s recruiting his Israeli Pals to give him a ‘help out’ – and, honestly, Bush needs a Mega-Story to Drown Out getting Publicly Tagged with Sytematic Torture.
He needs something Really Big, like capturing Osama, the collapse of Pakistan, the Israelis bombing the Natanz Nuclear Facility in Iran, or a little ski-boat sinking a Billion Dollar Missile Cruiser.
This calls to mind the Ancient Chinese Proverb: A Cornered Rat is Dangerous and Unpredicatable.
Yeah, but wrong causus belli there… it would just make the USN look stooopid, not like a victim deserving to strike back. (The Cole was not under way.) I find your other Really Big things more likely. Unless we get more than one at once, that is.
Yes, I’ve been really worried about that since the NIE.
OT
More on Republican cronyism and incompetence on your dime.
Goldie! How many times I gotta tell you I don’t want no horsin’ around
on tha airplane!
NYT buys a piece of the boat story.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01…..vy.html?hp
signing off.
Help me out here.
I’ve been working on my Pentagon-speak skills since CNN Presents Bush Takes Afghanistan and I’d just need a little input on how my progress and maybe a few pointers.
This is what I have Admiral Mike Mullen saying at his press conference yesterday.
“Thank you for those kind remarks Major.
Ladies…lady… and gentlemen, good morning…[what’s?]Sorry … I’m being told…Good afternoon. … [what?] .. Okay I guess it’s too close to call so…welcome …all.
We’re going to open here first with a brief presentation, so bear with us if you will please, I’m assured we’ll have lots of time after that for all your questions I’ve had the Major here clear this room until….three? Four! Well we won’t need all that much time but anyway we got lots and lots of time today all the time in the world so without further ado…
There certain facts in relation to this incident which are beyond serious dispute:
Firstly, the incident occurred on last Sunday, January 6, 2008, in the Strait of Hormuz, bordering on Iran, both of which hold great strategic interest to the United States armed forces as I’m sure you all know and understand.
Secondly, it involved three US Navy battle class ships, each of them with a full complement and under the command of a highly trained US naval commander.
Thirdly, it involved five water craft owned, operated and under the control by the Iranian National Guard, which as you know has been designated as terrorist organization.
Fourthly, the US ships were proceeding relatively slowly, consistent with their respective relatively massive proportions and relatively huge draw, and with little or no deviation from a pre-determined path of travel predicated on their mission, which in this case was to patrol international waters located just outside Iranian waters, and to be seen to be doing precisely that.
Fifthly, the Iranian boats were proceeding relatively quickly, consistent with both their respective relatively diminutive proportions and relatively minimal draw, as well the deployment of their chief design feature, which in my view is best appreciated by their informal classification as “speed boats”, and traveling very quickly in an area locationally closer to Iran in an area of indeterminate expanse but at a militarily significant distance from the path of travel of the US ships on the one hand, and an unmarked but readily determinable conceptual line dividing Iranian waters from international waters on the other.
In the absence of contextual considerations, it might be said that the only conclusions to be drawn from these established facts are that, comparatively speaking, very big watercraft, especially those with a very large ratio of inertia over thrust, present a significantly greater impression of placid movement, particularly when operated in the manner for which they were designed, being cruising over very long aquatic distances; whereas very small watercraft, especially those with a very large ratio of thrust over interia, present a significantly greater impression of relatively aggressive or frenzied or erratic movement, particularly when operated more or less in the manner for which they were designed, which is pursuit over very short aquatic distances.
However, as you know, and if you don’t then it should be apparent from the manner of my attire, as well as the name plate directly in front of me, and the imposing insignia which appears on the podium situated proximately in front and beneath that, I am the ranking officer over all American military forces, excepting solely those implications which certain provisions of the U.S. Constitution have for the chain of command by virtue of their assigning the duties and responsibilities of the supreme Commander in Chief over all U.S. military forces to the President of the United States.
History teaches us that the training & experience of the President of the United States can usually be expected to be somewhat less than my own for example, which is certainly the current situation, and so I would anticipate that in any matter in which US armed forces might be involved, I should anticipate that the President might derive benefit from the application of my again somewhat greater training and experience in considering the basic facts of a given situation.
I feel I should interject here and say that when I referenced the word “President” to the U.S. Constitution just now, that was intentional, and also cautionary, given we are now in the year 2008, and these days we realize the superficially plain words contained within that document, which of course as we all know from as far back as our early school days, has primacy in establishing the chain of command in relation to all U.S. armed forces, are understood to bear a certain subtlety, which I’m led to understand may have eluded some in the Executive Branch in bygone years.
Without going an further into a lot of unnecessary detail which to me frankly, and maybe for you too, is all a lot of dry lawyer talk and legal hocus pocus, and I might get sued for practicing law without a license or something, I think it’s sufficient for these purpose that I commend to each of you here today some fairly recent and I’m told basically representative statements which have issued out of the White House press office, which for your convenience is in your package at Tab 3 ….and while your looking for that I’ll just note that the U.S. Naval Observatory grounds also accommodates the official residence of the Vice President.
Now returning directly to the incident which brings us all here, were the President to ask me – – incidentally, by my employment of this predicate, I have to ask that you refrain from speculating as whether that has occurred already, or not, and in the alternative whether it is expected to occur shortly, or not, which in any event I would be obliged to decline to provide an informationally-nuanced response, as I have been led to understand just today that any such information has been classified – – I would feel both obliged and happy to respond with my best judgment, relying of course on the benefit of all my training and experience.
In approaching assessment of this incident, that training and experience counsels me that it would be prudent to first recast the established facts of this incident, and put them in context of all the various circumstances that are or, might be, relevant to its occurrence. I would do that in order to assess implications, if any, beyond those which arise naturally from a purely non-contextual consideration of the known facts.
In order that you may better appreciate the perspective that expertise brings to the appreciation of this incident, I have arranged to clear a few key judgments from the totality of my perspective, and to give you a flavor of how the process works I’ve brought along some examples of the perspectives that come to me from the Pentagon’s military intelligence officers who focus on analyzing such incidents. The examples of which I speak are real and actual ones which have been sent to my attention for my consideration, in arriving at the most reliable and actionable assessment I would be able to provide at this time.
I think I should add a word of caution, that sitting here today I’m only in a position of being able to refer to examples by way of illustrating the process involved; it doesn’t mean that these examples in fact found or in fact will or would find their way into my advice to the President, but as I say I hope they suffice to provide a sense of the process.
I’ll start by reading you one of the judgments that appeared or would appear in my assessment:
“That the US Navy ships patrol through the Strait of Hormuz was an intentional show of force at Iran”
Okay, now at this point I’ll just read from one of those examples I discussed a moment ago. The subject here is the analyst’s opinion on the impression the US Navy patrol can be reasonably expected to have had on the Iranian military observers.
“We are American. We are a very big country & we are all very strong.
We don’t like you.
We desire to make that last point unmistakably clear. If you have no more sense than Allah gave to a disordered camel, you will see plainly from our presence here, that we dislike you so much, that we have traveled half way around the planet, and we have gone to considerable expense and committed extremely valuable resources, just to make it crystal clear to you how much we do not like you.
From this demonstration we expect to convince you, and your ruling regime, and your countryman, that it would bring us intense and deeply satisfying pleasure were you to do something now which we might hope to use at a later time to explain to all other nations why is was that we then proceeded to fire projectiles and explosives devices in your direction which are manufactured for the purpose of obliterating the existence of persons, and achieved that result, or at least fucked you up real bad.
Or that plus have some our fellow Americans fly huge invisible American Stealth bombers into the air space above your country and mess with the homes and businesses and infrastructure and lives of some of your fellow Iranians.
We hope by this demonstration that you will experience fear, and that under the influence of that fear, you will decide that instead of spending the remainder of your miserable non-American existences living with that fear whenever you happen to contemplate the United States of America and the intense pleasure it would bring to all Americans to attack Iran and inflict various violences on Iranians, this demonstration American military superiority and resolve will motivate you not just to report this citing of our display, but to report in addition that great fear which our vastly superior military power caused you, and as well the intensity of our desire to fuck you up, as well as your no-account country, its phony religion, and in particular its lunatic rulers.
We also hope that, in the event your rulers are insufficiently impressed by your report to surrender their ruling powers, you will then proceed to encourage your countrymen to rise up against your rulers for their blindness and stupidity and ignorance in choosing not to demonstrating the kind of respect for America and its President to which each is rightly entitled, and that you will encourage your countrymen to plead for American assistance in efforts to overthrow your rulers, so that when those efforts succeed, you will be in the position of being able to request that America send Vice President Richard Cheney to re-organize your oil & gas production and delivery system and arrange all of the marketing, and send American entrepreneurs to assist the Iranian people in placing McDonalds & Walmart in various locations in Iran so Iranians will be able to pursue their own happy burgers and happy greeters and other US market-tested happiness indicators.”
At this point I’d like to read you another one of the key judgments from my perspective:
“That both the attendance on the scene and the subsequent actions of the Iranian boats manifest intentional retort at the US show of force.”
Now as I did with the previous judgment and the analysis of the Iranian perspective on the meaning of the US Navy patrol which followed on that, I’m going to read from an example of analysis on the Iranian response:
“Hey! Imperialist fag troopers! We know what you’re doing. You’re acting all big & tough to try to scare us.
You want to know something? We watch American TV shows. We watch Jim Lehrer show and Wolfman and Jack show and Ulberman show and Bill Moyers show.
So we know you have Alfred E. Neuman as president and we know you have Mr. Magoo as vice president. We know your sisters are all whores and you can’t even agree to kick your Mexican servants out of your land.
We know you armed the mad Iraqi tyrant Saddam Hussein to attack us. We whipped his ass. We sent him home whimpering. We’re not crazy though; we’re not bone-heads who choose to invade and trying to control his ungovernable shithole of a country.
Hey Yankee water boys! How is globalization working for you? How is subprime mortgage crisis going? How do you like paying $100 US per gallon oil?
You and your phony threats are quite laughable! You should leave our neighborhood before you can’t get out. Go home to your Internet porn and your game shows and your hurricanes and your fires and your restroom homosexual encounters and get on with electing your next village idiot in chief.
You are no longer feared by us as the Great Satan. The whole world knows you are just a very little naughty Satan”
I’ll conclude by reading to you from the summary part of my perspective:
“As Chairman of the Joints Chiefs of Staff of the United States armed forces, it is my considered judgment that the actions of the five Iranian speed boats in response to the intentional symbolic show of American military power – – aimed at encouraging destabilization of the regime which controls the government of Iran, and thereby advancing the political goal of regime change to increase the possibility that American corporations might assume effective control of the production and distribution of Iran’s reserves of petroleum and natural gas – – was a deliberate and intentional and unambiguous demonstration of the contempt the Iranian military and ruling class has for US military forces’ thespian skills, and moreover a practical illustration of the underlying rationale for the American vacationer’s preference for speed boats over battleship destroyers, as well as an important clue to the remarkable popularity of NASCAR.”
I will just finish off the presentation part of our program today by reiterating my earlier caution against speculating on whether my perspective has been requested and provided, or is expected to be requested and if requested would be provided.
And while I’m at this I’ll just add in here out of an abundance of caution, that you might find it helpful to know that as a function of our experience with previous occurrences where matters such as this have held the attention of the President for longer than 48 consecutive hours, some time ago the Joint Chiefs established an informal policy of assuming the White House does not necessarily limit its input sources on policy decisions to US armed forces general staff officers, not even on situations which superficially at least might appear to be strictly military in nature, despite impressions to the contrary which some bloggers have suggested from inexpert and non-nuanced reading of the plain words in published versions of presidential directives.
I’ll take questions now.
Yes Walter……
Okay, well, I don’t think I’m telling any tales out of school here, but yes, I’m prepared to confirm that the Vice President has indeed attended on the Pentagon, and on more than one occasion and ….
well, as I think you can well imagine it’s always quite an interesting and challenging situation when he does visit but of course that’s his prerogative as part of … his responsibilities … as I understand … were assigned to him by ……
No Sir I most definitely do not recall at this precise moment seeing any particular formal directive to that effect no – but it’s been more or less the custom or at least its been assumed for some time that……
well no I can’t say that if I wanted to because I wasn’t serving as Chairman of the Joint Chiefs when Al Gore was vice president so I really can’t express ….
Well now Walter, I think…as a matter of fact I know – you know – that kind of information is above my paid grade …..
Look I can absolutely assure you – categorically – and I say I’m pleased that you’ve given me this opportunity, but the fact is that Mr. Hersh is completely persona non gratis at my office or anywhere else under authority of the Joint Chiefs, so this talk about plans is so much bu….
Walter I’ll tell you as simply and directly as I can, and then I really have to go because – – What’s that Major? – – I’m getting the high sign folks – sorry I’m late for a very important meeting but I’ll just try to answer you know – directly in the spirit of your question.
The fact is that there’s a plan for just about anything you can think of and if you look long enough and if you look hard enough I’m sure you can find some bright light squirreled away somewhere in a basement office or the furnace room or somewhere that somebody with way too much time on his hands and not enough to keep him busy you know – made a plan to invade – I don’t know Belgium Canada New Zealand take your pick.
But you know I’ve been at this game a long time and I just don’t think that sort of thing serve the public very well or gives anyone much insight ….
Well now that’s certainly an intriguing question I’ll admit – – Really? Now? Sorry all, gotta scoot. Thanks for coming – the Major tells me there’s lots of good stuff on the buffet so – – enjoy.”
Snarkissimo! It deserves to be a Snark diary where it will be noticed, say on Dkos or Talk Left.
I read every word and I was laughing so hard much of the time, but now I’m feeling sad. Really well done.
Go ahead courts and blow off our heads…
http://www.mcclatchydc.com/hom…..24654.html
EW – Have you read this McClatchy article?? O.M.F.G. This country is in one serious world of hurt. The DC Circuit has just legalized torture and the only dissent came from Janice Rogers Brown. I just posted a comment on the trash talk thread involving a fake and satirical news report. It doesn’t hold a candle to what appears to be true fact in the McClatchy article. I am literally speechless. Wow.
Wow. That is awful. I hope some of the lawyers hereabouts will weigh in on that ruling. What a terrible thing it is.
bmaz, have you read it? Link.
I need to read it, but I think this might force the issue in some interesting ways. If a court says we torture, it’ll make it hard for Bush to say we don’t.
Well, I haven’t gotten past the first couple of pages yet, but some faith in the natural order of the universe has already been restored; Janice Rogers Brown did not dissent, rather she “specially concurred”. How human of her. The other note that pops out already is that our good old friends Peter Keisler and Greg Katsas are leading the torture crusade. I guess the Administration is so sure of getting immunity for telcos and themselves, they can free up Keisler and Katsas to legalize torture too.
Fair enough, but who remains in a position to put a stop to it then?
Ah, I see bmaz answered that already. Damn.
All in a Day’s Work
http://www.mcclatchydc.com/hom…..24654.html
(snip)
“It is an awful day for the rule of law and common decency,” said Lewis, the detainees’ attorney, “when a court finds that torture is all in a day’s work for the secretary of defense and senior generals. . . . I think the executive is trying to create a black hole so there is no accountability for torture and religious abuse.”
Lewis said his clients intended to ask the Supreme Court to overturn the ruling.
—
Did someone mention the Banality of Evil?
Masaccio and EW – I have read the thing now. Wow. What a nasty piece of work. EW, you make a good point with the comment “If a court says we torture, it’ll make it hard for Bush to say we don’t.”; but if this decision and ones that could, and would, foreseeably spring from it, take root Bush won’t have to worry about spewing the fraudulent meme that we don’t torture; because torture will be fully the law of the land (as if it is not already, but you know what I mean).
I have to say that the McClatchy article is somewhat misleading about the participation of JR Brown. She concurs with the most odious aspects of the ruling completely and then spins the one interesting foundational aspect of the decision, that could be contrasted by plaintiffs/appellees on it’s head. I am not quite sure why she chose to undertake this disingenuous exercise in perfidy, but my off the cuff thought is she has an esoterical concern about restricting the definition of “person” because of potential impact on right to life arguments. I have to think about it more, but that is all I can come up with quickly. Maybe i am in left field here or something, but I think this is one of the biggest pieces of legal crap i have seen in a while. ILf the court just wanted to be rid of this case, there were easy grounds to be ginned up to punt it on without all the contortious exercises ratify the Cheney/Bush torture regime. Amazing.
I’m just stunned. I meant what I said last week, that these cases test the willingness of judges to display intellectual dishonesty in their efforts to protect the current administration. I would never have guessed they would go this far, although I should have after Bush v. Gore.
Let me just make one major point. The decision turns on the notion that the plaintiffs did not exhaust administrative remedies. They should have followed the rules of the Department of Defense and put in a claim under the Federal Tort Claims Act. The rationale is that the Westfall Act states that only the Federal Tort Claims Act applies to acts within their scope of the employment of the individual. The decision explains that the decision to torture people is within the scope of their duties.
There is, however, an exception to the requirement of exhaustion of administrative remedies. You don’t have to do that if it would be pointless. It is ludicrous to suggest that Plaintiff’s counsel didn’t raise this issue, but the three hanging judges don’t address it. It is even more ludicrous to suggest that there is any point in trying to get relief from the DOD.
I am disgusted.
I remember that comment, and I was just as serious about my response to never underestimate the ability of Federal judges to muster the intellectual dishonesty necessary to limit private tort claims against the Federal government. You are exactly right about the real basis of the decision here, that was my point @45 above. If they were going to bounce the claim in this manner, the court could have just said that the plaintiffs haven’t exhausted admin remedies and for that, and otherwise, don’t have a justiciable claim and been done with it. Also no need for that horseshit out of Brown. Instead, we have been bequeathed 30 plus pages of torture ratifying and legalizing…..
bmaz, my memory is rusty, but Janice Rogers Brown’s name rings a bell. Wasn’t her appointment really really controversial?
Phred – Yes, very much so. Out here, we have known about Brown for a long, long time. She is out of California. she is literally so bad that many lawyers, and even judges, when citing her opinions as precedence one way or another, by qualifying it along these lines “… and our position is supported by the decision in Smith v. Jones, 456 P3d 231 (1987), for the record, it is a Brown opinion”. I have friends that have been known to go to incredible lengths, sometimes ahem very creative, that I will not describe here, to attempt to file their appeal notices when they thought it wouldn’t get assigned to Brown off the docket wheel.
Thanks bmaz. So what’s wrong with the rest of the DC Circuit? This is just stunning to me that a court, any court, in the United States can give a pass to torture.
The DC Circuit has been stocked, rather completely, with wingnut Federalist Society types byt the Reagan and both Bush Administrations. It is absolutely horrid, with only a few exceptions.
Fabulous. Now with the Supreme Court stacked as well, I am not at all confident that they will overturn this. Whatever happened to that “strict interpretation of the Constitution” crap the Federalist crowd was always on about. Not so much, I guess.
That was always a bunch of crap; it always meant strict interpretation of what our fellow pukes want…
So. It seems in the end that the reason “the USG does not torture people” turns out to be simply that the entities being tortured are not legally “persons”.
Get this, the Westfall Act only applies if the AG certifies that the action of the official is within the scope of his or her duties. So, that disgraceful Gonzales gave that certification. The Attorney General of the United States says that deciding to torture people is just part of the job.
Shouldn’t that be a void action though; because a clearly illegal and criminal act cannot be within the course and scope? As to the Admin exhaustion bit, don’t waste your time, your curiosity isn’t worth the effort to really lock down the right answer, and there would be a lot of things you would have to cross check. But, I’ll grant that point for argument; still don’t know why they needed to spend 30+ pages of saying the torture regime is AOK. Could have bounced on the no exhaustion of admin remedies in 4 pages including the caption and appearances.
It’s absolutely true that if you were going to rule that plaintiffs had to exhaust administrative remedies, it would take a couple of paragraphs.
The part about the religious freedom restoration act is equally embarrassing as an intellectual matter. Aliens aren’t persons, at least when they’re in Guantanamo. Because, the US doesn’t have sovereignty over that lease.
On second reading, it looks like the duty to exhaust administrative remedies is statutory. Still, there is no reason to treat it as jurisdictional if it is pointless, but I can’t do enough research to see if that is correct law.
Hey, here is a good one,
INSICE, at the direction of wingnut Gooper Julie Myers, has been effectively shooting up illegal Mexicans and other aliens with LSD in order to “facilitate” their deportation. From the Arizona Republic:What in the world have we become?
Barbarians. How is it possible the “culture of life” crowd only cares about unborn life. Apparently, after that first deep breath, you’re on your own and God save you if the goons get you, ’cause you’re not a person and you have no rights.
We are a rogue nation.
And we took out Sadaam Hussein because he was a bad man? As far as I can tell, were are responsible for as many deaths, whether through combat or that would otherwise not have died, since we invaded Iraq as Sadaam is alleged to have killed in the entire time he was in power. Add to that all the torture, renditions, illegal detentions, the violation of rights etc.; you get a view in which we are very arguably worse than he was. When you factor in the scale of our oppressive and negative effects, I’m not sure it is even close.