I suspect the outrage-o'meter is going to go off the charts with

[shraby]

this one. The story is on DailyKos and should be everyplace.
<http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2009/12/26/819301/-Nation-reporter-unmasks-extraordinary-rendition-like-subfields-run-by-ICE>

Nation reporter unmasks extraordinary rendition-like subfields run by ICE

Nation reporter unmasks extraordinary rendition-like subfields run by Immigration and Customs Enforcement.

Lets Breakthrough's diary
A couple months ago, Jacqueline Stevens, a reporter for the Nation, went on a road trip with Mark Lyttle, a U.S. citizen, born in North Carolina, who had been kidnapped by Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), stripped of his rightful identity documents, rendered stateless, and deported to Mexico, to re-locate the government offices that had temporarily held him.

Using google maps, they punched in 140 Centrewest Court, an address that appeared on a number of the documents issued to Lyttle by ICE in Cary, North Carolina. But when they arrived, Stevens was surprised that the government site was an unmarked building, no sign, no flag, with 15 equally unmarked vans next to an Oxford University Press production plant and a few gated communities.

Wondering how many other clandestine locations existed like this across the country, upon returning to Berkeley, Stevens picked up the phone and began a rigorous investigation of "America's Secret ICE Castles," the findings of which will appear in the January 4th edition of the Nation. First off, she read through, a recent report by Dora Shriro,"Immigration Detention Overview and Recommendations," and discovered that there were 186 "subfields" which were used to primarily hold people for up to 12-16 hours for 84% of all book-ins. But because these secret sites are below the legal radar, it's hard to say how long people are actually held and under what conditions.

When Stevens called ICE to request a list of the 186 subfields, she was initially told by Temple Black, an ICE public affairs officer, that these locations were "not releasable" and that the list was "law enforcement sensitive." However, Mr. Black had a family emergency, and put Stevens in touch with another ICE official, who released a partial list, which she then shared with immigrant rights advocates in major human and civil rights organizations, whose reactions ranged from astonishment to total outrage.

<http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2009/12/26/819301/-Nation-reporter-unmasks-extraordinary-rendition-like-subfields-run-by-ICE>

[shraby]

1. Who in the hell would unrecommend this post? It's an

important one and needs discussion.

[ixion]

2. rec'd

to try and offset the GOP-DLC crowd that seems to have taken an interest in DU.

[madrchsod]

7. the money must be good to sit around on a saturday

maybe the weather is as crappy there as it here.

[Jazzgirl]

34. Yes, and there is a shit-pot load of them.

n/t

[devilgrrl]

5. a dipshit troll would

BTW, recommended! :thumbsup:

[chill_wind]

16. It's just getting completely bizarre. Kicking and recommending. n/t

[Warren Stupidity]

17. don't worry, the good posts rise to the top

[whistler162]

24. Can't tell from your poutrage 2nd posting in this thread!

[DWilliamsamh]

25. Who gives a S$#%^?? It's got 70+ rec's as of 8:15 EST. (n/t)

[Individualist]

41. The message discipline team

[Nikki Stone1]

46. Also rec'd

The unrecers just like to press buttons.

[elocs]

81. Nice that you had to use the very 1st response within 2 minutes to point out an UnRec

and give them the attention they wanted.

Right now your OP has 230 Recs so I think it is doing ok. Kicking a thread by responding is what keeps it seen and read. In another day this OP will be off the front page and you cannot Rec/UnRec after 24 hours anyways, but even in a few days from now it can still be kicked to the top of the GD forum by simply responding to it.

Isn't it time for DU to stop obsessing about Rec/UnRec?

How do you keep a thread read and discussed? :kick: :kick: :kick:

[druidity33]

85. any thread

that the OP complains about an unrec within 5 minutes of posting, which is the FIRST reply in the thread gets an instant unrec from me.

Sorry, i just HATE that complaint, especially when you're on the GREATEST page.

I'll read the article and kick this, but you've earned an unrec from me...

[Dinger]

97. Rec # 285 from Me (nt)

[NewEngland4Obama]

109. How do we know who is crossing the borders intro our country

illegally? Some could be terrorist who want to do harm to those in the US. I have no problem with those who come to the US legally...

[asdjrocky]

116. How do we know who these people are?

They don't exist right? So how do we know if they are here legally or not? Do we just trust the government? Trust ICE?

[NewEngland4Obama]

124. If you distrust our government so much why do you stay?

[asdjrocky]

126. How 'bout this asswipe?

I refuse to live in a country like this, and I'm not leaving.

Run along now, back to your hole.

[NewEngland4Obama]

132. Sounds like you crawled out of a hole

[asdjrocky]

135. No dork, sounds like you did.

[niyad]

128. you know, the "america, love it or leave it" crapola is a reichwing meme and has no business

on this site.

have you seen the more appropriate bumper sticker "I love my country, it's my government I fear"

that, surely, is understandable?

[NewEngland4Obama]

134. The Anti-Obama crowd has no business here......

[niyad]

127. so you have no problem with the US government acting like a third world dictator? what will you

approve of next, star chambers?

[NewEngland4Obama]

133. I'm sure if you illegally enter a lot of countries you would be treated worse

[G_j]

3. Democracy Now! interview,

watch/listen/read:
http://www.democracynow.org/2009/12/24/the_nation__immigration_agents_holding

The Nation: Immigration Agents Holding US Residents in Unlisted, Unmarked Facilities

The Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency is holding an untold number of people in secretively maintained detention facilities all over the United States. That’s according to an explosive report that’s the cover story of the latest issue of The Nation magazine. They also report that ICE agents regularly impersonate civilians and rely on other illegal tricks to arrest longtime US residents who have no criminal history. We speak with the author of the two-part investigation, Jacqueline Stevens.


<snip>Welcome to Democracy Now! Explain exactly what you found.

JACQUELINE STEVENS: OK. So, I found that there are 186 ICE sub-field offices that are scattered around the country and that are designed, according to ICE’s own reports by Dr. Dora Schriro, to hold people on a temporary basis, typically for no more than sixteen hours. And the problem with these is that they’re not marked, they’re not—information about their whereabouts is not publicly available, and there’s no accountability for the treatment of people who are held in those facilities.

I am not making any claims about a conspiracy. I’m not making any claims about the intentions behind, you know, not having these offices marked or the information publicly available, so that’s a very surprising claim on their part. I’m simply noting that, according to their own records, there are 186 sub-field offices, and their locations are not publicly available.

JUAN GONZALEZ: And were you able to get a sense of the capacity, in terms of the numbers of people that they’re holding, and for how long they end up actually being held?

JACQUELINE STEVENS: Yeah. Well, their own report says that about 910 people a day are held in these facilities, and that amounts to about 340,000 people a year who are going through these facilities. And that’s their data. So I have no idea why they’re claiming that that’s not true. I mean, that’s their report.

..more..

[timeforpeace]

4. Never thought this would occur during the Obama administration.

[Hekate]

20. Shadow government. Plus, things set in motion by Bush1 and Cheney-Bush2...

... to the applause of the Repubs and the propagandized masses are still rolling along, as I predicted they would.

The problem with all that crap the Repubs put in place is that it applies just as much to Democratic presidents as it does to Republican ones. You want your Repub POTUS to have all this power? Well, his successor will, too, and it might be Hillary.

The problem with clandestine services is that they don't let much of anybody know what they really do. Sure the POTUS gets briefed, but I have a feeling that a lot of stuff is held back.

Back when we were on the cusp of electing Obama, I said that I did not know if it was possible to truly "get our country back" due to the profound damage wrought by the Bush2 administration -- USA PATRIOT Act and everything else. I just could not say if it would even be possible to undo and repair all that. But I knew for a fact that if Obama lost that election, the country would be lost.

It still remains to be seen...

Hekate

[gateley]

117. I agree about a lot of stuff being held back. I bet the Obama

admin will learn more from this expose than they ever did from the official briefs.

And who knows how they are presented -- in a flattering light? People will be watching their backs and thinking of job security and maybe not tell the entire, unvarnished story.

I bet we'll be unearthing Bush Cheney filth for quite some time to come.

[placton]

27. I hear/read those words about 12x a day

Obama - trojan hourse of the right

[Raineyb]

6. Appalling! I'll have to make my way to read that issue of The Nation.

I wish I could have afforded to keep that subscription.

[defendandprotect]

39. Try to give us a recap if you can --

[Individualist]

8. More chains we can believe in

[cliffordu]

43. Saw that phrase on a backwater rw reactionary site.

[phasma ex machina]

54. Deleted.

[glitch]

9. Fighting a metastasized cancer is not going to be easy and will take awhile.

The disease has been diagnosed, we need to start treatment asap.

[EFerrari]

11. As someone who has been following the torture story

from its inception in NYC all the way to these hidden ICE facilities, I agree with that.

[highplainsdem]

10. K&R. Yes, this story should be everywhere.

[snagglepuss]

13. +1

[annabanana]

12. The Nation's investigative outfit is damned good.

I fear the corpomedia will either ignore this story or try to paint it as "that crazy far-left fringe" . .

[HughMoran]

14. "While the President Obama may have released a memorandum in January requiring transparency..."

"While the President Obama may have released a memorandum in January requiring transparency for the heads of all executive departments and agencies, including DHS and ICE, the reality is it's not happening. Instead we have agents, like Tommy Kilbride, an ICE detention and removal officer and star of A&E's reality show Manhunters: Fugitive Task Force, operating out of a hidden office in a hip building in Chelsea Market alongside Rachel Ray and the Food Network, sporting a jacket that says POLICE, while rounding up criminal aliens, thereby glamorizing secret operations as the trappings of pop culture.

If indeed "sunlight is said to be the best of disinfectants," as Justice Louis Brandeis once wrote, I say let the sun shine on these ICE castles, so we can restore fairness in America. A democracy requires accountability, and accountability requires transparency."

Let the sun shine in.

[Renew Deal]

50. I think I might have accidentally found those guys in Chelsea Market.

If you walk all the way to the back (10th Ave. side). Take the elevator up to the 4th floor. All you'll find is a small glassed in reception area. You can't see past it. I think the signs there are for NARC's, but it wouldn't surprise me if it was more than that. One of the Food Network studios is right there. One more thing...I wouldn't say that office "glamourizes" anything. Most people wouldn't be aware of it existing. I found it by accident.

[amborin]

15. K&R glad you posted this and note especially:

"The Obama administration continued to ignore complaints about the LA subfield office known as B-18 until April 1, when Napolitano and Attorney General Eric Holder, as well as ICE officials, were named as defendants in a lawsuit filed by the ACLU and the National Immigration Law Center. "

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=433&topic_id=94448&mesg_id=95287

[gratuitous]

18. Our own American Gulag Archipelago

Isn't that nice? Thanks, Mr. Bush. By the way, Mr. Obama, I realize you have a veritable mare's nest of misgovernance to untangle, but secret prisons? Run by the Immigration and Customs Enforcement people? Uhhhhh . . . you know, I really don't know what to say. I couldn't say it forcefully enough to truly convey my disgust, revulsion, shame, and utter contempt for the men and women who put this program together and who cash a government paycheck to keep it up and running.

[glitch]

36. If he were serious about cleaning up any of this he'd have a more pro-active attorney general.

His staff picks tell their own story.

[fascisthunter]

19. I'm Sure Obama will put an End to This

[timeforpeace]

21. Maybe. First we need to ascertain whether he's behind it.

[amborin]

32. No:

"The Obama administration continued to ignore complaints about the LA subfield office known as B-18 until April 1, when Napolitano and Attorney General Eric Holder, as well as ICE officials, were named as defendants in a lawsuit filed by the ACLU and the National Immigration Law Center. "

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...

[niyad]

129. I wouldn't hold my breath, if I were you. have you been paying attention to things like bagram air

base, secrets, renditions, and the torture decision? if you had been, I doubt seriously you would have made that statement.

[Kaleko]

22. K & R

[scentopine]

23. Just waiting for the centrists to say - "liberals need to get over it". -nt

[Jefferson23]

26. K&R, thanks for posting!

[winyanstaz]

28. K & R,,,@84

I am glad to see this story coming out.
We all need a big dose of the truth about whats going down.

[pundaint]

29. Paranoids and avid news readers must come to the same conclusion

Is there an American Patriot left in government?

[treestar]

30. Hangover from previous administration

Imagine what the environment at ICE must be like. It was invented post 911 because of 911. Them was illegal aliens and terrorists! Amurkans must be kept safe! A matter of national security! :sarcasm:

The federal government is huge. It would take a while for a new culture to set in.

[hulka38]

35. What's becoming clear is that if this wasn't exposed it would likely have been a hangover

for the next administration.

[JDPriestly]

80. The culture of cheating, secrecy and surveillance has been in place

at least since the Nixon era--probably before.

[ChiciB1]

90. But Don't You Feel It's Gotten MUCH WORSE?? I'm A Boomer & HAVE Seen

some scary things that went on back in the 70's, but we DID have "some" voice it seems. Now, I'm at a point in my life where I feel "ignored" at best, but incapable of making ANY TYPE OF CHANGE or DIFFERENCE!!!

This HCR looks to be a travesty for too many people, and I as one who's husband was a Union worker had some good benefits, one which included a reasonable health care plan. He retired early so we could care for his mother and was entered into the "retiree" plan, so I wonder what changes will be coming down the pike.

Right now it's a Humana PPO, but we still have no choice about doctors and I'm finding more and more doctors NOT WANTING to take our insurance because of low re-payment rates!

One of my doctors, who is older and can probably retire, now has decided to NOT TAKE ANY insurance at all, so I have to pay his fee for my medications when I see him, and then file my own insurance claim for re-reimbursement. Just to see him for medications (nothing more) costs $90.00 which isn't that much, but my re-reimbursement was $38.14. Out of network my contract says 80%, but in fact it's NOT REALLY THAT! But this is for monthly medications that I MUST see him for because I take Klonopin which is a controlled substance! He once wrote for a 3 month supply, but no longer can do so because of DEA restrictions! I see him for all of 5 to 7 minutes each month!

And I have better insurance than many I know of! This just seems wacky to me! And now I wonder what OTHER restrictions will come down the pike!!

[ipaint]

94. The main difference I see as opposed to when I was growing up in the 60's early 70's

is back the NO ONE trusted corporations. Everyone knew they were about the accumulation of wealth over people and that they would poison the water, the air and the food you eat even kill you if it meant an extra buck. Unions represented our collective power to push back.

Fast forward after 30 years of non-stop advertising and images hitting us hundreds of times a day about the good corporate citizens with our best interests at heart, benevolent for profit friends who gatekeep our access to food, the cleanliness of our water and air, our health care, our jobs, generously provide us with paychecks and basically have inserted themselves in between us and every human need imaginable to sustain life, and we are slaves. Unions are a thing of the past and the bottom two thirds of the population exists to keep the top third comfortable.

Pretty pathetic when there are folks who call themselves democrats who continue to try to convince folks that corporations are our best buddies and corporatism is fringe leftist hate speech directed against our fellow "corporate citizen".

We are taught to enslave ourselves and each other. The exact opposite of community.

[ChiciB1]

99. I Completely Agree... What Shall We Do About It Except Sit At PC's

any type more words??? Not being sarcastic, just DON'T REALLY KNOW! I'm very, very worried! I've tried to help others less fortunate, but now my own financial situation has diminished and while I "feel" deeply for them, I can't do much anymore!

The phrase "bleeding heart liberal" only means my heart is bleeding now!

[JDPriestly]

110. Demonstrations are a worse waste of time than sitting at our PCs.

I worked so hard to get Obama elected, and now he doesn't care one whit about me or the people who worked with me.

How do we get beyond the media hype and to reality? Seems to me the first step is to vet candidates more carefully. Do a reality check.

I think that we Progressives need to organize our own party and work with it within the Democratic Party. I believe the Progressive Caucus is a start.

[ChiciB1]

119. First, We THOUGHT We Were Electing A DIFFERENT Person... We worked

hard, almost ALL of us whether he was our first choice or not, and what did we get? A man you say doesn't care "one whit" about you or those of us who worked for him. Living where I live I've tried to be optimistic about WHO that person could be! My state may have changed a little because of Obama, but I don't believe it will GO BLUE again! My district, county and city is REPUKE CENTRAL! I don't even know if there was EVER a Democrat elected as a county commissioner, EVER! Katherine Harris was my Representative for two terms, and now it's Vernie Buchanan! Bill Nelson is a Senator here, but the (D) doesn't seem to stand for much!

I thought long and hard about HOW to get him out of office, but HE HAS ALL THE MONEY! He has the name recognition for most DLC/DINO's in this state! Kendrick Meek doesn't seem to be any better either! Anybody running against them won't succeed, I fear. I can only think back to Ned Lamont and recall what happened to him!

In CT they decided to go for someone besides Joe, but who stepped in and helped him out? He GOT ELECTED and what a farce (force) he's been since then! Even OBAMA won't go against him!!

I would LOVE to see a Progressive Caucus, but I don't have a clue as to how I can go about it! I don't know where to start, and even if I did START... I seriously DOUBT I could muster up 100 people!

So, I'm all questions without answers OR solutions! One thing I do feel in my bones is this... things CAN NOT go on this way much longer! I hear rumblings, I feel unease, but I see NO ACTION! I AM AFRAID!

We have NO POWER! Corporations and all the BIG GIANTS are making sure of that, and it seems OBAMA is going right along with them! We say we need to spread Democracy to other countries, yet we are losing ours!

I know people may reply that all I do is rant, get involved... I HAVE been involved since the 70's... it's getting worse, NOT BETTER!! I want to quit, I want to stop complaining, I want to walk away from it all, but I CARE. And I'm addicted!!

[ChiciB1]

121. I Was Thinking (Which Can Be Scary) But The ONLY Two People With

any real name recognition in Congress that might be in a position to actually start a real movement within the Democratic Party are Bernie Sanders & Dennis Kucinich. But then I thought some more and figured that IF they really wanted to "get 'er dun" it would have already had some real roots!

We need some LEADERS to start an inside movement and I don't know of anyone who is willing to put their head on the chopping block! Does anyone else? Yes, there are other Reps. & Sens. but most are already on the take. Plus they think they are doing more good by simply bucking the status quo with various amendments that rarely go anywhere, still they have a seat at "a" table! Some I feel want to fight like Feingold and a few others, but not many. Perhaps there are people "outside" that have resources. That I DON'T know.

I think we MUST quit talking. We must try to figure out a way to find enough people with a big enough name to help "we the people" begin the process.

Of course, I do realize that once again I'm just sort of spitting in the wind and that's what's so frustrating!

Anyone else have any suggestions as to how to get SOMETHING rolling? I know I don't have that many ducks in a row to lead much of anything. I know a little about a lot, but there are thousands and thousands of others who are miles ahead of me.

[ima_sinnic]

31. just to add to the outrage:

Chris Floyd, "Dred Scott Redux: Obama and the Supremes Stand Up for Slavery"
Dec. 18, 2009
http://www.chris-floyd.com/component/content/article/1-latest-news/1887-dred-scott-redux-obama-and-the-supremes-stand-up-for-slavery.html

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.

for once I am speechless. Now I feel guilty and sick about encouraging people to vote for ... that.

[winyanstaz]

33. thanks for linking that....

This breaks my heart.
We are now all officially slaves.
I am sure Dr. King and all the people over the ages that have fought for civil rights, freedom, the Constitution and against slavery are turning over in their graves and weeping.

[ima_sinnic]

37. something is going terribly terribly wrong

I feel much more scared than I ever did under bush

[CoffeeCat]

42. I agree...

...we expect this under Bush. And when Bush was doing it, we at least had a glimmer of hope
that our party would resist and someday gain power and stop all of this.

Now that we're in power and it's still happening...there are no more white horses that will
ride in and save the day.

[ima_sinnic]

48. I'm really scared at the slick way it's being pulled off

the squeaky-clean image of sincerity and dedication to The People--who are for the most part like lambs being led to slaughter. The average person has no idea any of this is happening. My 93-yo father adores Obama--he wouldn't hear any criticism of him a while back--I think it would literally kill him (or weaken his already frail condition) to learn these details. When people find out they've been duped, the response is unpredictable and horrible.
But the slick penetration into the hearts and souls of the people, the very skilled divisive tactics--which we see all too clearly here at DU, the disinformation/distortions--right now, there are only a handful of people in Congress I would trust--and after seeing what is unfolding, I must reexamine even them. This is not going to go well.

[ChiciB1]

120. Hey ima_sinnic, I Keep Seeing Your Posts & I Read Your Words & I Wonder

if it wasn't ME who wrote them. Almost word for word. The desperation, the fear and the disillusionment doesn't seem to know any bounds!

I'm where you are trying to fight my way out of a paper bag and NOT SUCCEEDING!

[austin78704]

102. Well, that's where you're wrong.

_WE_ aren't in power. A bunch of rich guys who don't have to live like the other 99% of us or play by the same rules are in power. The Democrats have fallen for the same corruption that the Republicans fell for. We were all so busy being horrified by what the republicans were doing we kind of didn't notice what was happening on our own side.

[winyanstaz]

122. Looks like you are correct sir...sad to say.

[niyad]

130. welcome to DU--a lot of us saw what was happening, and got shouted down every time we tried to

point it out.

this is why I tell people I am a member of the national women's party. too bad alice paul is dead.

[winyanstaz]

44. I see it as more of the same thing...and yes..it is indeed frightening.

[ChiciB1]

100. Just Made the Very Same Comment Above... Now I MUST Run To

the store to buy some more over-priced food! I don't know where all it goes! I think I have what I need, then turn around and it's something else I ran out of... maybe because there's less in the package!!

I dunno!

[KoKo]

38. Yes...that was an incredible read... +!

[dragonlady]

64. This explanation of the Supreme Court action is extremely misleading

This was discussed on another post that has apparently been removed from this site. In the midst of numerous replies that bemoaned this action, someone explained what the Supreme Court actually did. According to that poster, their only action was to deny certiorari to an appeal from a lower court (which is what happens to 99 percent of all appeals and has no precedential value). The case concerned whether detainees could sue the U.S. government in civil court for interfering with their religious practices. The Chris Floyd article referenced above does not give any title or citation of this case so it could be easily looked up and unfortunately I don't have time right now to hunt for it. It would be interesting to read the background of this case in an original source document and compare it with the florid prose that it making everyone so indignant.

[ima_sinnic]

67. if you can shed that kind of light on it--do it

until then, I have no reason to doubt that Obama has granted himself horrendous powers that make a mockery of the very core of human rights. Is Chris Floyd not "reliable"? (first I've heard of it if so.) Sheesh--denying that a person exists as a legal entity, with no human or legal rights whatsoever--simply on the basis of the president's whims, on the basis of "suspicion"? Martin Luther King Jr. must be spinning in his grave, along with Gandhi, Jesus, and every decent human being who's ever lived on the planet.

[scentopine]

73. Something doesn't smell right -

are you saying Obama's justice dept. did not argue the case in the way reported below? This article is quite clear about the implications so I'm curious why this is so easily dismissed as inconsequential. I'm also curious why the circuit court opinion is not precedent setting - isn't it precedent setting within the area under its jurisdiction which is exactly where a case of this type would be heard?

This is a bit of old news, but it seems significant to me. If this isn't what Obama's lawyers argued, then what did they argue? Or if true, what good will come from this?

-------------- http://original.antiwar.com/fisher/2009/12/15/us-guantanamo-prisoners-not-persons/ -------------

Channeling their predecessors in the George W. Bush administration, Obama Justice Department lawyers argued in this case that there is no constitutional right not to be tortured or otherwise abused in a U.S. prison abroad.

The Obama administration had asked the court not to hear the case. By agreeing, the court let stand an earlier opinion by the D.C. Circuit Court, which found that the Religious Freedom Restoration Act – a statute that applies by its terms to all "persons" – did not apply to detainees at Guantanamo, effectively ruling that the detainees are not persons at all for purposes of U.S. law.

The lower court also dismissed the detainees’ claims under the Alien Tort Statute and the Geneva Conventions, finding defendants immune on the basis that "torture is a foreseeable consequence of the military’s detention of suspected enemy combatants."

Finally, the circuit court found that, even if torture and religious abuse were illegal, defendants were immune under the Constitution because they could not have reasonably known that detainees at Guantanamo had any constitutional rights.

The circuit court ruled that "torture is a foreseeable consequence of the military’s detention of suspected enemy combatants."

That opinion was written by Judge Karen Lecraft Henderson, who was appointed to the federal circuit court by Ronald Reagan in 1986 and to the Appeals Court in 1990 by George H.W. Bush.

[dragonlady]

75. I would just like to see some official documents on this case

The reply to the previous post that was taken down raised a significantly different interpretation of the Supreme Court's action. The articles cited here that have caused so much consternation don't lead to anything official. Is it too much to ask of these writers that they mention the name of the case they are describing? I like to make up my own mind based on the language of a decision. And no, I didn't find any reference to this case in the limited amount of time I had available for research. Any pertinent citations would be helpful.

[scentopine]

76. Here are most of court documents

This is a well known case that has been going on for years (which is why I said it was old news) and created a major shock wave when Obama directed justice department to continue with bush line of arguments in the case.

The 12/14 decision is not posted here but I expect it will be over time since all other docs are here. My understanding is that the decision creates precedent under the jurisdiction of the circuit court in Washington. I am interested in hearing why this isn't true.

http://ccrjustice.org/ourcases/current-cases/rasul-v.-rumsfeld

[bjobotts]

79. Like the scenarios in "The Shock Doctrine". Rights...what rights?

[dragonlady]

115. Thanks for the reference

Just to be clear, I'm not responding to the main thread about ICE, just this subthread about the Rasul case. It's my understanding that the recent Supreme Court action was a simple denial of certiorari, not, as the previous (now deleted) post seemed to claim, a "one-sentence" decision that detainees have no rights. A denial of cert does not expressly affirm a lower ruling, it just refuses to take the case, as happens to the overwhelming percentage of petitions for cert.

After briefly reading the DC Circuit's opinion that the detainees appealed from, what I take away is that this decision is more about procedure than anything else. Counts 1-4 of the detainees' case had been dismissed by the district court for lack of jurisdiction, and the circuit court upheld this decision. The Bivens claims in Counts 5-6 were turned down because during the time they were detained the Supreme Court had not yet ruled in the Boumediene case that alien detainees who had never been within the territorial jurisdiction of the United States were entitled to rights under the Constitution. Therefore, the circuit court reasoned, government officials would not have been on notice that detainees could sue them civilly for denial of constitutional rights. (This does not say that the officials' actions were acceptable, only that the existing law had not been construed by the Supreme Court to make them liable in a civil case. A lawyer's quibble, to be sure, but that is how the whole legal system works.) As to Count 7 on interfering with their religious practices, the court found there was no precedent for the claim that Congress intended the Religious Freedom Restoration Act to apply to nonresident aliens located outside U.S. territory. One of the judges wrote a concurrence with an interesting comment:

In drafting RFRA, Congress was not focused on how to
accommodate the important values of religious toleration in
the military detention setting. If Congress had focused
specifically on this challenge, it would undoubtedly have
struck a different balance: somewhere between making
government officials’ wallets available to every detainee not
afforded the full panoply of free exercise rights and declaring
those in our custody are not “persons.” It would not have
created a RFRA-like damage remedy, but it likely would have
prohibited, subject to appropriate exceptions, unnecessarily
degrading acts of religious humiliation. It would have sought
to deter such acts not by compensating the victims, but by
punishing the perpetrators or through other administrative
measures. ...

Judicial interpretation without text is at best a stop-gap;
at worst, a usurpation. In 2000, when Congress amended RFRA,
jihad was not a prominent part of our vocabulary and prolonged
military detentions of alleged enemy combatants were not part
of our consciousness. They are now. Congress should revisit
RFRA with these circumstances in mind.

http://ccrjustice.org/files/Rasul%20v.%20Rumsfeld%20-%20April%202009%20-%20dc%20circuit%20opinion%20post%20boumediene.pdf

Courts are supposed to work with what is put in front of them, deciding cases based on precedent, the language of the relevant statutes, and what they perceive as the intent of Congress. These three Republican appointees more or less did just that in this case and didn't really make new law as far as I can see. If they had "legislated from the bench" it might have been much worse.

[truedelphi]

111. yes thank you for adding that to the discussion

k & R to the OP and thank you to you.

[ipaint]

40. What a nightmare this has become. nt

[ChiciB1]

45. Has Anyone Started To Think We Are Living In Some Kind Of "Alter" Country?

To think this is America... home of the FREE & the BRAVE! Did I read this article WRONG? I could have gotten the wrong idea, please correct me if I'm wrong!

Am I crazy or are we just as bad as Russia, China, N. Korea and on and on? Is this the country I grew up in?

BAD things are happening and yet we sit and call OUTRAGE, and we sit and we sit! I'm VERY AFRAID, very, very AFRAID! Has it occurred to anyone that we are being followed here on the INTERNET???

Oh My, am I ever going over into "conspiracy land" and it all seems so REAL!

:scared: :cry:

[ChiciB1]

47. I Just Checked About A Post That Was On Here Earlier About Obama &

the Constitution. It has been shut down.

[ima_sinnic]

49. ...

I posted a link to the original article just upthread

It's at http://www.chris-floyd.com/component/content/article/1-latest-news/1887-dred-scott-redux-obama-and-the-supremes-stand-up-for-slavery.html

It is very creepy and disturbing that that thread, which had around 200 recs, was disappeared without explanation.

[Johnny ramone]

51. Yes, very creepy.

:scared:

[winyanstaz]

77. I cannot find my post about that thread either.....??

[ChiciB1]

86. I Logged Off After My Last Post Because I'm So Fed Up... The News

keeps getting worse! did you find out WHY that thread was removed?? What was WRONG with it? I think you were the one who posted it, about the "one sentence" that Obama added basically saying that combatants AREN'T HUMANS! That was the gist of it, but it said a lot more

When I clicked on it I was told I could contact the moderators but didn't do it, but it WAS STRANGE! In fact I was wondering if even my comment about it was going to be deleted. But it's still here, so I don't know what to think!

[juno jones]

55. I am not in the country I grew up in that's for sure.

Last nite the fam and I watched an old copy of the "Star Wars Holiday Special" from 1978 (very dumb and cheesy, but that's beside the point). What I found fasciinating was that whoever originally taped it back then had left the commercials intact. It's a disturbing trip into looking-glass world, let me tell ya.

Funny, you don't see commercials for Unions anymore. It's a different world now for sure. We used to have commercials from American-made products that were proud to bear that label. We used to see more shots of union laborers in car factories than we did cars sitting on top of mountain peaks accompanied by rock music.

Our country was much different pre-Reagan. I listen to Canadian radio at work (as we live on the border) and their commercials bear far more resemblance to those old 70's chestnuts than ours do here in the US. 'Alter' country, indeed. I guess the canadians got the good alternative future. We got the scary one.

[HillbillyBob]

95. This kind of stuff has been going on for a very long time

Not that I agree to any of it, but I have seen some of this stuff going on in Miami/SoFla in the 80s and 90s by several alphabet agencies. They just did it 'out of sight' Im thinkin they did not know I was there and in one case they did know I was there and was told that if I ever said anything........my family would pay for it.
I am glad to see it come to light. It still makes me every bit as ill feeling as it did then and outraged, but being a small person in a tank with very big sharks with long reach.

I know someone who saw something post katrina nolo they went into hiding and I haven't seen or talked to them since the day after the incident and don't know exactly what happened.
I do know what I was told by said person one thing and since I have known them since I was a child and they were lying.
Yes I am being vague since I have already had nsa search my home w/o warrant or notice of any kind.

[niyad]

131. "waving to agent mikey"

[juno jones]

52. Here's a related story

http://rawstory.com/2009/12/report-ice-unlisted-detention-centers-immigrant-prisoners/

K&R.

[NJmaverick]

53. LOL! They got this list of "secret" centers by asking the government for it

this certainly doesn't pass the bull cookie test.

[ima_sinnic]

56. yes, it was all "made up"--lol!

I think we now see how you "deal."

[NJmaverick]

61. Yeah I deal in intellectual honesty, you ought to try it some time

[ipaint]

57. Perhaps you missed the part about the US citizen kidnapped.

"A couple months ago, Jacqueline Stevens, a reporter for the Nation, went on a road trip with Mark Lyttle, a U.S. citizen, born in North Carolina, who had been kidnapped by Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), stripped of his rightful identity documents, rendered stateless, and deported to Mexico, to re-locate the government offices that had temporarily held him."


Some reporter finally did her job and that is supposed to excuse this. "Oh it's not so bad see the reporter has a list of the unmarked detentions centers where they bring kidnapped americans and hold them for deportation with no phones, no counsel, no beds, no toilets."


Are you for real?

[treestar]

58. How was the US citizen deported to Mexico?

He'd need his Mexican passport.

I wouldn't jump on this until it was confirmed better.

A U.S. citizen cannot be "rendered stateless" by ICE.

Maybe this reporter believes all she is told without checking things out.

[Name removed]

69. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[NJmaverick]

59. ICE arrests not kidnaps, you are certainly skilled at picking words that deceive

in order to push an agenda

[ima_sinnic]

70. keep your head in the sand, keep singing lalala so you can't hear what you don't want to

your posts used to be a little amusing in their naivete. Now they're just simple-minded and a complete waste of time.

[sabrina 1]

84. You don't know much about ICE do you?

ICE kidnaps, is guilty of, and I'm being kind here, criminally negligent homicide, the incarceration of babies and little children, torture and general inhumane treatment of human beings. .

I hope one day this country will reach the point that some in Latin America have reached and will begin the process of dealing with the brutal, war criminals and torturers who once thought they were invulnerable. And hard as it once was to believe, we appear to have far too many of the same kind of scum right here in this country.

Make light of what has happened to this country, for what purpose I cannot imagine being that you are posting on a Democratic blog. But every rotten government and their henchmen throughout history had their defenders and cheer-leaders, they couldn't exist without them. And every one of them eventually fell.

The very presence of ICE in this country is an abomination that every American should be ashamed of, and feel duty bound to put an end to and prosecute those who have caused so much human misery right here in the US.

[ChiciB1]

87. You Know I've Followed A LOT Of Your Posts & I've Come To The

conclusion, that no matter WHAT Obama does, you are going to SUPPORT IT, NO MATTER WHAT! I can't figure out this "blind faith" when it's pretty obvious that there are really some very disturbing things going on.

Trying to turn them around and twist the words back into something palatable doesn't make it TRUTH from you. You have done this over and over and over. You DO have a right to your opinion, no doubt... but many of us have begun to realize in a BIG WAY, that so many things have turned "Topsy-turvy" and we ARE worried!

Looking the other way doesn't seem reasonable, but I guess you will hold on, but I think I once told you that you may end up losing a GREAT DEAL of credibility.

JMHO!

[Joe Chi Minh]

89. Love the word, 'maverick' though, in his u/n. Very impressive, isn't it?

No mistaking him for a troll, that's for sure.

[ChiciB1]

91. Don't Think He's A Troll... But Just Can't UNDERSTAND What He's Seeing

that so many of us feel are so controversial! I don't believe in BLIND FAITH, in politics, my marriage or my daily life! For me, it's nothing more than waiting for a "train wreck" and you have BLINDERS on and can't see it coming!

[Moochy]

101. You give the benefit of the doubt

to someone who clearly does not deserve it. It's here to bolster talking points only.

[ChiciB1]

92. BTW, You Mention Richard Dawkins... Do You Believe Him & What He

writes about? As a once devout Catholic, I bought several of his books and he made a LOT of sense to me!

I also found Julia Sweeney another Catholic and her documentary about "Leaving God Behind" very much in tune with all that I was indoctrinated into. I concur with her conclusions, but since I see where you are from, it made me wonder.

[Joe Chi Minh]

107. No, I think Dawkins is an idiot. This blog is interesting:

http://str.typepad.com/weblog/2009/10/dawkins-materialism.html

One caveat though. The author concludes his piece with the comment on an interview of Hugh Hewitt with Dawkins:

'Hugh makes one serious error at the end of the interview and unwittingly concedes Dawkins' own view of "faith" as contrary to reason and fact. He describes faith as belief against or without evidence. He concedes the lack of conclusive evidence for God's existence and creation as an opportunity for faith.

HH: ...I'm saying that the world has been made as it is to allow for faith, because if it was made too easy for the simple-minded, it would simply be routine, and everyone would believe, and then there would be no faith.

In other words, faith only exists when evidence, facts, and justification cannot guide us. This is not the biblical definition of faith. Faith isn't faith because it's rare and unusual. Biblical faith would still be just that if every single person had faith in God and His revelation. People don't believe because of lack of evidence, as Romans 1 explains, but because of their sin and rebellion.'

But, he is wrong. Hewitt was essentially correct with regard to trhe credence aspect of Christian faith. Most of Jesus' most astonishing miracles he only allowed his apostles to witness. After all, a being who could control the wind and the waves and have the vessel he and his friends were travelling in, immediately fetch up on the opposite shore, could have proved such divine powers to everyone in the world, but it would have defeated his purpose.

Our basic assumptions, effectively impossible to prove, are chosen by our heart (and that only under the influence of supernatural grace), not by our brain, the seat of our worldly intelligence. We know what we want to know. I believe in philosophy it is called 'voluntarism'. It is clear from Christ's Gospels that that is the basis upon which shall be judged: the disposition of our heart, not the eminent capacity of our intellect. People are never condemned for being foolish in ths world's eyes; for having a low IQ. He warns against calling anyone a fool, because we are wont to judge human intelligence by our purblind human standards. Yet He, himself occasionally called people fools, albeit in his parables. But the folly was always of a spiritual nature. To our pathetic minds, it seems a bit much, but He even derided the folly of a businessman who built another barn, in order to be able to accommodate a bumper harvest he had had.

On the contrary, it is precisely the 'ordinary' Joe and Jane in this world's eyes, not the world's leaders, who have the firmest grip on the deepest truths, which are opaque to the worldly intelligence. God chose them, we are told to be rich in faith. 'Where your treasure is, there your heart is,' Christ tells us. People are generally rich in this world's goods because they set their hearts on doing so. A poor man will do the lottery, rather than save every penny and invest it as safely as he can. And if he should be unfortunate enough (at least in the UK) to win it, his lives will not uncommonly go to pieces, because money is not his kind of commodity. He may give most of it away to family and friends and waste the balance. It often happens.

But there is another more important aspect of faith than credence. 'The devils also believe and tremble', as the Apostle James pointed out in his epistle. It is a commitment to charity, to selfless love. In Christ's description in Matthew's Gospel, even formal belief in Him is not a pre-requisite, nor is it any kind of guarantee. Only that selfless love for others, particularly, the less fortunate, those in some kind of trouble, is the indispensable ingredient for a happy eternity.

[ChiciB1]

108. Very Interesting Reply... What I Have Never Been Able To Understand About

"faith" AND God is this... why do so many have so much (as in America for instance) and those in third world countries suffer simply because they are born to it??

This has been a bone of contention to me for longer than I wish to remember. Therefore, I chose to leave organized religion and simply follow my heart. Many kind, good people do so much more than many hypocrites who plop themselves in church pews.

I love my very, very devout sister who remains a FERVENT Catholic, and I mean an every single day to the church we go catholic, but I disagree with her. Another sister who is a fundamentalist, who I love dearly also, seems to be out on some quest that I simply cannot fathom, and yet chastises me for my un-Godly ways.

It took me a long time to divest myself of the Catholic teachings, there were times I thought I would be struck down when I talked against my belief. But, here I am still standing. Dawkins is a "hard" read I will admit, but he does speak some sense to me. I don't agree with "how" he denounces, but I seem to be able to make more sense about what he says as opposed to the alternative.

I was just curious about you, but I don't pass judgment on those who sincerely believe. I have 5 sisters, I'm the "black sheep" of the family!

JMHO!

[Joe Chi Minh]

123. I've been where you are. Actually, much, much more hostile to the Catholic Church.

God has ways of bringing us round, though. In the end, you realise that it's pretty much like Peter's answer to Christ, when he asked him, "'Will you also go away?' To which "Simon Peter replied, 'Lord to whom else can we go? Thou hast the words of eternal life. And we believe and are sure that thou art the Christ, the son of the living God'" Most people who lapse are not angry with Christ, but with the Church.

I would go as far as to say that the Church is pretty much a microcosm of the world. Good and bad; very good and very bad. And among the worst can be the occasional old girl who take Holy Communion every day. You just have to accept that, and that God has a reason for allowing it to be like that; and for allowing so much of the very blackest villainy in the history of the world to placed at its door. After all, when more is given to us by God, more will be expected from us. And, as Jesus once said, 'quoting himself'(!) in his capacity as God, in in the parable of the talents, 'You knew that I was hard man, who reaped where he didn't sow; who gathered where he didn't scatter.' And don't I know it!

It seems to me that the talents can only refer to the currency of Heaven, charity. But the man with the single talent burying it in the ground (itself, perhaps, a metaphor for worldly self-indulgence) always makes me laugh. There's always some pusillanimous character who behaves in a daft way, i.e. in character!

As a footnote, I would say that, as regards the Church's traditional teachings (not necessarily its actions), the longer I live, the more impressed I am by its profundity and truth. There are still what I believe are quite major imbalances, but I'm not inclined to share them with cocky atheists vaunting their ignorance at what they fondly believe will be Christianity's expense. I don't mean you, of course. Your integrity seems to be very high. I dare say higher than plenty of half-hearted believers.

Good luck. I doubt if you'll escape Francis Thompson's Hound of Heaven, though!

[donco6]

125. You're right about that.

I can't think of anything Obama could do that "maverick" wouldn't support.

[treestar]

60. Anything they can grab onto in order to declare Obama=Bush

They don't even check it out, they are so happy to find it.

[NJmaverick]

62. ding! ding! ding!

You win the prize

[ipaint]

65. Keep making excuses for the inexcusable.

In late October 2008, Mark Lyttle, then 31, was held in the Cary office for several hours. Lyttle was born in North Carolina, and the FBI file ICE had obtained on him indicated he was a US citizen. Lyttle used his time in the holding tank attempting to persuade the agents who had plucked him out of the medical misdemeanor section of a nearby prison, where he had been held for seventy-three days, not to follow through on the Cary office's earlier decision to ship him to Mexico. Lyttle is cognitively disabled, has bipolar disorder, speaks no Spanish and has no Mexican relatives. In response to his entreaties, a Cary agent "told me to tell it to the judge," Lyttle said. But Lyttle's charging document from the Cary office includes a box checked next to the boilerplate prohibition: "You may not request a review of this determination by an immigration judge."

Lyttle made enough of a fuss at the Stewart Detention Center in Lumpkin, Georgia, that the agents there arranged for him to appear before a judge. But the checked box in the Cary paperwork meant he never heard from the nonprofit Legal Orientation Program attorneys who might have picked up on his situation. William Cassidy, a former ICE prosecutor working for the Executive Office of Immigration Review, ignored Lyttle's pleas and in his capacity as immigration judge signed Lyttle's removal order. According to Lyttle, Cassidy said he had to go by the sworn statements of the ICE officers.

Meanwhile, Lyttle's mother, Jeanne, and his brothers, including two in the Army, were frantically searching for him, even checking the obituaries. They were trying to find Lyttle in the North Carolina prison system, but the trail went cold after he was transferred to ICE custody. Jeanne said, "David showed me the Manila envelope --'Refused'--and we thought Mark had refused it." Jeanne was crying. "We kept trying to find out where he was." It never crossed their minds that Mark might be spending Christmas in a shelter for los deportados on the Mexican side of the Rio Grande.

http://www.thenation.com/doc/20100104/stevens/2

[treestar]

66. He went before an immigration judge and didn't make his claim as a citizen?

this sounds like a very, very weak person + a messup in the government. maybe a clusterfuck, but no signs of conspiracy of secret prisons.

Still weird that Mexican authorities would take a non-Mexican from ICE.

[LittleBlue]

63. Bush Co. is still in business operating under the name Obama

Sorry, but it's the truth.

[ipaint]

68. Hearings by video. lawyers have to choose to be with their clients of in front of the judge.

JENNIFER LUDDEN: At the federal immigration court in Arlington, Virginia, the waiting room is packed. A standing room crowd spills into the hall that leads to five small courtrooms. Fatima-Matin(ph) is with the Justice Department agency that oversees this system.

Ms. FATIMA MATIN (Justice Department): The immigration judge is here, and the attorneys for the aliens are also here. But the aliens are actually somewhere else.

LUDDEN: That's right. No one whose immigration case is being heard today is in this building. Instead, about 150 detainees will be beamed into these courtrooms via video from local jails or federal detention centers around Virginia, in Cincinnati, Cleveland and El Paso.

Ms. MATIN: Well, it's a good use of resources. We're able to hear many more cases. We don't have to have immigration judges in all of those locations all across the country.

LUDDEN: No recording is allowed in the courtrooms. In the one I visit, a TV is set up on the side, with the screen split four ways. In an upper corner of the screen, one detainee appears. He's sitting against a white wall in prison-issued clothing. For activist Paromita Shah, of the National Immigration Project, the effect is something of a wide-angle mug shot.

Ms. PAROMITA SHAH (National Immigration Project Activist): You don't know who you have in detention. There are legal immigrants who are in detention. There might be citizens in detention. But the fact is that when you see someone in a jumpsuit in front of you, it definitely creates the perception that everybody is a criminal.

LUDDEN: Video hearings also pose what Shah calls an impossible choice for the detainee's lawyer: Whether to be in the courtroom, where you can confer with the judge and see any prosecution evidence, or forgo that to be with your client. Either way, attorney Susan Smollens says her immigrant clients, hooked up by video, are at a disadvantage.

Ms. SUSAN SMOLLENS (Immigration Attorney): They're in total isolation. They become less real. And all the body language that goes on - the nuances, the social part of the courtroom - is eliminated. And that's an important part of the case.

LUDDEN: Add to this another possible layer of technology. If a detainee needs Spanish translation, there's an interpreter in the courtroom. But if he or she needs another language, an off-site interpreter is called up on a speakerphone on the judge's desk to relay the testimony from the video screen across the room.

Ms. BRITTNEY NYSTROM (National Immigration Forum): I think the immigration court has erred too much in favor of efficiency at a cost of due process.

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=100534850

[Goldstein1984]

71. Rec #160

Good story. Important.

It was also covered on Democracy Now!

We are not the nation we pretend to be.

[Tim01]

72. I'm having a hard time keeping up with the bad stuff now. Fast and furious. nt

[Echo In Light]

83. Even some who used to smugly dismiss unfavorable data as 'conspiracy' just shrug...

... unable to keep up w/trying to defend, downplay and safely explain-away the deluge of such info.

[peacetalksforall]

74. I was positive 'Deportation' meant being sent back to the country the person came from

or from the most legal country or prior-residence?

A natural born citizen is deported to Mexico?

Where is the law in that?

Are we under dual Constitutions? Or is there only one - the baron constitution.

(I don't even know where to put a capital C or a lower case c.)

Obama gets a lot of camera time compared to Pres. Bill Clinton - and he says nothing about all these rights things. Who is going to ask him? Who is going to demand an answer? Are they getting ready to announce something? Where is this heading? What it the timetable?

We are (or are we) living a Hollywood movie?

Does it make sense that making us a third world economy also involves stripping rights? China/USSR <> U.S. Two going up, one going down?

I felt cheated whn Obama said they were shutting down Guantanamo while saying NOTHING of the other prisons and HE DIDN'T say we stopped torturing.

[Solly Mack]

78. K&R

[jgraz]

82. Why is no one asking the MOST IMPORTANT QUESTION?

What does Jane Hamsher think about this?

[Douglas Carpenter]

88. kick and recommend

[MrMickeysMom]

93. I'd like to see an expanded list of those ICE facilities...

I'll have to ask my son to see if it's in the article, as he subscribes.

In defense of the Obama administration, there's a whole lot of corruption in which to play "catch up". I hope it's on that fucking long list.

[Dinger]

96. K & R

What will it take?

[Torn_Scorned_Ignored]

98. Maybe

someday people here will believe
what I say has, and is still happening
to me, and put aside the "mentally ill"
and locked threads.


It's immediately shocking to me that my/our govt.
does these things to American Citizens.

...and it should be.

[hellsbeagle]

103. K&R

[mapatriot]

104. I saw one!

One of these is only a few miles from my home, so I drove by. 64 Gricebrook Road in St. Albans, Vermont. Non-descript building just off I-89, and about 20 miles just south of the Canadian border. That border crossing is a hot-spot for "bad guy" activity (guns, drugs and illegals) and I can understand why ICE would need a processing and detention facility at that location. It seems to me that as long as there is some disclosure of locations of these things (which there is.....hell, it's easily found on DU!) and detainees are held for under 48 hours, we would be in compliance with international and US law. Think about it....we catch some person coming over the Canadian border with fake ID, hidden weapons and who is not forthcoming about why he has these things and why he's trying to get into the US. They have to have some place to process and interrogate the alleged bad guy. The border station is not equiped to house, feed and detain suspects. So they have only a few choices: let him in and hope for the best, turn him back and hope he doesn't keep at it using other border crossings or detain him/her until they can untangle the accurate info. This seems to me just a facility that is part of the ICE office at the border. It doesn't make much sense to post signs.

The key is this: Do they inform the US Attorney in Burlington (25 miles south of St. Albans)of the detention? Is that office made aware of the circumstances and do they insure that the detainee is being treated according to all the tenants of US and International law. If that is the case, this kind of facility doesn't bother me a bit.

[djp2]

105. then put him in a regular jail,

don't hide them in buildings that aren't designated as such...I'm beginning to believe the stuff about secret MASS detention centers being built!

[mapatriot]

106. Think about the logistics

There is an overcrowded, longer term correctional facility, run by the State of Vermont in St. Albans. There is a short term correctional facility in South Burlington (again, about 45+/- miles south of the border). It's run by a the state and a local, county sheriff's dept. I can't imagine housing a federal detainee in either of these prisons, in the general population with shoplifters, etc. while trying to figure out who he is, where he's from, what risk he poses and what the whole business is about. IF these detainees are properly vetted and insured internationally agreed upon rights by the US Attorney's office (populated by lawyers, mostly appointed through Sen. Leahy's office.....the US Attorney himself is a former Leahy staffer)and if the detainees appear before US Magistrate John Conroy in Burlington for adjudication, I cannot see what purpose a sign on the processing building serves.

[ipaint]

112. Too bad. Law enforcement needs to be accountable to those that pay their salaries.

These places need to be identified, opened up to inspection, have procedures and policies in place and enforced, be totally transparent to those who need to get in touch with loved ones being held, to the lawyers and advocates representing the accused, they need telephones and bathrooms.

They need to be identified by sign and on the map. Innocent people are caught up in this "undercover" bullshit. Why are they unmarked. Are jails unmarked, police stations, court houses?

[CANDO]

113. These are secret detention centers in the US?

Used to strip people of their identity and then deport them, even if they are US citizens? Am I getting it right, or is there something I'm not understanding?

[lonestarnot]

114. How many times did I tell folks here that this was happening right under our noses?

Everyone blew me off as crazed. :D

[Festivito]

118. SUNLIGHT needed, as per article. /nt