KingVoyeur
10-09-2007, 07:32 AM
New story today, though it might make for some interesting discussion.
Full story (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21205942/)
The Supreme Court on Tuesday terminated a lawsuit from a man who claims he was abducted and tortured by the CIA, effectively endorsing Bush administration arguments that state secrets would be revealed if the case were allowed to proceed.
I don't know much about the "state secret" ruling they talk about, but it does sound like the government has really been pushing it lately. I mean, using that excuse to hold back info from the courts 39 times since 2001 as opposed to only 6 times in 22 years during the Cold War does seem a bit excessive.
Normally I wouldn't pay much attention to claims like this, but it seems like this guy has a lot of backup from investigations and reports from both within and outside of the US.
I really hate all this secrecy shit. :mad:
Full story (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21205942/)
The Supreme Court on Tuesday terminated a lawsuit from a man who claims he was abducted and tortured by the CIA, effectively endorsing Bush administration arguments that state secrets would be revealed if the case were allowed to proceed.
I don't know much about the "state secret" ruling they talk about, but it does sound like the government has really been pushing it lately. I mean, using that excuse to hold back info from the courts 39 times since 2001 as opposed to only 6 times in 22 years during the Cold War does seem a bit excessive.
Normally I wouldn't pay much attention to claims like this, but it seems like this guy has a lot of backup from investigations and reports from both within and outside of the US.
I really hate all this secrecy shit. :mad: