Right to Know

The right to know is inimical to U.S. interests through intention.  The intention, as perfectly illustrated by the treatment of many of the ‘terrorist’ arrests, is to deny knowledge.  This is an interrogation weapon.  The victim interrogated is given full knowledge about his families lack of knowledge.  The suffering of the family is to be aleviated by the victim’s testimony.  This is merely an extension of the U.S. Justice Departments ‘spousal attack’ program, whereby the spouse of a victim is attacked to secure the testimony or ‘confession’ of the victim (as in the Aldrich Ames case).
The most amazing part about the U.S. delegation’s stand at the conference was their open willingness to state their opposition to the knowledge (with respect to missing people).  This was not an act of stupidity or ignorance.  It was an act of understanding.  Understanding about this administration’s near complete control of mainstream media.

Posted by James Strauss on Jun 3, 2003 at 7:11 PM

“the U.S. Justice Departments ‘spousal attack’ program,...(as in the Aldrich Ames case)”

What are you attempting to say?  That either or neither of the Ames were guilty of the crimes to which they both confessed?

They both confessed and both were sentenced to jail - there was no quid pro quo.

If you believe this to be untrue, set forth support for your argument.

I take it you have never heard of the “innocent spouse” doctrine?  This is a long-standing and fully accepted concept in U.S. jurisprudence and an affirmative defense to joint liability.

Posted by Nus on Jun 13, 2003 at 8:18 AM