Skip to main content

View Diary: POLICE STATE: Ailing 83-Year-Old Activist Priest Held in Solitary Confinement in Federal Prison (127 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Folks aren't saying to free him (32+ / 0-)

    Just to not place him into solitary confinement.

    I strongly, strongly agree that he's done nothing to warrant being placed into solitary confinement at all, and that it's cruel and unusual to do so. It doesn't help anything at all. He's already paying reparations for what he did. Solitary confinement is, to some, a kind of torture. It's well beneath our country to place anyone into solitary confinement without exceedingly rare circumstances (like they are otherwise in worse danger).

    •  Oh, absolutely. (15+ / 0-)

      Solitary is something we should do away with as a society as far as I'm concerned.

      But the reason I posted this is simply that this post sacrifices accurate context in favor of sensationalism, and that kind of approach irritates me. Plus, a part of what I do is work to get bloggers taken seriously in the public debate, and this doesn't really help all that much.

      "Newt Gingrich, who appears to be running mainly on rancor, the candidate of the I Want to Eat Mitt’s Liver Party."

      by MBNYC on Sat Jan 28, 2012 at 10:55:14 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Thank you for the work you do (6+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        MBNYC, roadbear, volleyboy1, Ahianne, kyril, Matt Z


      •  I disagree in the strongest terms (16+ / 0-)

        It is indeed a sensation -- and should be a profound national humiliation -- when an elderly, nonviolent priest in solitary confinement is not given adequate clothing and/or bed linens to stay warm. I perceive no shades of gray in this matter. There is no excuse.

        And with respect to your statement:

        That is really serious fucking business. Nobody can just stroll into a U.S. nuke site, and nobody should, frankly. Our government spends billions of dollars every year to secure these weapons. And why? Because compromising even one of them is a national security nightmare.

        O rly?

        Time to name the 800-lb gorilla in this room. What's SERIOUS is that, yes, somebody CAN "just stroll into a U.S. nuke site". In fact, a handful of retirement-aged folks were able to use garden-variety bolt cutters to access a nuclear weapons storage facility, and sprinkle it with banners, blood, prayers, and sunflower seeds. If "our government spends billions of dollars every year to secure these weapons," perhaps we should give these people medals for demonstrating that our billion$$$ have been utterly wasted, that our national security fly is wide open and our national security privates are flapping in the wind. Perhaps this should inspire a major Congressional inquiry, not to mention investigations by the Department of Justice, the Department of Defense, the Department of Energy, and the appropriate inspectors general.

        Sometimes the quest for public respectability leads one astray. Sometimes it can blind one to the REAL issues at stake. Sometimes it might even lead one to tolerate the blatant, unnecessary, abuse-of-discretion-because-we-can mistreatment of an old man.

        If you wish to be taken seriously, sure seems to me that three-clergy-+-bolt-cutters=nukes is a compelling issue to bring to "the public debate."

        •  I don't really disagree. (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          kyril, Matt Z, CanyonWren

          Like I said, we're talking about multi-billion-dollar budgets here, year after year, at home and abroad. And some retirees can just walk in with these kinds of tools?

          This whole thing reeks of a 9/11-hijacking-like security problem. Heads should roll.

          "Newt Gingrich, who appears to be running mainly on rancor, the candidate of the I Want to Eat Mitt’s Liver Party."

          by MBNYC on Sat Jan 28, 2012 at 04:50:52 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  Wait: are you concerned that billion$$$$ (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:

            spent for nuclear weapons security have gone for nothing? I thought you were concerned that the diarist was sensationalizing the mistreatment of an 83-year-old peace activist who broke the law and, in doing so, showed that the billion$$$$ for nuclear weapons security have gone for nothing.

      •  he didn't harm a fly (0+ / 0-)

        and obviously never would have.

        If a sock 83-year-old man armed only with bolt cutters was able to walk four miles undetected through a top-security military base and end up sitting next to the nukes, all without being stopped or detected, I'm thinking this isn't a comment on why he should be in prison - he's harmless - but on why they have pretty pathetic security around the nuke sites. Putting him in prison to punish him retroactively isn't going to act as a deterrent for actual terrorists or people who do want to do harm. Actually I think there's no justification for it they're just mad the guy effectively showed up how they're not doing their jobs.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site