Wouldn't It be Nice, if Nobody Ever Questioned Election Results?

Remember the American election with the hanging chads and other weirdly improbable stories coming out of Florida? When one comic opined that the state of Florida was going for the 'stupidest state in the union' title?

Or the Minnesota election when lawsuits over the results nearly delayed the decision over who won - until the next election?

Well, it could be worse:

"Sri Lanka election loser Sarath Fonseka arrested"
BBC (February 8, 2010)

"The defeated candidate in Sri Lanka's presidential election, Gen Sarath Fonseka, has been arrested at his office in Colombo.

"Gen Fonseka was defeated by incumbent Mahinda Rajapaksa last month by six million votes to four million.

"Gen Fonseka rejected the results and vowed to challenge them in court.

"The initial allegations brought by the government against Gen Fonseka, 59, were put simply as "committing military offences"...."

I'll concede that arresting candidates who threatened to contest the official results is one way to eliminate those pesky legal challenges. On the other hand, I'm not entirely convinced that what seems to be the Sri Lanka model is much better than systems which award the presidency to whoever has the most soldiers in the presidential palace at the moment.

But He's a General! - And Everybody Knows What They're Like!

America is a republic with strong democratic traditions: and I think that form of government works moderately well for us. But I'm not convinced - at all - that this is the only sort of government that can adequately coordinate a nation-state. Or even the sort of entity that America is. I'm not at all convinced that the United States of America is a nation state in the traditional sense of the term. (which is another topic)

I've discussed whether there's a 'best' sort of government before. (Most recently in "Commie Plots, Cholesterol, Frank Burns, Hugo Chavez, and 2012" (November 15, 2009))

I hope that Sarath Fonseka is high-profile enough so that he won't simply disappear: and that he doesn't "commit suicide" while in custody. Perhaps I'm misjudging the bunch that won the election - officially.

Or, perhaps not.

The point is, not all nations are alike. And I think it's reasonable to think that America, where we fuss on talk shows and hire lawyers if we don't like the results of an election, isn't exactly the same as the nations where losers get arrested if they don't gracefully accept the inevitable.

Related posts:

• "Commie Plots, Cholesterol, Frank Burns, Hugo Chavez, and 2012"
  (November 15, 2009)
• "Afghan Election: A Few Observations"
  (August 20, 2009)
• "Afghan Press Says Gag is Unconstitutional: They Could be Right"
  (August 19, 2009)
• "Iran's Election: The West Has been Meddling - Sort of"
  (June 22, 2009)
• "Journalism in the Information Age, Or Nothing Says 'No' Like a Brightly Burning Motorcycle"
  (June 24, 2009)
• "Guinea, Military Rule, and Terrorism: Beware Hasty Judgment"
  (December 29, 2008)
• "Sarah Palin's a Nazi: I Saw it on Television"
  (October 20, 2008)
• "Obama Lawyer: FBI, Republicans, Conspire Against ACORN, Obama and Legitimate Votes"
  (October 17, 2008)
• "Barack Osama?! A Whopper of a Typo, or Some Kind of Plot?"
  (October 10, 2008)

In the news:

• "Sri Lanka election loser Sarath Fonseka arrested"
  BBC (February 8, 2010)

Someone Should Tell Congress There's a War on: President Obama, Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab

I'm not on the same page with President Obama on many issues. Including the matter of putting terror suspects in the civilian court system: like the young man who almost certainly tried to bring down an airliner on Christmas weekend last year.

But, like 'zero tolerance,' it looks like one size does not fit all in this case.

Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab has been read his rights, and he's cooperating. Big time.

That's the good news.

The bad news? Congress can't keep its collective mouth shut.

Hello? Congress? There's a War On

I suppose the American congress can't be blamed for being a bit confused. The current administration has been sending some - interesting - signals about whether or not the war on terror is still on. (March 30, 2009)

Still, you'd think that members of Congress would have their aides read a newspaper to them once in a while. It's fairly obvious that the Taliban, Al Qaeda and like-minded outfits haven't changed their minds about taking down the West. And any Muslims that aren't sufficiently 'Islamic' by the terrorists' standards.

Somebody Talked

One thing about gathering intelligence during a war: It's important to not let the enemy know what - and how much - you know.

Again, someone really should tell Congress.

The current administration had been keeping how much they were learning from the would-be Christmas terrorist under wraps. Then, Congress did it's usual work: asked questions, got answers, and leaked the results.

I understand that there needs to be something like Congress, to keep an eye on other parts of the federal government. It's that checks and balances thing. (November 20, 2008)

I just wish that we had a bunch that's more reliable than what we have.

I also hope that what was learned from Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab could be used fast, because now that Congress tipped off the world that he's been talking: terrorists will be moving people and equipment, and making any other changes they need to, to protect themselves.

Like I said, there's a war on.

Here's an excerpt from what got me started on this little rant:

"Airline Terror Suspect Provides Key Intelligence"
The Associated Press, via FOXNews (February 02, 2010)

"The Nigerian man accused of trying to use a bomb hidden in his underwear to bring down a Detroit-bound airliner on Christmas has been cooperating with investigators since last week and has provided fresh intelligence in multiple terrorism investigations, officials said Tuesday.

"Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab's cooperation could prove to be a national security victory and a political vindication for President Obama, who has been under fire from lawmakers who contend the administration botched the case by giving Abdulmutallab the right to remain silent, rather than interrogating him as a military prisoner...."

"...In the days following the failed bombing, a pair of FBI agents flew to Nigeria and persuaded Abdulmutallab's family to help them. When the agents returned to the U.S., Abdulmutallab's family came, too, according to a senior administration official briefed on the case. The official spoke on condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the case...."

"...Authorities had hoped to keep Abdulmutallab's cooperation secret while they continued to investigate his leads, but details began to trickle out during testimony on Capitol Hill, where FBI Director Robert Mueller and Director of National Intelligence Dennis Blair confirmed authorities continued to get intelligence in Abdulmutallab's case...."

"...Also unsettled is which system is better for gathering intelligence. The Bush administration, which authorized secret CIA prisons for interrogations, also repeatedly used the U.S. court system to prosecute terrorists. Some detainees at the U.S. detention facility at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, have provided valuable intelligence, while others have refused to cooperate.

"Some suspects in the criminal system refuse to talk once they have a lawyer. Others, like Abdulmutallab, can be persuaded to keep talking...."

In this case, it looks like the current administration made the right call in putting the Christmas suspect into the civilian court system.

Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't. And sometimes Congress gets in the way.

Related posts:

• " 'The System Worked' - Napolitano and an Unscripted Interview"
  (December 28, 2009)
• "Northwest Flight 253: Near Miss on Christmas Weekend"
  (December 27, 2009)
• "Fort Hood, Obama, Congress, and Getting a Job Done"
  (November 16, 2009)
• "Somalia, America, Assumptions, Terrorists and the Press"
  (October 7, 2009)
  Particularly
  • From "Irish Need Not Apply" to "What is Radicalizing Young Somali Men?"
• "No More "War on Terror" - Officially?"
  (March 30, 2009)
• "Iran's Nuclear Program, Israel, Iraq, America, Bush and Obama: Simple? Not!"
  (January 11, 2009)
• "Emotions, the Frontal Cortex, The War on Terror, Anarchists, and the Illuminati"
  (December 23, 2008)
• "Pay Raise for Congress: Have They Read the Papers This Year?"
  (December 21, 2008)
• "Someone in the CIA Lied: That's Why There's an Inspector General"
  (November 20, 2008)
• "Russia, Georgia, Two Oil Pipelines, and the European Union"
  (August 13, 2008)
  Particularly
  • It's Not That Simple: It Never Is
• "How Dare General Petraeus Bring Facts to Congress?"
  (September 11, 2007)
• "Congress Must Decide Who to Protect Americans From"
  (August 5, 2007)

In the news:

• "Airline Terror Suspect Provides Key Intelligence"
  The Associated Press, via FOXNews (February 02, 2010)