Today's fine satire

In response to this MSNBC story, Farkers have torn into the government's timeline and all but proven that torture in secret prisons, at least in this case, produces nothing of value and hurts American standing. I'm going to post the best stuff here, by a guy named jarrett, because it sets the stage for the finest satire I've read in a while:

submitter: Gitmo detainee confession helps nab terrorist. Suck it, libs

According to the article, the so-called informant, Abu Zubaydah, was not even at Gitmo during the Jose Padilla investigation.

So the timeline breaks down like this:

May 8, 2002
Jose Padilla, an American citizen, is arrested on American soil under allegations of planning a "dirty bomb" attack.

June 9, 2002
Bush administration declares Padilla to be an "enemy combatant" citing dirty bomb plan and transfers him to a military prison. Padilla has no contact with the outside world or legal counsel. Padilla later claims he was tortured while being detained in South Carolina.

Nov. 22, 2005
After being held for 3 1/2 years, Padilla is finally indicted for conspiring to kill or kidnap people overseas. The indictment makes no mention of the "dirty bomb" and alleges no plans for attacks in the US. At least one of the charges has already been dismissed.

Today
The government claims that a secret interrogation from a secret prison led the government to capture the "dirty bomber" who apparently, um, wasn't. The informants also claim they were tortured while detained.

A few comments later, jarrett lays in with the satire:

What you guys don't seem to be considering is that these people might kill everyone you know and love if given the chance. So torturing and indefinitely detaining suspected terrorists (one of whom happens to be an American citizen) is very necessary. Sure, there's no "evidence" that Padilla had access to radioactive materials, but why take chances? He's brown. No one will miss him.

Besides that, it doesn't matter what our government does. As long as we're one step above "beheading someone on VHS", the United States maintains the moral high ground.

Also, let's not forget that the detainees get meals and a prayer mat while sitting in a cell for years without indictment or any form of due process. So even though they've lost every freedom and semblance human dignity, they probably have it much better than they did in their homeland with their family.

Finally, we all know our government does everything Good and Right, and is free from human error or corruption. I feel completely comfortable giving our government absolute power over peoples' lives, completely free from the strictures of the Geneva Conventions (which we ratified in the pre-9/11 world), and free from any oversight for those human-rights tree-hugging terrorist-lovers. I don't see why any patriotic citizen would feel any differently.

Any bets on how many people in our administration wouldn't see this as satire?