Freed Gitmo Detainee Rejoins Al-Qaeda, Attacks US

Allen773 said:
Except we're not at war. Where's the declaration of war against al-Qaeda (which isn't a recognized nation, so we can't really declare war on it)?
Click to expand...

Sure we are. Al Qaeda declared war on us (http://www.pbs.org/newshour/terrorism/international/fatwa_1996.html and http://www.pbs.org/newshour/terrorism/international/fatwa_1998.html ). And nothing in our Constitution states that a declaration of war has to be in the form "We declare war" or only applies to countries. The Congress in effect declared war on al-Qaeda when it authorized the use of military force to deal with them whereever they might be. And just for the record, being a "recognized nation" is irrelevant since the definition of war doesn't limit itself to nations.
 
Dont you see. GITMO created this terrorsist!!! The guy was probably totally innocent (how else do you get out of Gitmo?) But since he was taken from his home an thrown in a box for years he developed the hatered of a terrorist. Hr gets to go home and is easily recruited by the real terror groups who see him as a hero.



Kinda like a reverse stockholm syndrome.
 
jj said:
Seems a bit dishonest to assume that "closing Gitmo" means that all of the people there will just go free, tra la.
Click to expand...

I hear Jack Murtha wants them brought to Pennsylvania. Guees it's his version of a job program? :confused:
 
BenBurch said:
As a skeptic, I have done a little bit of investigation;

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2009/1/22/15165/1055/804/687707

Seems not all is as reported...
Click to expand...
A "skeptic" links to daily kos and hopes nobody finds a single, slanted source something to cheer about?

I am trying to find a way to parse CNN as a GOP mouthpiece.

Been watching CNN for about 25 years on and off.

Don't see it, Ben. (What I do see CNN being is about a lot of Benjamins, but that's another matter.)

As to what to do with those in Gitmo, I never got the impression W, Cheney, nor Rummy thought that all the way through. Maybe one of them did.

DR
 
BenBurch said:
Of course he is trying to hurt us!

Sheesh.

Lock ME away for 6 years of torture and detention without trial or Habeas Corpus, and I would be a terrorist against you too, whether I was one before you abducted me or not!

We have sewn the wind, and are surprised that we are reaping the whirlwind???
Click to expand...
Ben we captured 70,000 in Afghanistan and of that number only 700 were deemed to be dangerous enough to go to GITMO most of them Arabs and not Taliban. Did you really not believe that there was a very large military operation in Afghanistan? We have already released a lot of them, not because they were innocent but because they were repatriated to their home countries that promised to keep track of them. This guy was sent to Saudi Arabia and went through a "rehabilitation" program and then left for Yemen.

We have about 50 Yemen prisoners now that have been okayed for repatriation, not because they are innocent but they are no longer deemed a threat to the US but based on past experience Yemen will just release them and they will return to the fight. We have about 15 Chinese Muslims that were not fighting us but were in Afghanistan attending OBL's training camps for attacks in China. They have not been released even though China wants them back to put a bullet in their ear. and they are fighting going back. What do we do with them, they are trained terrorists and unless we send them home to be shot, I would send them, then you can't just release them into the US. This nonsense that GITMO is filled with innocent sheep herders is beyond rediculous.
 
Texas said:
Ben we captured 70,000 in Afghanistan and of that number only 700 were deemed to be dangerous enough to go to GITMO most of them Arabs and not Taliban. Did you really not believe that there was a very large military operation in Afghanistan? We have already released a lot of them, not because they were innocent but because they were repatriated to their home countries that promised to keep track of them. This guy was sent to Saudi Arabia and went through a "rehabilitation" program and then left for Yemen.

We have about 50 Yemen prisoners now that have been okayed for repatriation, not because they are innocent but they are no longer deemed a threat to the US but based on past experience Yemen will just release them and they will return to the fight. We have about 15 Chinese Muslims that were not fighting us but were in Afghanistan attending OBL's training camps for attacks in China. They have not been released even though China wants them back to put a bullet in their ear. and they are fighting going back. What do we do with them, they are trained terrorists and unless we send them home to be shot, I would send them, then you can't just release them into the US. This nonsense that GITMO is filled with innocent sheep herders is beyond rediculous.
Click to expand...

There is no presumption of guilt in a free country. They are, therefore, innocent.
 
Smackety said:
There is no presumption of guilt in a free country. They are, therefore, innocent.
Click to expand...
No, they are captured hostile forces. They are by definition guilty of being at war with the US military. The ones slated for war crimes trials such as KSM will have a trial where the assumption will be innocence until proven guilty will apply but that is an entirely different situation to the majority of GITMO detainees.
 
Texas said:
No, they are captured hostile forces. They are by definition guilty of being at war with the US military. The ones slated for war crimes trials such as KSM will have a trial where the assumption will be innocence until proven guilty will apply but that is an entirely different situation to the majority of GITMO detainees.
Click to expand...

They are not at war with us - because we are not at war with them, so they cannot be prisoners of war, can they?
 
Smackety said:
They are not at war with us - because we are not at war with them, so they cannot be prisoners of war, can they?
Click to expand...
Then who in the hell were they fighting? We have been at war with them since 2001. What do you think all of those NATO troops are doing in Afghanistan? Geeze.
 
Tailgater said:
Most of these guys will end up spread out in US prisons and some released. I'm sure the finest prosecutors in the world will get them in the door.
Click to expand...
It is a violation of the Geneva Conventions to put them in a prison with criminals. The ones convicted of war crimes can be, but the ones being held as enemy combatants cannot be placed with criminals.

Gitmo may well close, but another detention facility will have to be opened. This is a symbolic move, nothing more.
 
How far do people want to take this whole breaking the law thing?

The rhetoric praises our troops for defending freedom, and stirs up fear of al Qaeda and the like because of the threat to our way of life. Meanwhile, Bush was selling out our freedom and our way of life. Bin Laden could have never passed the Patriot Act, or caused the suspension of Habeas Corpus, or green-lighted torture, etc. But he sure enough convinced us to do it to ourselves. Al Qaeda threatens our lives; the biggest threat to our way of life comes from within.

If all we're concerned about is survival, then yes, let's make survival as easy as possible. I was under the impression that we were concerned about something more than that. And if our system is a little harder to preserve as a result of it being a lot more worthy of preservation, I'm fine with that too. After all - Freedom, as the bumper stickers tell us, Isn't Free.



Getting to the point of it - if the OP is correct, then it's a failure of our system to charge, prosecute, convict, and imprison this guy. Not evidence that abuse or abandonment of our system is a good thing.
 
Texas said:
Then who in the hell were they fighting? We have been at war with them since 2001. What do you think all of those NATO troops are doing in Afghanistan? Geeze.
Click to expand...

I am talking about their official, legal status. We did not declare war on Afghanistan, and the terrorists are not soldiers of any country. What are they?
 
BenBurch said:
Against an enemy who we already knew did not mount a fighter response to lone aircraft.
Click to expand...
There were actually 2 B-29s sent to Hiroshima. The 2nd plane was there to film the whole thing, but the camera malfunctioned and the only footage we have of it is from one of the Enola Gay crew members who filmed a bit of it with his personal camera.

/pedant
 
linusrichard said:
How far do people want to take this whole breaking the law thing?

The rhetoric praises our troops for defending freedom, and stirs up fear of al Qaeda and the like because of the threat to our way of life. Meanwhile, Bush was selling out our freedom and our way of life. Bin Laden could have never passed the Patriot Act, or caused the suspension of Habeas Corpus, or green-lighted torture, etc. But he sure enough convinced us to do it to ourselves. Al Qaeda threatens our lives; the biggest threat to our way of life comes from within.

If all we're concerned about is survival, then yes, let's make survival as easy as possible. I was under the impression that we were concerned about something more than that. And if our system is a little harder to preserve as a result of it being a lot more worthy of preservation, I'm fine with that too. After all - Freedom, as the bumper stickers tell us, Isn't Free.



Getting to the point of it - if the OP is correct, then it's a failure of our system to charge, prosecute, convict, and imprison this guy. Not evidence that abuse or abandonment of our system is a good thing.
Click to expand...


If you can tell me a single freedom this country has lost because of Bush policies please post it. This canard that he suspended Habeas is just that a canard. It was never true.
 
Last edited:
Smackety said:
I am talking about their official, legal status. We did not declare war on Afghanistan, and the terrorists are not soldiers of any country. What are they?
Click to expand...
WE did declare war on Afghanistan. NATO would not be there had we not.
 
linusrichard said:
Getting to the point of it - if the OP is correct, then it's a failure of our system to charge, prosecute, convict, and imprison this guy. Not evidence that abuse or abandonment of our system is a good thing.
Click to expand...
It was never the intention to charge and prosecute the vast majority of them. They were held as enemy combatants, in much the same way that we held thousands of Germans in WWII and only charged a handful of them for war crimes.

Being an enemy combatant isn't in and of itself a crime, but they can be held nevertheless. And generally without charges.
 
Last edited:
Smackety said:
I am talking about their official, legal status. We did not declare war on Afghanistan, and the terrorists are not soldiers of any country. What are they?
Click to expand...
You keep saying this as if you really believe it. If so, there are tools available on the internet with which you can educate yourself.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom