Bush official admits innocent at Gitmo

Well Tech, considering the amount of people that absolutely HATE Bush Jr., as well as the fact that everyone likes Obama (mainly because he's smarter than Bush Jr.), I don't think that would be a problem.

Shit......Europeans are calling for their skulls as well.
 
Well Tech, considering the amount of people that absolutely HATE Bush Jr., as well as the fact that everyone likes Obama (mainly because he's smarter than Bush Jr.), I don't think that would be a problem.

Shit......Europeans are calling for their skulls as well.
so, when more people hate Obama, bringing him up on charges will be ok?


this is just fucking MORONIC
:rolleyes:
you have to actually have PROOF to back up charges, moron
 
I love the assumptions that everyone loves Obama, or even that every Democrat supporter loves Obama ...



No wait ....


... I hate assumptions. I want Oabam jailed soon so we can repeal all his idiotic crap ASAP. Seriously, no one hates Jr either, we just know he was a bumbass. Hell, he couldn't cover his true mistakes with then coats of primer if you showed him how.
 
Well Tech, considering the amount of people that absolutely HATE Bush Jr., as well as the fact that everyone likes Obama (mainly because he's smarter than Bush Jr.), I don't think that would be a problem.

Shit......Europeans are calling for their skulls as well.

Of course the Europeans are calling for their skulls. Seriously, you get that we aren't all on the same side right? All of the world is calling on us to do things that will weaken our country. We are the lone super power. It's like being a gunfighter in the old west. Everyone else is gunning for you.

As a personal matter, I gives a shit what happens to them. However, as an American, we should not give in to such bullshit. Our politics have gotten overly divisive and this "I can fuck your guy worse than you fucked our guy" bullshit has got to stop.
 
It does not matter what the Bush Admin chose to call the people they locked up in Guantanamo. No matter who they are or what they are accussed of doing, torture is against US law. There are no exceptions, period.

And yes for those of you who are easily fooled, waterboarding is torture. That's why the US prosecuted Japanese soldiers for torture after they waterboarded American prisoners in WWII.

False... And it's false by the general misuse of the word "torture." You want, by your implication to demand that Gitmo was used to torture the poor innocent terrorists... and by torture you want to include any activity to which the terrorists might have been subjected which caused them discomfort... sadly for you, that is not what 'torture' means.... and water-boarding is NOT torture... Speaking as one whose BEEN WATERBOARDED...among other examples of ceorcive interrogation, in contrast to say... YOU!

It's not pleasant... it's damn dangerous... and it will scare the shit right out of ya... but it's not torture.

No one was 'tortured' at Gitmo... PERIOD.

Secondly, those who declare and execute a war wherein they intentionally seek to murder innocent civilians and to further cause death and injury to non-combatants is illegal combatants... such is anathema to civilization itself and as such, those who engage in it forfeit ANY AND ALL RIGHTS which they otherwise enjoyed prior to their disregard for the rights and lives of the innocent and can be used for any purpose which may improve civilization until their imminent death and if that means that they spend every moment of their lives forced to stand naked on a stack of nails until there is no reason to believe that they possess any further potential to advance civilization, then so BE IT.

They cast off their humanity when they sought to strip innocent people of theirs... and you're feeble minded attempt to humanize the inhumane... is beyond absurd.

Those people who are found engaging in mass murder of the innocent for their addle-minded political bent HAVE NO RIGHTS... Fuck them into INFINITY.
 
Last edited:
Publius
How do you know that anyone at Guantanamo did anything?

Oh, that's right, Bush said they did.

I guess we don't need to prove they did anything, we'll just beleive Bush.

We used to believe "innocent until proven guilty". Now we just say guilty if that's what King George said.
 
You are just bringing up Bill Ayers in a pathetic attempt to link Obama to his Ayers past behavior. But of course Ayers is irrelevant to the discussion of why Bush failed to prosecute the "worst of the worst", the people Bush put in his extra-legal prison in Guantanamo.

Either Bush couldn't prosecute because of his torturing of prisoners or because there was no evidence of terrorist links to begin with.

Either way Bush was in violation of our laws.

One doesn't prosecute prisoners of war... One detains them until the cessation of hostilities. Where such prisoners are found to have violated US Criminal code, then there is grounds for criminal prosecution, but where the evidence against them does not rise beyond the threshold which such courts require, there is no means TO prosecute them. That little fact in NO WAY evaporates their on-going status as prisoners of war .

This isn't complex stuff sis... it just may be beyond your intellectual means to comprehend. Which is highly likely given the fallacy laced train-wreck you advanced above. Feel free to advance you opinion, just don't expect idiocy to suffice as reason around here.
 
Last edited:
Publius
How do you know that anyone at Guantanamo did anything?

Oh, that's right, Bush said they did.

I guess we don't need to prove they did anything, we'll just beleive Bush.

We used to believe "innocent until proven guilty". Now we just say guilty if that's what King George said.

Is there any hack leftie comment you won't spout? You're like one of those old time dolls, just pull your string and the next pre-programmed hack comment comes out.

They aren't in prison numbnuts. They are detained. The difference is as you noted, they haven't been tried or convicted of anything, BECAUSE THEY ARE ENEMY COMBATANTS DUMMY. You don't try POWs and we shouldn't try them. We should keep them until the war against terrorists is over and then release what's left of them.
 
Publius

Your insults aside, let's pursue the point.

You claim my statement that torture is forbidden by US law is false. Please quote the law that permits torture.

As for your statement that "one does not prosecute prisoners of war", I thought that these were 'enemy combatants' not POWs.

After the first attack on the WTC President Clinton successfully prosecuted, convicted and imprisoned the people responsible.

A better outcome than Bush's shameful record shows.
 
They can't be put on trial. Any judge would throw the cases out. Illegal aliens cost us 20k a head.

Last I checked, they've had military hearings, which has been the accepted procedure since forever. That would be why so many who WERE detained there have been released, and quite a few re-captured when they went right back to being terrorists.

If those released "went back to being terrorists" as you say, why were they released in the first place? Why weren't they tried, convicted and sentenced as they should have been if they were terrorists?

Was it because they were tortured and so anything they said was not admissable in court? To bad the Bush Admin became through their illegal actions an enemy of American justice.

First of all, Mensa Boy, you don't try enemy combatants in court. War is not a civil offense, numbnuts. It's not a CRIME. It's fucking WAR. You take them prisoner, you hold a military hearing to determine if, in fact, there is sufficient evidence that they are, in fact, your enemies, and then you either detain them until the hostilities are over, or you release them. In this case, they were released because there was insufficient evidence that they were enemy combatants. Turns out that they were.

I swear to God, do they not have bookstores where you liberals live, or do they just not stock any books on war history? Maybe if it was in an "I Can Read" or perhaps a pop-up book, you might have some sort of clue.
 
Publius
How do you know that anyone at Guantanamo did anything?

Oh, that's right, Bush said they did.

I guess we don't need to prove they did anything, we'll just beleive Bush.

We used to believe "innocent until proven guilty". Now we just say guilty if that's what King George said.

Right. It was just Bush. Everyone knows that the military are all just Bush's bitches and yes men, so it was all just a matter of believing Bush. That's all there ever was to it.

Seriously, they have treatments for your Bush Derangement Syndrome, and since he's out of office, now might be a good time to get some frigging meds.
 
Publius

Your insults aside, let's pursue the point.

You claim my statement that torture is forbidden by US law is false. Please quote the law that permits torture.

I stated that coersive interrogation is not torture... I stated that your implication that it is, is absurd... Please advance a well reasoned, intellectually sound, logically valid argument, which clearly defines torture and establishes that coercive interrogation which applies stress and relief on prisoners fits your definition; then show where such is prohibited by a morally just, thus legally valid statute.

As for your statement that "one does not prosecute prisoners of war", I thought that these were 'enemy combatants' not POWs.

Do whuh? So you feel that the concepts of 'Prisoner of War' and 'enemy combatants' are mutually exclusive concepts?

Let me simplify it for you... Those detained at GITMO are enemy combatants, of the illegal variety, who have been captured through the process of war and detained for the purposes of preventing them from pursuing further hostilities and culling information which may be helpful in the US prosecution of the aforementioned war...

So you see that the concepts of 'enemy combatants' and 'Prisoner of War' are decidely NOT exclusive terms, with the former being necessary to that of the latter.

After the first attack on the WTC President Clinton successfully prosecuted, convicted and imprisoned the people responsible.

Heir Schlickmeister prosecuted the functionaries and subjected the US prison population to the infection of radical Islam through his having housed those mass murdering fucks in the US Prison system.

Hey did NOT prosecute 'the people responsible' as is evidenced by the attack 8 years later on the same target... Bubba's failures are innumerable on this issue, with just a few listed below.

1- He considered the acts of terrorism a criminal matter; despite the incontrovertible FACT that the 'defendants' were FOREIGN NATIONALS...

2- He restricted the means of the US Intelligence services and domestic law enforcement to share information in investigating and prosecuting these 'defendants'...

3- He issued an Executive Order which prohibited the CIA from hiring foreign assets who had a 'history of criminal behavior', in their pursuit to infiltrate TERRORIST CELLS... Thus preventing US Intelligence from hiring the people who would most likely be working in and WITHIN TERRORIST CELLS.

and on and on...


A better outcome than Bush's shameful record shows.

Bush persecuted on the order of magnitude 10,000 times greater the number of terrorists than Clinton prosecuted and Bush Prosecuted several times the number of terrorists that Clinton prosecuted.

At the end of the Bush administration, the Middle East had TWO Democratic governments, both of which are closely aligned with US policy goals in the ME... In contrast to the Clinton administration who left office having empowered Islamic terrorism, through his implementation of innumerable layers of subversive, pro-terrorist PC policies to the point where they were only MONTHS away from the most devastating attack by a foreign enemy since 1812...

Bush has prosecuted and convicted the masterminds of 9-11, the attack on the Kole and the two African embassies... He has over seen the assasination or capture of the total leadership of Al Qaeda known to exist prior to 9-11... save TWO, who have been on the run, in hiding SINCE 9-11... but who no dount breathed a GREAT sigh of relief upon the election to the Presidency of the US, of a Marxist Muslim... and who no doubt feel MUCH better since that Marxist Muslim President gave one of the most notorious terrorist groups on earth a BILLION DOLLARS in 'foreign aid'...
 
Publius

Your insults aside, let's pursue the point.

You claim my statement that torture is forbidden by US law is false. Please quote the law that permits torture.

As for your statement that "one does not prosecute prisoners of war", I thought that these were 'enemy combatants' not POWs.

After the first attack on the WTC President Clinton successfully prosecuted, convicted and imprisoned the people responsible.

A better outcome than Bush's shameful record shows.

Oh, yeah, President Clinton's deranged desire to treat acts of war as though they were merely crimes was SO successful, that the WTC was subsequently destroyed only a few years later. Wow, THAT really worked. What a great outcome, as compared to Bush's "shameful" record of preventing further terrorist attacks in the US for eight years. DAMN that incompetent Bush!
 

Forum List

Back
Top