Former Gitmo Detainees Help al-Qaida Grow in Yemen

Zoom-boing

Platinum Member
Oct 30, 2008
25,764
7,808
350
East Japip
These people should be left exactly where they are till the war on terror. . . . er, um the war on mad made disasters . . wait, overseas contingency plans . . . whatever it's called these days is over. Period. It's a bad idea to close Gitmo and it's a bad idea to release these people.

SAN JUAN, Puerto Rico – As a prisoner at Guantanamo, Said Ali al-Shihri said he wanted freedom so he could go home to Saudi Arabia and work at his family's furniture store.

Instead, al-Shihri, who was released in 2007 under the Bush administration, is now deputy leader of al-Qaida in the Arabian Peninsula, a group that has claimed responsibility for the Christmas Day attempted bomb attack on a Detroit-bound airliner.

His potential involvement in the terrorist plot has raised new opposition to releasing Guantanamo Bay inmates, complicating President Barack Obama's pledge to close the military prison in Cuba. It also highlights the challenge of identifying the hard-core militants as the administration decides what to do with the remaining 198 prisoners.

Like other former Guantanamo detainees who have rejoined al-Qaida in Yemen, al-Shihri, 36, won his release despite jihadist credentials such as, in his case, urban warfare training in Afghanistan.

He later goaded the United States, saying Guantanamo only strengthened his anti-American convictions.

Former Gitmo detainees help al-Qaida grow in Yemen - Yahoo! News
 
These people should be left exactly where they are till the war on terror. . . . er, um the war on mad made disasters . . wait, overseas contingency plans . . . whatever it's called these days is over. Period. It's a bad idea to close Gitmo and it's a bad idea to release these people.

SAN JUAN, Puerto Rico – As a prisoner at Guantanamo, Said Ali al-Shihri said he wanted freedom so he could go home to Saudi Arabia and work at his family's furniture store.

Instead, al-Shihri, who was released in 2007 under the Bush administration, is now deputy leader of al-Qaida in the Arabian Peninsula, a group that has claimed responsibility for the Christmas Day attempted bomb attack on a Detroit-bound airliner.

His potential involvement in the terrorist plot has raised new opposition to releasing Guantanamo Bay inmates, complicating President Barack Obama's pledge to close the military prison in Cuba. It also highlights the challenge of identifying the hard-core militants as the administration decides what to do with the remaining 198 prisoners.

Like other former Guantanamo detainees who have rejoined al-Qaida in Yemen, al-Shihri, 36, won his release despite jihadist credentials such as, in his case, urban warfare training in Afghanistan.

He later goaded the United States, saying Guantanamo only strengthened his anti-American convictions.

Former Gitmo detainees help al-Qaida grow in Yemen - Yahoo! News

wtf.jpg
 
Yep and they will all say they were tortured and weren't allowed to have conjugal visits or some shit. Its in their handbook.

Maybe they could spend another couple billion re-vamping those "art re-edumacation camps" in SA and Yemen. Maybe if they add a spa and some kumbaya sing alongs they will be less inclined to blow up planes.
 
Its all about the ambulance chasers drumming-up work. IMHO if they lawyer-up fine as long as US taxpayers aren't paying for them. I'd drop them off at the door step of the US Supremes since they gave them citizenship rights.
 
These people should be left exactly where they are till the war on terror. . . . er, um the war on mad made disasters . . wait, overseas contingency plans . . . whatever it's called these days is over. Period. It's a bad idea to close Gitmo and it's a bad idea to release these people.

SAN JUAN, Puerto Rico – As a prisoner at Guantanamo, Said Ali al-Shihri said he wanted freedom so he could go home to Saudi Arabia and work at his family's furniture store.

Instead, al-Shihri, who was released in 2007 under the Bush administration, is now deputy leader of al-Qaida in the Arabian Peninsula, a group that has claimed responsibility for the Christmas Day attempted bomb attack on a Detroit-bound airliner.

His potential involvement in the terrorist plot has raised new opposition to releasing Guantanamo Bay inmates, complicating President Barack Obama's pledge to close the military prison in Cuba. It also highlights the challenge of identifying the hard-core militants as the administration decides what to do with the remaining 198 prisoners.

Like other former Guantanamo detainees who have rejoined al-Qaida in Yemen, al-Shihri, 36, won his release despite jihadist credentials such as, in his case, urban warfare training in Afghanistan.

He later goaded the United States, saying Guantanamo only strengthened his anti-American convictions.

Former Gitmo detainees help al-Qaida grow in Yemen - Yahoo! News
That which should be obvious to a third grader is being ignored by the White House in favor of political correctness and futile attempts to appease a relentless, maniacal enemy.

The decision to try the 9-ll mastermind in federal court was an equally stupid move. Both lend respect to terrorism. Obama is aiding and comforting the enemy.
 
I do not blame Bush for releasing them.

If we had no way to prove they had done what was claimed then htey should be released.

YOU DO NOT PROSICUTE PEOPLE FOR FUTURE CRIMES!
 
I do not blame Bush for releasing them.

If we had no way to prove they had done what was claimed then htey should be released.

YOU DO NOT PROSICUTE PEOPLE FOR FUTURE CRIMES!

How bout keeping them for what we do know about them???

Like other former Guantanamo detainees who have rejoined al-Qaida in Yemen, al-Shihri, 36, won his release despite jihadist credentials such as, in his case, urban warfare training in Afghanistan.

btw, you missed this:

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1uuWVHT1WUY&feature=player_embedded[/ame]
 
Last edited:
If you can prove a case against them then hold them.

You see Bush turned them into terrorists with his treatment of them.

If you start holding people because you think they may commit a crime then you are advocating prosicution for FUTURE CRIME.

do you people have any fucking idea how sick that is?
 
If you can prove a case against them then hold them.

You see Bush turned them into terrorists with his treatment of them.

If you start holding people because you think they may commit a crime then you are advocating prosicution for FUTURE CRIME.

do you people have any fucking idea how sick that is?

Bullfuckingshit. They were terrorists when they were captured but you keep spinning the crap the terrorist huggers peddle. Wake up.

Did you even watch the Maddow clip. Never mind, I know you didn't.
 
What a stupid statement.
If you can prove a case against them then hold them.

You see Bush turned them into terrorists with his treatment of them.

If you start holding people because you think they may commit a crime then you are advocating prosicution for FUTURE CRIME.

do you people have any fucking idea how sick that is?
It's about as stupid as saying if we treat them nicely and get out of their country, they will live in peace. If they keep multiplying like rabbits, they may tell everybody in Europe to get out of "their" country.

These were not run-of-the-mill US citizens being held for purse snatching. That they should be extended any rights other than to breathe, eat, drink water and relieve themselves is too kind. It's the bleeding heart liberals that will allow them freedom to go home and participate again in the indiscriminate killing of innocent people, possibly someone you know.
 
Last edited:
You do not prosicute or hold people for Future Crimes.

I dont care how much you THINK they may commit a crime later.

What you are suggesting is fucking insane and evil.
 
Hey truth - we know you believe all these guys are innocent and were just at the wrong place at the wrong time. We'd all like to see your evidence. Including the justice dept. They were not picked up for "future crimes". Unbelievable.
 
What they were picked up for could not be proven.

Do you understand that?

If we become a country that imprisons for LIFE people who we can prove no infraction against but continue to hold them because they MAY commit a crime in the future than we can put ANYONE in prison fro life without proof of any infraction.

Do you understand what that means?
 
I am incredulous that Americans are arguing FOR the US government to hold people for life without charges of any kind.
 

Forum List

Back
Top