how else is one sappose to interpret that jubilation that gitmo detainees might be released because there is not enough for trail, or the evidence was gained by intelligence methods that cannot be exposed?
2006-06-30 01:05:29 · 8 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Government
Very sad. I don't understand their motivation. They are so intent on bringing the Bush administration down that they are willing to sacrifice the nation's safety. For what?
Again I say, this is not a football game with two opposing teams. It's not a rivalry with one side against the other. The winning side here isn't going to get a trophy and bragging rights. This is the future of our country. Rather than pulling for the Left or the Right. the Dems or the Republicans, maybe we need to start pulling together as a country. Otherwise, we are going to fall to terrorists and extremists.
2006-06-30 01:15:29 · answer #1 · answered by kelly24592 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Actually, most of the files on a majority of the gitmo detainees were released a while ago. Seems we were holding apple salesmen, school teachers, and even a crossing guard. It stems from a brilliant system we implemented in Afghanistan when we first got there, where we rewarded local warlords with big cash bounties for any "terrorists" they handed to us. They immediately went through their towns and rounded up quite a few suspects that had nothing to do with terrorists for between $100 and $5000 a head.
This process did yield a handful of medium profile suspects (like bin Laden's chauffer), but everyone turned over was held for years at a time while they were sorted. A few of these made it to Gitmo, but thousands were left to rot in Afghani prisons, effectively political prisoners in their own country that hadn't committed any crime.
2006-06-30 02:49:06 · answer #2 · answered by lostinromania 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Anytime the Constitution wins its a victory!
The appellant in the case was a Jeep driver for Saddam who has been held 4 1/2 years for 1 count of "suspicion" of terrorism. A lousy Jeep driver!!
It really is too bad when Bush has to follow a law like the Geneva Conventions! No wonder the Marines don't think it means anything.
Wonder if he is still taping conversations between the accused and their lawyer!! Another violation. Bush is just ignorant!!
You are unhappy that the branch that decides whether a law is constitutional aren't going to give Bush a pass to do anything he wants, including setting up secret prison camps in Poland and other countries by the CIA.
Bush is not a dictator. Even he has to follow the law!
But it is OK for Bush to write over 700 slips saying he isn't going to follow laws because of "National security" or it is unconstitutional. This includes the Patriot Act!
Who made Bush a judge???
One of the things a president swears to when he is inaugurated that he will uphold the constitution. Wonder if he has ever read it?This president doesn't even know it exists!
No one has declared War or Martial law!!!
2006-06-30 01:23:40 · answer #3 · answered by cantcu 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
cheering terrorists no, we are just against free BABARISM, murderers, babies killers and exploiters..
http://www.takebackthemedia.com/bushnona...
..
http://www.zmag.org/content/showarticle.cfm?SectionID=11&ItemID=10237
he current "War on Terror" is a project of the US Empire and is a war based on lies and myths. The motive was to create a long-term war to ensure that elite concentrations of wealth and power would not be threatened, and to scare populations into accepting policies benefiting the rich and powerful. Seen in this light, Empire is used as a conduit for maintaining and increasing elite wealth, power and privilege; and war is the State's weapon to achieve these aims. Just as the current "War on Terror" is an immoral war based on lies and myths, history is full of wars of conquest and barbarism. It's the duty of an anti-war movement to raise consciousness and provide insight highlighting that not only is the current war immoral and wrong, but all war is immoral and wrong, and that war has many structural sources. So, we're faced with the task of providing vision for what a world without war would look like and how to get there.
War is the product of many things and these things have their own forces and institutions, all of which have their roots in the underlying structures of society: militarism, capitalism, imperialism, racism, sexism and centralized political power, etc. Unless we address the root causes of war, the imperial wars of today and tomorrow will continue to rear their ugly heads into the future. Without exposing these structural sources of war, we face the very real prospect of fighting and resisting one war after another, without ever achieving victory.
2006-06-30 01:14:48 · answer #4 · answered by cyranoyebo 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I think that due process should be totally eliminated and torture and humiliation is the best way to go. It's really a wise choice to begin instituting this system by preying on Muslims beause they are the antichrist. then, the government should begin detaining people who don't agree with right wing religious fanatics, hold them for years without due process, and continue and refine torture and humiliation techniques. God Bless America.
2006-06-30 01:13:32 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yep they always do. They are socialist/comunist/facist at heart. The leader of the free world is thier no 1 target because our success is evidence of thier failed philosiphy. The left will allways side with tyrany.
2006-06-30 01:12:40 · answer #6 · answered by wwgiese 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It was expected. Not wanting the US flag desecrated would have help make them more normal but again Ted Kennedy won.
2006-06-30 01:10:41 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
WHY DOES THAT NOT SURPRISE ME. MAYBE THEY NEED TO GET THE HELL OUT OF THIS COUNTRY TOO.
2006-07-01 08:25:56 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋