English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

No prisoner abuse at Gitmo. The liberal attempt to help terrorist recruit more suicide bombers by creating outrage with their lies has FAILED. Read it and weep, traitors:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070207/ap_on_go_ca_st_pe/guantanamo_abuse_probe

2007-02-07 08:33:58 · 26 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government Politics

26 answers

bush is the only traitor ---i know
he kills americans for oil and israel

2007-02-07 08:37:39 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 11 3

Oh and you dont think incarceration for years with no charges, no contact with family or legal representation and no TRIAL is not abuse?

Besides I dont see where anyone was alleging "prisoner' (your term not mine) abuse at Gitmo. It was Abu GRAIB the abuse happened. It's an already released story, the guilty have been accused, tried and punished.The ones in charged similarly charged or removed from service.Try to get your facts straight, please.
Now back to your choice of terms for the incarcerated "terrorists" at Gitmo. You called them prisoners. Did you mean like criminals who are jailed are prisoners? Or did you mean "prisoners of war", the war on terror?

If you meant like jailed criminal prisoners, why can't they see attorneys, prepare a defense, have a trial, etc?
If you mean Prisoners of War, on what grounds? None of them can possibly be combatants in the Iraq war, since they've been incarcerated since LONG before we invaded Iraq. If they're POWs from Afghanistan, what proof they were combatants? The Afghan Northern Alliance was a domestic force in Afghanistan which was resisting Taliban rule. The Clinton Administration recommended to the incoming Bush team that they fund the Northern Alliance, to keep Taliban members and freshly trained Al Qaeda troops fighting on the lines in Afghanistan, rather than let the Al Qaeda go off to different countries.

This advice was ignored. For 9 months and 11 days.

2007-02-07 16:53:14 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 5 1

Why don't you think in terms of America and not your ideology? Are you that narrow-minded that you can only see one way? If you believe liberals are trying to subvert America than you probably ought to have your doctor up your meds, because you are delusional. That people don't like the way the country is being run doesn't mean anyone is more or less concerned about this country than you are. I would love for you to call me a traitor to my face. The only uniform you've probably worn in your life was for your job at the Lube and Go. You're a patriot, and Dick Cheney drives a Honda. Grow up.

2007-02-07 16:55:36 · answer #3 · answered by Garth Rocket 4 · 2 1

... so... this person was "bragging about it" and you think that anyone who even wants and investigation is a traitor apparently? since those who want an investigation, according to you, are creating outrage with their lies?

things need to be investigated, and sometimes there are wrong doings and sometimes there are not... you seem to basically have a communist attitude of "if you question the government, you are a traitor"... remember the USSR during the 80s... you sound just like them buddy... and government would be twice as corrupt if we all just thought they never did anything wrong...

I feel sorry for you... you are what you think you hate...

2007-02-07 17:11:09 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 3 0

This report was conducted by the people who run Gitmo you moron, the US Army. Do You 30% of the people who still think for whatever reason that Bush is doing a fine job really think that the 70% who see truth for what it really is are traitors? Does you mother know your playing on the computer?

2007-02-07 16:57:43 · answer #5 · answered by donronsen 6 · 4 1

first of all, enough with the crap about war on america. it really is unoriginal, stupid, and not funny.

second, yes they found no evidence. but notice how they didnt interview one single detainee at the base. they only interviewed those responsible (like they would admit it) at other "witnesses" which means other military personnel. dont be naive. its called cover-up. why would you rat out one of your comrades? did you miss the article about the cover up about the british guy getting killed by friendly fire from american planes. it was an accident, yet the military covered it up for 3 and a half years. then someone leaked the video and it all changed. the top dogs of the military are good about covering stuff up.

2007-02-07 16:48:44 · answer #6 · answered by 2010 CWS Champs! 3 · 7 1

I'm sure imprisonment at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, is like spending a week at the Waldorf in Manhattan. They are pampered and treated to turn down service with an Andes mint on their satin pillows each night.

I'm planning my next vacation there as we speak.

2007-02-07 16:40:39 · answer #7 · answered by Jackson Leslie 5 · 7 1

what was found was that when the military investigates itself, it did nothing wrong.
That study doesn't change the fact that, the camp itself is in violation of the Geneva Convention. To hold anyone incognito, charge them with crimes but not to allow them to be present at the trial and not to disclose the evidence that convicts you (possibly to death) is a travesty to any nation that is trying to spread the values of freedom and democracy.

2007-02-07 16:46:50 · answer #8 · answered by Alan S 7 · 6 1

Wow--you're accusing American citizens of being traitors because of our Constitutionally-provided vigilance? Not particularly American of you.

That said, this is no "huge defeat" for anyone--it is excellent news. As long as people are being illegally held, without their Constitutional right to counsel or to a speedy trial, it's VERY good to know they aren't being physically abused.

2007-02-07 16:39:23 · answer #9 · answered by Vaughn 6 · 8 1

No. You just don't get it. It's not about attacking America. It's about staying true to our ideals and laws and traditions.

BTW, it seems odd that the person conducting the investigation didn't bother to interview the prisoners making the accusations.

2007-02-07 16:40:00 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 12 1

Hey Einstein, did you read the whole story. They were talking about one incident, not overall abuse. I suppose next your going to say that Abu Gharib never happened. Tha Army also said that there was no evidence that friendly fire had killed a British soldier until evidence popped up on the internet yesterday.

2007-02-07 16:38:11 · answer #11 · answered by Anonymous · 13 2

fedest.com, questions and answers