If we don't immediately return him to his friend's and family, aren't we violating his human rights?
2007-03-15 08:21:07 · 28 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Prove to me he was corerced. I don't buy it. Gitmo detainees are treated pretty damned well - they've GAINED weight down there. I'm still waiting for some idiot to file a lawsuit for them for "forced obesity" or some equally moronic reason.
They are provided with the Quran, their religious dietary needs are met and they have the right to pray as often as they see fit. Show me another similar situation where the captors show this much mercy.
2007-03-15 08:26:08 · answer #1 · answered by Jadis 6 · 7⤊ 3⤋
no longer likely, america of a isn't between the common third international murderous totalitarian regimes you liberals are constantly so worried for. Even those in militia custody have criminal risk-free practices interior the direction of the JAG and under different conventions. in actual actuality that this pile of crap who's in the back of each and every of the terrorist assaults you dont seem to care approximately, is probably no longer confessing, he's bragging. in case you will possibly hassle to study various the transcripts of the confessions, he aint sorry approximately something he has finished to all those harmless people in long island, in DC, in Indonesia, or everywhere else. he's happy with it. via the way, do you already know that he needs all of YOU to die and bypass to hell? nonetheless so worried approximately his rights? nonetheless want to incorporate him and tell him it rather is all going to be ok? awaken!
2016-10-18 11:22:34 · answer #2 · answered by croes 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Okay, well why don't we move him into your neighborhood? Do you think he would have confessed if we gave him Kool Aid and Cookies? No, we shouldn't return him anywhere, tell Daniel Pearles family all about Sheikh Mohammed's human rights.
2007-03-15 12:06:24 · answer #3 · answered by rosi l 5 · 1⤊ 1⤋
I read the transcript, he claims his coerced confessions are not valid, but he admits and understands being designated as an enemy combatant, and he admits and understands that he did have a role in those 30 terror plots that are being associated with him. He is a man guilty of wrong doing, why should we let him free?!
2007-03-15 08:28:52 · answer #4 · answered by Pfo 7 · 4⤊ 1⤋
Hmmm, I've searched the files and it seems we've never had a Khalid Sheikh Mohammed in our custody. Why do you ask?
2007-03-15 08:33:55 · answer #5 · answered by Gus K 3 · 3⤊ 2⤋
He flat spilled the beans. We cannot validate all his claims but can validate much of what he said to be fact. How about giving our Military and special agents a little credit for once. We have bad guys! Funny, Rosie accuses Mr Bush and our Gov't about holding Mohammed but says she like to physically hurt the druggie who beat the 101 year old lady in NYC. Guess it's selective aggression huh??
2007-03-15 08:28:14 · answer #6 · answered by aiminhigh24u2 6 · 6⤊ 2⤋
Because he's not being tried by federal or state court, but a military tribunal that uses different rules.
Letting murderers go free is second nature to public courts, but in the context of a global war - it's completely unacceptable.
We could hand him over to the Pakistanis' and let them execute him for us, I guess - if that's what you'd prefer.
2007-03-15 08:25:49 · answer #7 · answered by wigginsray 7 · 4⤊ 2⤋
Oh CRIMINY! Do you listen to EVERY OTHER WORD of a broadcast?!?! He had the ability in court to speak to the alleged coerced admission. He claimed it all true [even though he expressed he felt bad for killing thousands in the WTC attack] in that court.
Tell you what, why don'y you take up arms, fly to Bagdad and join the jihadists. You're doing thier job on American soil anyway.
2007-03-15 08:27:08 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 6⤊ 3⤋
There is plenty of evidence linking him to Al-Qaeda and the 9/11 attacks besides his confession, whether coerced or not.
2007-03-15 08:24:10 · answer #9 · answered by zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz 4 · 10⤊ 2⤋
He's a prisoner of war, he has no rights.
The only right he has is to go home in a box.
2007-03-15 08:31:27 · answer #10 · answered by Sgt 524 5 · 3⤊ 1⤋