Do you have adblock enabled?
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Fox News)   John Walker Lindh asks Bush to let him out of prison   ( divider line
    More: Unlikely  
•       •       •

13234 clicks; posted to Main » on 29 Sep 2004 at 12:00 AM (13 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»

233 Comments     (+0 »)

Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Newest | Show all

2004-09-29 03:43:07 AM  
Hey geaux do you think for one moment that when they put the rifle in his hands that he'd be using it for good? You give liberals a bad name. Most of them aren't pussies. You are, though.
2004-09-29 04:02:17 AM  
the Bushies throw American citizens in jail - no charges, no lawyers, no visitors - for nearly 3 years and you Conservative dopes think it's misguided 20-year olds that are threatening you...

don't get me wrong, my heart hardly bleeds for Lindh, but he and his ilk are insignificant pukes compared to the arrogant asshats you dittoheads will line up for on Nov 2.

When exactly are you gun-toting patriot-types going to put down your KY-slathered assault weapons long enough to see that your "patriotic" president and his army of blue-suited "Christians" are taking away what plankton-sh*t like Lindh could never HOPE to threaten?????
2004-09-29 04:22:21 AM  
Let's see...some time ago America funds the Taliban, trains them to fight the Soviets, even trains...Osama Bin Laden. Lindh joins Taliban, then American announces Bin Laden is responsible for the World Trade Center destruction. Lindh misses the televised news reports saying America invading Afghanistan (his 50" projection TV was probably tuned to some reality show...oh wait...THERE WAS PROBABLY NO ELECTRICITY!) So imagine his surprise when the country that funded the group he joined was then attacking them for not giving up Bin Laden (later proclaimed "not an important target" by America's commander-in-chief). Then oil pipeline built through Afghanistan, most military forces moved to Iraq, Taliban resumes control.

Did I miss anything?
2004-09-29 05:38:16 AM  
I bet Bush was confused for a while about how Chuck Norris ended up in prison

/realizes the joke has been made, does it anyway
2004-09-29 06:24:54 AM  
Steve Earle - John Walker

I'm just an American boy raised on MTV
And I've seen all those kids in the soda pop ads
But none of 'em looked like me
So I started lookin' around for a light out of the dim
And the first thing I heard that made sense was the word
Of Mohammed, peace be upon him

A shadu la ilaha illa Allah
There is no God but God

If my daddy could see me now chains around my feet
He don't understand that sometimes a man
Has got to fight for what he believes
And I believe God is great, all praise due to him
And if I should die, I'll rise up to the sky
Just like Jesus, peace be upon him


We came to fight the Jihad and our hearts were pure and strong
As death filled the air, we all offered up prayers
And prepared for our martyrdom
But Allah had some other plan, some secret not revealed
Now they're draggin' me back with my head in a sack
To the land of the infidel

A shadu la ilaha illa Allah
A shadu la ilaha illa Allah
2004-09-29 06:44:29 AM  
Next time we run acrosss an American hanging with Al Qaeda, I hope our troops have enough since just to blow his brains out next time.
2004-09-29 06:58:28 AM  
Could this be one of those rare times when Democrats DON'T automatically disagree with whatever President Bush decides?
2004-09-29 07:10:37 AM  
Just about any topic turns into a political flamewar these days.

/nah, it's always been like that.
2004-09-29 07:20:41 AM  
Liberals suck.
2004-09-29 07:20:43 AM  
20 years isn't that bad for him.
2004-09-29 07:21:15 AM  
WSUCannuk. Does this mean you want to declare war with North Korea? In all the ramblings on this page a lot of you seem to be complaining that we aren't at war with them. I just want to make sure I'm right in my assumption here.
2004-09-29 07:29:31 AM  

The kids that had a shooting gallery at Columbine were misguided children, but it doesn't mean they aren't responsible for their own actions and that if they hadn't taken their lives, they would life prison sentances.

So many Americans refuse to ever admit that, like it or not, your lot in life is your responsiblity. Its easy to blame TV, society, sue your parents, or blame 'W', but in the end you have to answer to yourself. If you join a foreign army that has terrorist tendancies, you have to face the consequences. If he was a a man of true conviction, misguided or not, he would have made a grand stand at his place of capture.
2004-09-29 07:33:06 AM  
Bush can't allow him out of prison. Lindh, having consorted with the Taliban and al Qaeda, is fully aware of the details of Bush's conspiracy to permit the attacks of 9/11 in order to begin the process of implementation of the plans of the "Project for a New American Century", Peak Oil, Halliburton, Enron, and the well known loose affiliation of millionaires, billionaires and babies.

2004-09-29 07:44:39 AM  
Personally I think this guy should be let go, as he isn't really a traitor in the normal sense of the word. This isn't a guy who was passing over intel to the other side, as he worked for the US military. This is a guy who thought the other side was the just side, and left the US. Yes, he was still an American citizen, but that doesnt make him a traitor. If the US went to war with Canada, does every former US citizen get thrown in jail after the war is over for being a traitor?
2004-09-29 07:53:02 AM  
From the Article:

'"The Taliban was a brutal regime that harbored and assisted Al Qaeda," Corallo said. "It should be pointed out we are currently engaged in a global war on terrorism against Al Qaeda and remnants of the Taliban."'

That seems a little harsh doesn't it? I mean the US government used to support the Taliban AND Al Qaeda in their fight against the Soviets. Also, just before 9-11 the US government still liked the Taliban enough to allow US corporations to do business with them in planning to build a trans-Afghan oil pipeline. It seems a little two-faced that they'd hold this guy's ties to the Taliban against him.
2004-09-29 07:58:15 AM  
Everybody seems to ignore the fact that the US bribed the Taliban with $43 million in May, 2001 for their good work in eradicating the heroin poppy crop. Also to grease the wheels for the proposed oil pipeline.
2004-09-29 07:59:02 AM  
"He is not a criminal, he is one of Bush's many scapegoats."

Yikes man. Do you realize who he was fighting for, and for what? The Taliban, and to preserve thier rule in Afghanistan.

Now, who were the U.S. Soldiers fighing for, and for what?

How is he NOT a traitor to the U.S.?
2004-09-29 07:59:26 AM  
Treason. Off with his head.
2004-09-29 08:02:11 AM  

"If he was a a man of true conviction, misguided or not, he would have made a grand stand at his place of capture."

I can't remember the exact details, but I believe the situation of his capture was something like this.

He and some other Taliban fighters were holed up in a prison. They had no food supply, or potable water, and the area they were found in was flooding. He had hypothermia and could barely be considered conscious.

My suspicion is that if anyone's arrest involves finding them and putting their frail body on a stretcher, just saying "Hello" to your captors would be a grand last stand.
2004-09-29 08:02:29 AM  
Mercutio74 - We're fighting AGAINST them now. Try to keep up.

Maybe you missed 9-11?
2004-09-29 08:03:07 AM  
WHAT? Yes, we had a business deal with them. Nothing wrong with that. And then 9/11 happened. All bets were off. We were a nation mourning as one right after that, and the battle lines were drawn. At that point, they were the enemy and all bets were off. Anyone who sympathized with them at that point was considered an enemy. It's just like any other war that has ever happened. Why is it so hard to understand? You can be allies with someone until they f*ck you, and then all bets are off - you choose what side you're on and bask in the glory, or suffer the consequences.
2004-09-29 08:03:59 AM  
My apologies for the repeated phrase "all bets were off". It just fit.

/need coffee...
2004-09-29 08:05:43 AM  

Then why are we still in business with the Saudis seeing how 15 of the hijackers were Saudi nationals?
2004-09-29 08:06:07 AM  
We should have flipped him and turned him into a spy. He was already deep into that scary fundie world.
2004-09-29 08:07:27 AM  
The president commuted the sentence of Bobby Mac Berry, of Burlington, N.C., who had been sentenced to nine years in prison in 1997 for marijuana and money laundering convictions.

Bush also commuted the sentence of Geraldine Gordon, convicted in Las Vegas of a drug distribution charge in 1989 and sentenced to 20 years in prison. Gordon's release was effective Sept. 20.

Bobby Mac was released literally three months before he was due to be released. Gordon spent 15 of his 20 years in prison before the Bush pardon. Gee...better late than never huh, Mr. Bush?

(Last months Playboy had more information, in the Playboy Forum Q&A section.)
2004-09-29 08:10:26 AM  

But you can't have it both ways. The philosophy of the Taliban pre-9/11 is precisely the philosophy that they had during and after 9/11. The stance of people who are in favour of the war on terror and the war on Iraq and the war on Afghanistan is that these things are evil and should be done away with. Well guess what, your government doesn't care about evil. It cares about profit and public perception (and only public perception as far as it gets them re-elected, beyond that, who cares).

So if you count Afghanistan as an ally prior to 9/11, I don't know why you would want your country fraternizing with such hateful and evil elements. I mean, the basic humam/civil rights policies of your two countries didn't even begin to match. How on earth could the US think that doing business with a country that, among other things, treats women as if they were posessions? It doesn't wash.

And, are all bets really off? If you can't publicly do business with a government, what's the standard US foreign policy solution? That's right, change the government you're dealing with. It's not like this is the first time it's happened.

It's time to wake up... your government does not deal in terms of "good" and "evil" like human beings do. Sure, they'll talk to you in those terms to sway public opinion, but they have a different agenda all together.
2004-09-29 08:11:15 AM  
Well, maybe linhd didnt "know" the Taliban was going to fight America, but surly after several years there, he helped them commit atrocities agains the people of afganistan. These were the asshats who killed and oppressed woman and anyone with an education. Just when does a good little kid who grew up on the west coast not figure out these are bad people?
2004-09-29 08:14:52 AM  
Mr. Clarence Butterworth

First of all, the Saudis are adament about their stance against terrorism. I believe them because we drown them in our money year after year. They don't want anything to happen to their best customers. Now, the reason why we are their best customers is the fault of you and me. We drive cars. We use oil. Their is no money going into research and especially the implementation of other fuels. It's not Bush's fault that we are in the Saudi's pockets so deep. It's America's fault. Everyone. Figure out an alternative fuel source that we can manufacture on our own, and we cut the Saudis loose. I've always wondered, how would they react to that if it were to happen?
2004-09-29 08:16:34 AM  
[image from too old to be available]
2004-09-29 08:17:25 AM  

So you're saying that the US had NO idea prior to 9/11 that the Taliban was not only hosting high ranking elements of Al Qaeda?

It's almost like you're implying that the Taliban turned evil just as the first plane struck the the towers.

That's not the case. The US fully knew who and what they were dealing with but they were ok with it the whole time. So if you're going to tell me that it was alright to have ties with them pre 9/11, you can't tell me that the US toppled the regime because it was evil and repressive. It was toppled because it caused too much of a stir.
2004-09-29 08:22:00 AM  

Okay - ally was too strong of a word. I didn't mean to refer to the Taliban as an "ally" prior to 9/11. We were working with them to achieve certain goals regarding our own interests over there. They were cooperating and things worked - for a while. Hindsight is always 20-20, and it's easy to say at this point that we were foolish. We failed to see the fox in the chicken coop as it were, and we paid dearly for it. Let's not forget though, that WE were attacked, and that we were on the defensive. It was clear where the battle lines were drawn after 9/11. Anyone who chose to side against America at that point, must have really hated America.
2004-09-29 08:26:43 AM  

Mr. Clarence Butterworth

First of all, the Saudis are adament about their stance against terrorism. I believe them because we drown them in our money year after year. They don't want anything to happen to their best customers.

But their best customers now, are China, which has recently outpaced us in oil and petroleum product consumption.
2004-09-29 08:32:24 AM  

It's actually a little more complicated than that. When I found out out 9-11, I was at work (and at the time there were 3 Americans in my department). I actually had to go to the washroom as I felt I would throw up.

I don't hate America. There are quite a few Americans who I consider to be among my favourite people. What I do hate is how US foreign policy is run and managed. 9/11 is a clear example of the failings of US foreign policy. Your leaders will tell you that the US was attacked by "freedom hating" terroists. If it was only about freedom, why is the Netherlands never attacked by these people? It's a pretty free place... some would say freer than the US. Ok, so it's because they're "jealous of the US standard of living". That doesn't work either as other nations like Luxembourg aren't under constant threat. So what is it that makes the US such a target for these groups?

It's that these groups feel wronged in some way by the US government. And, the logical conclusion in the minds of the extremists is that, since the US is a democracy, the citizens of the US must support the government's actions. Unfortunately the effects of over 50 years of very aggressive foreign policy cannot be reversed quickly... and it certainly can't be reversed by invading every "rogue" nation that rears it's ugly head.

It's a tough problem, and one that's going to be tough to get out of. However, something fundamental has to change in the US government before this bad situation gets worse.
2004-09-29 08:38:18 AM  
It goes back to the Reagan foreign policy. This idea of trying to bridge the gap between the Jews and the Muslims. Not necessarily aiding either faction in their fight against each other, but trying to simultaneously use both resources for our interests and put money into both of their economies. Now Israel is the underdog - and we have a history of supporting the underdog. They are a tiny nation completely surrounded by hostile nations hell-bent on their extermination. We are the boy scouts of the world - we can't let that happen. Muslims don't hate us simply because we don't side with them and their fight against Israel, they hate us because we stand in the way of their goal to obliterate them. We thought that we were dealing with rational people who could see that all we want is to be the peacemakers and try to help out the middle eastern economy as a whole. But they are so resolved in their fight against Israel that we have become more engulfed in the security of Israel. We didn't allow a sick faction to wipe the Jews off of the planet when Hitler was around, and we can't allow it now. We aren't the bad guys - don't forget that.
2004-09-29 08:39:04 AM  
Bush heard "Johnny Walker" and complied immediately.
2004-09-29 08:47:37 AM
2004-09-29 08:49:40 AM  
All rhetoric aside, consider this:

Johnny Taliban PLEADED THE SENTENCE HE'S SERVING. He and his lawyers are the ones who agreed to a 20 year sentence in lieu of being put on trial under penalty of death. That sentence was a no-parole deal.

I don't now about you, but I've always had to live up to contracts I've signed.
2004-09-29 08:51:52 AM  

I think you need to do better than "The US foreign policy is wrong because terrorist groups feel wronged."

You haven't stated what the US is doing that makes the terrorists feel wronged. It's like if some guy walks up to three guys and punches one of them in the face. I think that would be wrong. Apparently you would say "Since he didn't punch the other two in the face, the guy who got hit must have done something to deserve it."
2004-09-29 08:53:06 AM  
"You want us to what?"

[image from too old to be available]

Heh heh...whew! That was a good one!"
2004-09-29 08:56:10 AM  
As was stated before, it is quite ironic how the U.S. gave $43 million to Taliban in May, 2001. Maybe G.W. should be imprisoned as a traitor?
2004-09-29 08:56:39 AM  

I agree with a lot of what you say, but I think there's still a basic element that I disagree with. Americans do love an underdog, it's true. However, the American government doesn't care. The US/Israel alliance, such as it was, wasn't about fighting for the existence of the Israeli state, it was about having a idealogically similar country that they could use for a base of operations in the Middle East. You'll notice now that there's a US presence in the Middle East in Arab nations, Israel is talked about much less in terms of support. Personally, I think this is because the current powers that be have always seen Iraq as a potentially good base of operations. It has a seat on OPEC. It is by far the most secular Arabic nation in the area. Also, it has a fair bit of modern infrastructure (or it did... I'm not sure how well the infrastructure's holding up right now). It seems like the perfect choice, actually. Unfortunately for the US, the enactment of this reshuffling didn't really go that well.

And I'm not going to get into an argument about Hitler, but don't forget a lot of industrialists in the states were big supporters of his. Including Prescott Bush (dubya's grand-pappy) and Ford (of Ford Motor Company fame). In order to even get enough power brokers behind him into the war, there's stong evidence to suggest that Roosevelt manipulated intelligence to all the Pearl Habour raid to be a rout, almost ensuring enough outcry to get the US involved. Be that as it may, if the Japanese hadn't attacked, the US might never have joined in the fight against the Axis powers. In any case, this just supports my basic theory. The average US citizen is a good, decent person. It's the government and moneyed ruling class that is questionable.
2004-09-29 09:04:03 AM  

Well, giving military support to Israel for one. Having a public stance that's inherently pro-Israel (which I admit is changing a bit, the US is starting to distance itself). Funding playing both sides of the Iran-Iraq conflict was also a big PR no-no. Invading Iraq the first time. Trying to interfere in the balance of power in the region.

And that's only the stuff that came to my mind in the last few minutes, and this is only stuff that was major news.

In any event: Here's an article I found... I'm not sure of the website's political bent, but it is footnoted so make us of the facts at your leisure.
2004-09-29 09:04:15 AM  
The dude's biggest character flaw is being a naive impressionable idiot.

Grew up in a well-to-do Irish Catholic household with no apparent direction from his parents.

Reads Malcolm X as a teen, (and teens know everything, so he believed all the bullshiat X was preaching), and decides he understands the world all of a sudden.

Converts to a religion that is based on the writings of a murdering psychotic pedephile, moves to the middle east, and asks his dad for a couple of grand to buy pot to smoke while he's online in internet coffee shops.

Dude's got the mind of a 6 year old.

Leave him in the clink.
2004-09-29 09:07:16 AM  
...and there was such a nice discussion going too.
2004-09-29 09:07:29 AM  
Why did this guy receive different treatment than the other "enemy combatants" in the first place? He was quickly brought back to the States and given a trial while the others were left to rot in Cuba without trial. It's this kind of uneven exercise of justice that gives the militant muslims of the world - who quite frankly have a chip on their shoulder to begin with - reason to see the war on terror as a war against Islam.
2004-09-29 09:24:06 AM  
I agree with Lindh!!!

This is totally unfair!!!

Hamdi should be in jail too!!!

Libs/terrorists sure have a weird way of looking at things.
2004-09-29 09:26:50 AM  

2004-09-29 09:35:26 AM  

Cons/Nazis do too.
2004-09-29 09:40:04 AM  

I wonder if after 200+ years, the British army can claim victory over the Irish?

Try 800 years.

And since the Irish didn't give up for those 800 years, and eventually kicked the British the eff out of the majority of their country, and are still trying to kick the British the eff out of the rest of it, I'd say no, the British can't claim "victory" quite yet.
2004-09-29 09:42:41 AM  
Chew harder, Lindh, because that's tough shiat!
Displayed 50 of 233 comments

Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Newest | Show all

This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking

On Twitter

Top Commented
Javascript is required to view headlines in widget.
  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.