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.

(Reuters)   Bush Administration mulling lifetime detentions for terror suspects--even those without enough evidence to bring charges against. In related story, the Administration announced its energy plan: harness spinning corpses of Founding Fathers   (reuters.com ) divider line
    More: Asinine  
•       •       •

12223 clicks; posted to Main » on 02 Jan 2005 at 6:35 AM (11 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



1314 Comments   (+0 »)
   

Archived thread

First | « | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | » | Last | Show all
 
2005-01-02 01:22:20 PM  
DasWiggy

Joelawyer, nah, just release them in rural Georgia, and remove all police presence/protection for 24 hours.

Woooooo! No charges, no trial, indefinite detention, summary execution, AND mob vigilante justice!

You, sir, are a True American Hero.
 
2005-01-02 01:23:00 PM  
Here is a touching story about released detainees.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A52670-2004Oct21?language=pri​nter

They were released and ater captured or killed while fighting US troops.
 
2005-01-02 01:24:05 PM  
DasWiggy said, "But the facts suggest otherwise. If you're toting a machinegun and shooting at "friendlies", you shouldn't just be released."

If you're shooting at friendlies, and get captured, then aren't you a prisoner of war?
 
2005-01-02 01:24:43 PM  

It's all a matter of context. Most people in the US DOC system claim that they're innocent. But the facts suggest otherwise. If you're toting a machinegun and shooting at "friendlies", you shouldn't just be released.


False Dicockomy!

For the last time (unlikely), we wouldn't be RELEASING them. We would be TRYING them. Those that were PROVEN guilty would be locked up, those that weren't would be released. This is the basis on which the justice system ones. Why does it not apply here?

And don't say "because they were shooting us in Afghanistan, but we can't prove it". Shooting at someone invading your country is not a crime, no matter what your government happened to be doing. If captured, it makes you a POW, and now the war is over, either send them home or convict them of something else.
 
2005-01-02 01:24:48 PM  
www.aclu.org
 
2005-01-02 01:25:33 PM  
DasWiggy

"What if your daughter, mother, or grandmother was detained for protesting against Bush? Would you feel differently?"

If they were foreign nationals "protesting against Bush" with machineguns, I'd not feel one whit differently.


Nor, of course, if they were foreign nationals accused of "protesting against Bush" with machineguns by other foreign nationals who were paid to accuse them of such.
 
2005-01-02 01:27:24 PM  
But what do they care...If they aren't Americans, tell them to go to hell - this is the attitude of most posters here..Do you really think any kind of a sensible response would change their mind?
 
BHK
2005-01-02 01:27:29 PM  
The prisons would be operated by those countries, but the State Department, where this idea originated, would ask them to abide by recognized human rights standards and would monitor compliance, a senior administration official was quoted as saying.

Right. They are going to abide by human rights standards and take care of the prisoners when there are so many other pressing concerns and graft to be had. This won't cause and revolts, riots or bloodshed -not at all.
 
2005-01-02 01:28:35 PM  
Alexandra

Isn't there something in Patriot Act 2 where they can STRIP YOU OF YOUR U.S. CITIZENSHIP for doing something?

I'm not sure about that, but there have been cases of American citizens being held indefinitely without charges or trial, and who were eventually released under the condition that they renounce their American citizenship.

Where the logic in that is, I don't know.
 
2005-01-02 01:29:30 PM  
Thank you all Red States for re-electing this asshat. hallelujah. praise the lord indeed.


Whateer happened to jus tloving your fellow man?
 
2005-01-02 01:29:55 PM  
Released Detainees Rejoining The Fight

By John Mintz
Washington Post Staff Writer
Friday, October 22, 2004; Page A01

At least 10 detainees released from the Guantanamo Bay prison after U.S. officials concluded they posed little threat have been recaptured or killed fighting U.S. or coalition forces in Pakistan and Afghanistan, according to Pentagon officials.

One of the repatriated prisoners is still at large after taking leadership of a militant faction in Pakistan and aligning himself with al Qaeda, Pakistani officials said. In telephone calls to Pakistani reporters, he has bragged that he tricked his U.S. interrogators into believing he was someone else.
 
2005-01-02 01:30:00 PM  
No, they are not 'Americans' but so what?
They are HUMAN BEINGS! Just like me and you.
Well, more like you, fundy lunatics.
 
BHK
2005-01-02 01:30:56 PM  
I love those who quote Churchill - the man who created the modern Iraq and who advocated the use of poison gas against women and children to subdue the populace.

"I do not understand this squeamishness about the use of gas...I am strongly in favor of using poisoned gas agains the uncivilized tribes."
"Gas is a more merciful weapon than high explosives and compels an enemy to accept a decision with less loss of life than any other agency of war. The moral effect is also very great. There can be no conceivable reason why it should not be resorted to."
- Winston Churchill
 
2005-01-02 01:31:03 PM  
"If you're shooting at friendlies, and get captured, then aren't you a prisoner of war?"

Not even close. There are very set rules for who constitutes a POW, the kind of organization they must belong to, the kind of conduct they must engage in, and a variety of other things.
 
2005-01-02 01:32:27 PM  
"Whateer happened to jus tloving your fellow man?" (sic)

That went out the window when our "fellow man" started trying to kill us.
 
2005-01-02 01:32:34 PM  
DasWiggy You are comparing apples to oranges with WWII prisoners of war and Guantanamo detainees. WWII POWs were taken in accordance with the geneva conventions by the allies and repatriated at the end of hostilities. The detainees in Guantanamo have been classified not as POWs but as unlawful combatants by the Bush Administration.

This is a classification with precedent from WWII used to described saboteurs on US soil. There is on very important difference though between these unlawful combatants and the ones caught in WWII. The WWII saboteurs were given speedy trials by military tribunal, all of their hearings were finished within a month of their capture.

So now the Bush Administration is keeping these guys locked up without trial for reasons I can still not comprehend. They have no information of use anymore... any opperational knowledge any of them might have had is already too old to be used. So give them their tribunals and move on with it. But the Bush administration does not want to risk the possibility of the tribunal finding even one of them wrongly imprisoned, if that happens it would throw a great big wrench into the justification for their present and future actions. So these guys will stay without trial for the fear that one of them may be innocent.
 
2005-01-02 01:33:26 PM  
2005-01-02 07:51:23 AM 0lorin
Lets play BUSH OR HITLER
....."I believe that I am acting in accordance with the will of the Almighty Creator,"

Well, since the other quote is from Hitler, I'm gonna guess this one is from Bush. Could you provide a reference for this, however? Where did you find it?
 
2005-01-02 01:34:09 PM  
"Shooting at someone invading your country is not a crime, no matter what your government happened to be doing. If captured, it makes you a POW, and now the war is over, either send them home or convict them of something else."

I suggest you read the various definitions of what a POW is. Ignorance is not a virtue.
 
2005-01-02 01:34:43 PM  
Still funny: Those most scared of terror in America are those who weren't anywhere near any of the IX/XI attacks.

Wussies.
 
2005-01-02 01:36:13 PM  
Released Detainees Rejoining The Fight


RE-joined or joined AFTER being detained with little or no cause. If I were imprisoned for years for being in the wrong place at the wrong time, I'd be more than just a little bent.

I can't say one way or the other what the case is for these particular former detainees. Just sayin' that detaining people w/o trials is not exactly a good way to win hearts and minds. Because we do have to win hearts and minds to have any chance for success in this "war on terror".
 
2005-01-02 01:36:30 PM  
re: 'Lets play BUSH OR HITLER'

Hehe, good idea for a board game. It has no purpose and in the end, everyone loses. The existential game of life.

"What luck for rulers that men cannot think" - ?
 
2005-01-02 01:36:33 PM  
"So now the Bush Administration is keeping these guys locked up without trial for reasons I can still not comprehend. They have no information of use anymore... any opperational knowledge any of them might have had is already too old to be used."

We're not holding them for intellegence purposes. We're holding them so we don't have to deal with them shooting at us once they're released.

It's like the old saw about capital punishment...it may not prevent crime in a general sense, but the person executed is 100% guaranteed to never recidivate.
 
2005-01-02 01:36:47 PM  
Code_Archeologist said, "So now the Bush Administration is keeping these guys locked up without trial for reasons I can still not comprehend."

You can't comprehend them because you haven't accepted the fact that the Bush regime is evil incarnate. You're clinging to the hope that they're just misguided.
 
2005-01-02 01:37:27 PM  
AnonymousGuy:

Lets play BUSH OR HITLER
....."I believe that I am acting in accordance with the will of the Almighty Creator,"

Well, since the other quote is from Hitler, I'm gonna guess this one is from Bush. Could you provide a reference for this, however? Where did you find it?


Nope, that'shiatler.
 
2005-01-02 01:37:52 PM  
"RE-joined or joined AFTER being detained with little or no cause. If I were imprisoned for years for being in the wrong place at the wrong time, I'd be more than just a little bent."

So, you're basically admitting that all of the people held would be highly likely to take up arms against the US if released, yes?

Isn't that the perfect reason to keep them where they are?
 
2005-01-02 01:38:58 PM  
Still funny: Those most scared of terror in America are those who weren't anywhere near any of the IX/XI attacks.

Wussies.


Also funny. Those areas directly affected (NY, PA, DC) voted against bush.
 
2005-01-02 01:39:37 PM  
DasWiggy

We're not holding them for intellegence purposes. We're holding them so we don't have to deal with them shooting at us once they're released.

So if you're relative was held without reason you would just fold up and submit? Are you really that big of a pussy?
 
2005-01-02 01:39:58 PM  
"If you're shooting at friendlies, and get captured, then aren't you a prisoner of war?"

Apparently once we replace the government in a country, (or decide that we have), anybody that fights for the old one is no longer defending the old government/country. They are insurgents.

I've always been of the opinion that "war crime" is kind of an oxymoron...once things go that far everybody involved is covered in evil. Ok, so they're insurgents/enemy combatants/evildoers/spawn of Joan Rivers. Whatever.

But why do they want to keep these caged Ayrabs forever? What possible use are they, except to make an enduring joke of our constitution and bill of rights? Why not quietly drown the lot if they don't want to let em go?

Who's advising Bush...Osama? Jeebus Keripes...
 
2005-01-02 01:40:02 PM  
Code_Archeologist:

So these guys will stay without trial for the fear that one of them may be innocent.

200 men, each with extended families back home who love and miss them. 200 men who even under the most kangaroo court system in their home countries would at least have a chance to have their side of the case heard.

What's that... adding up brothers, sisters, wives, sons, daughters, cousins, uncles, aunts... 2000? 3000? More?

All angry about the treatment of their love ones.

I'm sure that when the next major terrorist act hits, we'll be told again that they hate us because of our freedom...
 
2005-01-02 01:40:22 PM  
flypusher, the Pentagon is actually located in Virginia, which went for Bush by a large margin.
 
2005-01-02 01:41:51 PM  
It scares me that most posters in this thread are the 'smart' ones who voted for Kerry. Most don't know what a POW is. I can find 'unnamed sources at City Hall' right now, but they are mostly 8 year olds skating at the town skating rink.
 
2005-01-02 01:42:06 PM  
D'oh!

Thanks, Sloth_DC
 
2005-01-02 01:42:25 PM  
DasWiggy is STILL a farking xenophobe.

/that got me banninated yesterday.
 
2005-01-02 01:42:43 PM  
"So if you're relative was held without reason you would just fold up and submit? Are you really that big of a pussy?"

You're making a fallacious assumption that the families of these scumbags loved the US in the first place.

Since they already hate us, why should we release their kin? Shouldn't we instead be hunting down and killing their families too?
 
2005-01-02 01:43:03 PM  
flypusher713: Also funny. Those areas directly affected (NY, PA, DC) voted against bush.

Just a note: DC wasn't directly affected, but VA was, and it voted for Bush. You did realize the Pentagon isn't in DC, right?
 
2005-01-02 01:43:42 PM  
So, you're basically admitting that all of the people held would be highly likely to take up arms against the US if released, yes?

Ah, the perfect self-fullfilling prophecy. Nice circular logic.

Isn't that the perfect reason to keep them where they are?

How about we move these cases in a timely manner and not create the possibilty of such a problem? And don't forget these people have realtives, lots of relatives, who don't take kindly to such detentions.
 
2005-01-02 01:44:41 PM  
wyohome said, "It scares me that most posters in this thread are the 'smart' ones who voted for Kerry. Most don't know what a POW is. I can find 'unnamed sources at City Hall' right now, but they are mostly 8 year olds skating at the town skating rink."

I'm sorry, could you please make a point?
 
2005-01-02 01:45:01 PM  
DasWiggy:

You're making a fallacious assumption that the families of these scumbags loved the US in the first place.

Since they already hate us, why should we release their kin? Shouldn't we instead be hunting down and killing their families too?


Here's a tip: They don't live here. They don't have any obligation to love us.
 
2005-01-02 01:45:04 PM  
You did realize the Pentagon isn't in DC, right?


Actually I didn't. My bad.
 
2005-01-02 01:46:20 PM  
"And don't forget these people have realtives, lots of relatives, who don't take kindly to such detentions."

That gives us a pretty good list of who to capture of kill next, doesn't it?
 
2005-01-02 01:46:25 PM  
wyohome [TotalFark]

It scares me that most posters in this thread are the 'smart' ones who voted for Kerry. Most don't know what a POW is. I can find 'unnamed sources at City Hall' right now, but they are mostly 8 year olds skating at the town skating rink.

It scares me that people like you haven't bothered to follow the administration's actions in guantanamo that pretty much verify this unnamed source.
 
2005-01-02 01:46:44 PM  
DasWiggy said, "Shouldn't we instead be hunting down and killing their families too?"

Shouldn't you be dissecting small woodland creatures and bathing in their entrails?
 
2005-01-02 01:47:25 PM  
Flypusher sez: "Actually I didn't. My bad."

Education is a wonderful thing. You might try more of it sometime.
 
2005-01-02 01:47:39 PM  
DasWiggy

"So if you're relative was held without reason you would just fold up and submit? Are you really that big of a pussy?"

You're making a fallacious assumption that the families of these scumbags loved the US in the first place.

Since they already hate us, why should we release their kin? Shouldn't we instead be hunting down and killing their families too?



TROLL! Dammit, got me. Nice.
 
2005-01-02 01:48:05 PM  
You're making a fallacious assumption that the families of these scumbags loved the US in the first place.

Since they already hate us, why should we release their kin? Shouldn't we instead be hunting down and killing their families too?


Woah, it's great when conservatives reductio ad absurdam their own posts. At this rate Fark liberals will be obsolete by 2010, around the time they all get thrown into disused oil rigs (see the above article on what happened to RNC protestors).
 
2005-01-02 01:48:32 PM  
DasWiggy

You're making a fallacious assumption that the families of these scumbags loved the US in the first place.

You're making a fallacious assumption that these people are scumbags.
 
2005-01-02 01:48:38 PM  
funny headline. off to read the article.
 
2005-01-02 01:49:00 PM  
DasWiggy's Bio
I'm a fat, loud, obnoxious, 36 year old lazy bastard. I sue people for fun. I'm a retired class 3 arms dealer, a retired realtor, ex-LE, and a J.D.

I have two personal mottos: "I am heavily armed, easily bored, and off my medication" and "Never underestimate the danger posed by a bored, unemployed, psychotic Juris Doctor."

My hobbies are shooting machineguns and frightening cops.

Oh, and BTW, I am indeed BACK on my medication...most of the time.
 
2005-01-02 01:49:09 PM  
**So, you're basically admitting that all of the people held would be highly likely to take up arms against the US if released, yes?**

What the hell..Is circular logic the only thing going on here...yeah let's lock up anyone who we "suspect" without any evidence, and keep them for a long time, then use the reason that if they are released they "might" attack us for the injustice done to them, so that we should lock them up forver..

What the fark???? Insanity? Or stupidity?? or both??
 
2005-01-02 01:49:33 PM  
DasWiggy,

It's not based upon NO evidence, it's based upon evidence that wouldn't get a conviction in an adversarial process under the UCMJ.

Then maybe we shouldn't even be arguing. Did you RTFA? They're talking about holding people with NO evidence. So I'll ask again.
 
Displayed 50 of 1314 comments

First | « | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | » | Last | Show all



This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter






In Other Media


  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.

Report