I don't mind another topic being opened about Guantanamo, as long as anyone involved can keep his or her temper in check and make a reasonable attempt at a debate. It was, after all, personal attacks that led me to close the original topic.
It is rather burdensome, though, to refer readers to the closed topic and to assume familiarity with it, since it became quite large before it was closed.
Asa, I think it would be good, as a convenience to the readers, to restate or summarize your position from the original thread. Perhaps you might add any other reflections or modifications that you have made in the meantime, i.e. what made you further convinced or led you to change your mind, and relate the whole thing a little more clearly to the sources you are now citing. How do you see this new thread as an update? (You do offer a rather spare commentary, which restraint I interpret as being a kind of summons for others to offer their views, but I think you might get a better or a fuller response if you expand a little more on your own views.)
If you'd like to refer to your sources or arguments from the previous thread, please, as a further convenience, also give the page of the thread where it can be found.
Andrew, let the man talk for once without pouncing on him. Not that pouncing isn't a valid debating skill, just that in the past it hasn't succeeded in developing the thread's argument, at least between you and him. And also not that you haven't provided valid critique through your pouncing, but it does often strike the wrong tone--what I would call overly triumphalistic: "Aha! here's the flaw that brings the whole structure down!". Perhaps he might respond better if you left out the aha! and said more simply, "Here's the problem with what you're saying". I'm not asking you to overhaul your whole style--I see the value of it--, just mute it a little.
I'll be removing presently all of the silly asides and arguments over arguments. Then we can get this started again properly.
12 June 2006. Three detainees committed suicide. The base commander described their deaths as acts of war! This comment prompted me to start the thread.
Two and a half years ago I said that enough was enough. Guantanamo should close. Despite no evidence the detainees were being held with no prospect of trial.
On page three of the original topic: “Amnesty International has documented numerous allegations of torture and ill-treatment at the detention center at the U.S. navel base on Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, and elsewhere. At Guantanamo, detainees have alleged to have been subjected to a number of forms of psychological and physical torture including but not limited to prolonged sleep deprivation, stress positions, starvation, and severe beatings.
Alleged detention and interrogation practices by the U.S. Government documented by Amnesty International: some appear to have been tailored to specific cultural or religious sensitivities of the detainees, thereby introducing a discriminatory element to the abuse. Techniques are often used in combination. Neither gender nor age has offered protection. Children, the elderly, women and men are reported to have been among the subjects of torture or ill-treatment. This list does not claim to be exhaustive. 1. Abduction 2. Barbed wire, forced to walk barefoot on 3. Blindfolding 4. "Burking" – hand over detainee's mouth/nose to prevent breathing 5. Cell extraction, brutal/punitive use of 6. Chemical/pepper spray, misuse of 7. Cigarette burns 8. Claustrophia-inducing techniques, e.g. tied headfirst in sleeping bag, shut in lockers 9. Death threats 10. Dietary manipulation 11. Dogs used to threaten and intimidate 12. Dousing in cold water 13. Electric shocks, threats of electric shocks 14. Exposure to weather and temperature extremes, especially via air-conditioning 15. Flags, wrapped in Israeli or US flags during or prior to interrogation 16. Food and water deprivation 17. Forced shaving, i.e. of head, body or facial hair 18. Forcible injections, including with unidentified substances 19. Ground, forced to lie on bare ground while agents stand on back or back of legs 20. Hooding 21. Hostage-taking, i.e. individuals detained to force surrender of relatives 22. Humiliation, e.g. forced crawling, forced to make animal noises, being urinated upon. 23. Immersion in water to induce perception of drowning 24. Incommunicado detention 25. Induced perception of suffocation or asphyxiation 26. Light deprivation 27. Loud music, noise, yelling 28. Mock execution 29. Photography and videoing as humiliation."
Despite this America carried on.
Lawyers representing the detainees were stumped because trial dates were never set.
Nearly seven years and still no prospect of trials.
Listening to the U.S. prosecutor who is trying to blow the whistle has brought back to mind the plight of the detainees. I’m sorry to say that the two and a half years for me has passed quickly compared to the detainees who are still being tortured, who have no idea what the future holds and whose gaolers have no evidence to take to trial.
"Amnesty International has documented numerous allegations of torture and ill-treatment" Alleged detention and interrogation practices by the U.S. Government ...
Allegations? Alleged?? Sorry, a court of law doesn't do alleged! And so we're back where we started, and no-one seems to care, nor offer any new "evidence" or reasons for these jolly folk being released, either by Bush's closing down Guantanamo (he did listen to you, Asa, I know he did!) or by your storming the place, driven by your ovbious and sincere detestation of such inhumanity.
"Three detainees committed suicide. The base commander described their deaths as acts of war!"
And? These Islamic (alleged!) lunatics believe that, in Islam, they will go to heaven, get to knock off a few virgins (clean underwear only), and therefore will have a jolly good time of it all. Seems to me that, with such promises, they were, in fact, brave to have stayed alive for as long as they did, when the afterworld's so damn enticing a place to be. How can either suicide bombers or suicide detainees (unable to take any innocent people with 'em) be anything other than self-centered? We could perhaps say that Bush and Condo et al are doing them a favour!
"Nearly seven years and still no prospect of trials."
Does anyone want to inform Asa!!
"Now then, Mr Osamachauffeur, what were those surface to air missiles doing in the car with you (not allegedly), while you were driving Osamamassmurderer here and there, totally ignorant of his policies toward the non-Islamic world?"
"Hair dryers, to prevent that just-unkempt look. Good for the Al Jazeera interviews which often accompany beheadings."
"...has brought back to mind the plight of the detainees. "
Firstly, I can't recall a single instance where you voiced concern for the victims of Islam. Secondly, I couldn't actually care less about these animals, and I suspect that that is the case with many, many millions of other Islamic-targeted-citizens of the world. I doubt, for a single instance, that there is a solitary innocent in the place.
"Two and a half years ago I said that enough was enough. Guantanamo should close. "
But it didn't; therefore, we won!
"Defending the pillars of Saddam's power until the end, embracing the evil that their hatred of America makes them love."
Posts: 1372 | Location: England | Registered: 07-14-02
quote: Allegations? Alleged?? Sorry, a court of law doesn't do alleged! And so we're back where we started, and no-one seems to care, nor offer any new "evidence" or reasons for these jolly folk being released,
It's called contempt of court. (innocent until proven guilty - something which Asa is giving the Guantanamo administrators which the administrators wont give to the prisoners) - one has to use the words 'alleged' before someone is convicted or released.
I doubt anyone is this uneducated or polemical. You're clearly taking the piss, hence no-one will ever take a single thing you say seriously. Take up golf.
"To run away from danger, instead of facing it, is to deny one's faith in man and God, even one's own self. It were better for one to drown oneself than live to declare such bankruptcy of faith." - Mahatma Gandhi, 1946
Posts: 3774 | Location: Disputed Zone | Registered: 01-10-05
"Allegations? Alleged??" You might as well dismiss everything Amnesty has ever said or written. Including: “I am now disabled. I can’t work in the field. I want to be compensated for the injuries. I want to talk to my attackers and be told the truth about why I was beaten. I also want them to be brought to justice.”
“One man was stepping on my head [and] forcing my head on the floor with booted feet. All I could hear were sounds. I just could feel that they were beating me, and the sound of my body. I tried to block the beatings with my hands. My hands were bleeding profusely. The beatings took [about] 30 to 40 minutes.”
[A wide range of detainees] told Amnesty International that they were subjected to beating of the soles of the feet with batons or metal rods. Victims often had problems walking.
“I want my attackers to be brought to justice. That is my desire.”
Also, I'm not an expert in Islamic suicides but I believe that, in order to get to heaven and enjoy all that paradise offers, one must kill one or more of the enemy. I may be wrong.
"We could perhaps say that Bush and Condo et al are doing them a favour!" Maybe you'd like to enjoy the same favour?
"Firstly, I can't recall a single instance where you voiced concern for the victims of Islam." Then your memory is inadequate and goes to show that you will only notice what you want to notice and will dismiss anything that counters your peculiar opinions.
"Secondly, I couldn't actually care less about these animals" No comment needed.
"I doubt, for a single instance, that there is a solitary innocent in the place." So you've made your mind up on what evidence? What makes you believe that they are guilty? Not that your idol Bush tells you, surely? Is it an informed opinion? Have you done your usual painstaking research and spoken to some of the detainees and some of the gaolers? Are you relying on second hand accounts or any accounts for that matter?
I am, before you ask. Amnesty. And I know you will say that the onus of proof is on me because I raised the subject. If I or the detainees' legal representatives are to prove innocence, then take them to trial. Oops, can't do that because there is no evidence of guilt. (Except the confessions that were signed under torture)
And as for Bush saying he wanted to close the place 2 and a half years ago and NOT closing it implies an incompetence that we have witnessed before or a lie, many of which we have witnessed before.
What a pair of silly billies we have here! It's alleged 'cause there are no independent witnesses to prove the crap! Not that I happen to give a frig. "'Scuse me, I was beaten black and blue (as opposed to murdered in cold blood) and had my koran pissed on."
"Any witnesses?"
"My brother Jihadist and fellow mur... Islamist - the one with the surface to air missile in his trouser pocket (are you carrying a surface to air missile in your trousers or are you just pleased to see me?).
"Bit of bad luck you're having."
"Ah!" says Mr. Anne Nasty, "I happened to be passing his cell, just as he was having his big toe tweaked."
"Damn! ok, let them all go; we've bottled it, lads. Let's scarper while the going's good."
So, you two are relying on Amnesty believing sick ****ers, and I'm listening to the US. Hard choice, huh?
"So, what were you doing in the middle of a desert in Afghanistan with a kalashnikov and a scud?"
"Foraging."
"[A wide range of detainees] "? Yeah: A one-legged Islamist; A one-(heavily)armed Islamist; A young Islamist; An old Islamist; A dark-skinned Islamist; A slghtly less-dark-skinned Islamist; An Islamist; An Islamist with a koran; An Islamist whose koran is a bit wet; An Islamist with a face like a bullfrog; An Islamist who once won a beauty contest...
Asa reads one book (The Liberal's Guide to Islamic Apology), and then he's even more inclined to believe Islamists over the US. Long history of both selective reading and believing, our Asa. Yep, it's for Asa to prove otherwise (that these...people belong in Guantanamo). He accuses me of having already made up my mind; yet, guess what? He's already made up his mind (and boh grandstands)! On what evidence? None. He's fond of dropping the fact that he's read a book (yep, he has!) called The Prosecution of George W. Bush for Murder. Has Bush been, or will Bush ever be, charged with murder? No. Why not? Well, duh. The book is about as well regarded as Noddy Does Dallas. But don't make the mistake of dismissing it as a book written by someone with an already made up mind (yes, that's right - like those of Asa, Ananya and boh); once he started to write this nov...book, Bugliosi kept his mind wiiiide open. Bush murdered thousands of US personnel, all by himself, with just a pocket watch and a slightly defective tv remote control.
"Bit of a lack of real evidence to accuse The President of The United States of America here; we may just have to change the title to I Don't Quite Trust This Guy - Like Asa Says - But We Can't Really Make This Charge Stick"
But Oliver Stone borrowed heavily from this nov... book while researching for his latest film, about Bush. Oh, sorry, he didn't happen to mention the 'fact' that Bush was a mass murderer who compares less than favourably with only Hitler, Stalin, Saddam and Mugabwe; didn't actually have a great deal of bad stuff to say about Bush, our Stone didn't. Funny - not like Oli to miss the big stuff. But Stone did happen to mention the fact that Bush once failed to take a library book back before its due date, so he really should have been prosecuted long ago.
Inadequate memory? Hah! "And while we're condemning Bush, let's not forget that old chappy who had his bus pass stolen by that out of work and decidedly unfortunate Muslim. Let us prey on...uh, pray for him... the Muslim, that is."
"Take them to trial," says Asa. One down, lots to go. Lots back home, too - plotting away, claiming benefits and continuing to live their old lives, as illegal immigrants, in the lands they despise so much. The means - a nice and easy, sort of decadent and comfy, lifestyle - justifying the barbaric ends they bring to others who don't actually believe that a host of dirty women - or men - awaits them in paradise, just as long as they wear clean and multiple pairs of underthingies. Bush said he wanted to close Guantanamo, just to get you off his back, Asa. Then laughed while changing his mind, huh?
"Also, I'm not an expert in Islamic suicides but I believe that, in order to get to heaven and enjoy all that paradise offers, one must kill one or more of the enemy"
Assuredly they will enjoy themselves.
Oh, boh? I'll take up golf when you have anything to say about the actual subject, rather than just dropping in to let us know about your news desk.
"Defending the pillars of Saddam's power until the end, embracing the evil that their hatred of America makes them love."
Posts: 1372 | Location: England | Registered: 07-14-02
quote: Allegations? Alleged?? Sorry, a court of law doesn't do alleged! And so we're back where we started, and no-one seems to care, nor offer any new "evidence" or reasons for these jolly folk being released,
It's called contempt of court. (innocent until proven guilty - something which Asa is giving the Guantanamo administrators which the administrators wont give to the prisoners) - one has to use the words 'alleged' before someone is convicted or released.
I doubt anyone is this uneducated or polemical. You're clearly taking the piss, hence no-one will ever take a single thing you say seriously. Take up golf.
That isn't the definition of contempt of court, boh??
Anyway, part of your considerations regarding these 'alledged allegations' should comprise the question what if the Guantanamo staff aren't guilty and the Islamists were beating up the incidences to cause the outrage that would free them? One of the main difficulties facing the US is whether any prosecution could succeed on US soil considering the detention measures taken to deal with the unusual circumstances the world found itself in due to 9/11. Are we prepared to have Islamist fanatics walking around free as happens via technicalities.
We've developed laws around humans based on certain givens. We've all observed the incomprehensible inhumanity of Islamist fanatics like the Bali bombers right up to their deaths. With the Islamic fanatics, there is a need to start developing new ways of deactivating what are basically non-human death machines. It's a long hard process.
Posts: 3724 | Location: Brisbane, Australia | Registered: 07-26-02
Look what Asa's hero, Bugliosi, said about the trial of Orange-Juice Simpson. The guy's now where he belonged a long time ago. Some nifty footwork allowed him to laugh in the faces of the families of the murdered couple, and the criminal justice system, for years. He was found not guilty, but who the hell actually believes he is? A civil court made some correction; but he's been free for years. I hope no-one minds if I prefer not to have that happen with the Guantanamo accused, when the consequences of releasing Islamic terrorists - uh, hair-dryer salesmen is rather more severe.
"Defending the pillars of Saddam's power until the end, embracing the evil that their hatred of America makes them love."
Posts: 1372 | Location: England | Registered: 07-14-02
My third post which quoted Amnesty referred to Zimbabwe. Not off-topic because I was referring to Amnesty's credibility. I hope, afenton, you're not suggesting that, because Amnesty has no corroboration, the atrocities in Zimbabwe are make believe and that we MUST discount anything they say about Zimbabwe? "[A wide range of detainees] "? in this instance were Zimbabwean women, children and men.
Asa reads one book (The Liberal's Guide to Islamic Apology) No, I've not read that book. Another assumption and mistake.
He accuses me of having already made up my mind; yet, guess what? He's already made up his mind Great rebuttal. You should be proud of that one.
Now, you spend a lot of time rambling on about Bugliosi and Stone. Why? I haven't seen 'W' but, by all accounts it shows Bush in a good light.
Inadequate memory? Hah! Not Hah! But Yeah!
Could you let me know what in your last post were Bugliosi's words and which were yours? It's unclear. I'm also unsure of what Bugliosi and Simpson have to do with Guantanamo. Unless you're saying something like 'Asa read a book by Bugliosi, Bugliosi said something about Simpson which didn't add up, everything Bugliosi says doesn't add up, everything that Asa has read doesn't add up, everything Asa says doesn't add up'. Yes? The logic is amusing.
Finally, I came to a realisation this morning. You talk about the inmates as animals and that none of them could be innocent. I believe you take a vicarious pleasure in their suffering. I believe that, given the chance, you'd be there shocking them, shaving them, burning them, water-boarding them. That you think they are guilty should not mean that you think they should be tortured. That you do is a ghastly reflection on your humanity and your morals.
Actually, Asa, The Liberal's Guide To Islamic Apology isn't a real book. Therefore, not an assumption and not a mistake! Not that I make either.
Next bit: yes, my mentioning the hypocrisy of your suggestions about making up one's mind was rather good, wan't it? Good of you to appreciate it.
*checks Asa's silly list*
Oh, the bit about inadequate memory, and how you so often show the same (lack of) compassion for the victims of Islam as you pretend to show the Islamists - one-legged or well-armed - in Guantanamo. Not that fake compassion ever convinced me. I'll just ask you to show anyone, perhaps by posting in gd, all the posts you've made, showing compassion for the victims of the suicidal maniacs in Afghanistan and Iraq and Israel and Bali and Spain and The US and The UK and Lebanon and Syria, and all the other countries where Islamic terrorism has come to be expected, thanks to the loving kindness of the Islamists on display in Guantanamo; and delivered, in the satchels of Down's sufferers, and children's toys, to every Jew, Christian, Mormon, atheist (non-Muslim, in other words); gay (Muslim or otherwise), straight (non-Muslim). Selective, fake compassion.
Your third post (un)concerned Zimbabwe?? Your third post was about Zimbabwe? What the hell...? Either you...uh, forgot to mention that or you were confused, I guess (assume).
Your final couple o' paragraphs made about as much sense as yours ever do. Which words were mine? Bugliosi's? Do you read anything at all? Who wrote the book that you said you were reading - The Prosecution of George W. Bush for Murder?
Answer: (fill in)
Who condemned the trial of Simpson, and the US criminal justice system - including judges; lawyers, for both the defense and prosecution, et al - as a whole (Try to see the connection to Guantanamo and justice and trials and prosecutions, and how the murderer of two innocent people was freed, and would then go on to commit further crimes. If still unable, please feel free to ask)?
Answer: (fill in)
In considering both answers (if you've actually got there yet), does "Unless you're saying something like 'Asa read a book by Bugliosi, Bugliosi said something about Simpson which didn't add up" actually make sense?
Answer: (Fill in)
"The logic is amusing", says Asa, but he didn't even see it!
See, the problem I have with your pretending to be a man of justice and a demander of equal rights for all is that you are so obviously no such thing; you refuse to even accept that the people of Iraq have the right to democracy. Then, when given that democracy, you refuse to accept that the person they voted to have as their elected head of state is a prefereable choice to Saddam Hussein. "We prefer a life without Saddam to life with Saddam!" "No, actually, you just think you do." Says Asa.
Didn't give much of a stuff about choices and life and death and torture and murder and brutal oppression then, did you? Why the act about Guantanamo? You think anyone's fooled? Perhaps they are. I sure as hell ain't.
"Finally, I came to a realisation this morning."
First one ever. Alas, it was wrong! Firstly, they should be tried in the manner that the US government decides - Bush's government. If Obama decides to try to change the system of trials, and wins the right to make that change, then that's fine by me. Not actually fine, of course, but it has been decided by the government of The USA, so US justice, as decided by the government of The USA, has been seen to be done, so I'm happy. Secondly, I'll leave "vicarious pleasure" to you: it's your chosen hobby.
"Defending the pillars of Saddam's power until the end, embracing the evil that their hatred of America makes them love."
Posts: 1372 | Location: England | Registered: 07-14-02
Actually, Asa, The Liberal's Guide To Islamic Apology isn't a real book. I thought the most sarcastic person on these boards would recognise sarcasm.
You've read my posts - so may everyone else. The evidence is there. It's up to you to prove I haven't shown compassion. Isn't it?
You missed the point and didn't answer mine. I didn't need to mention Zimbabwe. I was referencing Amnesty. Don't you believe them or are you too embarrassed to admit that they might be telling the truth. You have to defend Amnesty or Mugabe. Which is it?
Which words were mine? Bugliosi's? It's just that you missed the quotation marks. I know you're a stickler for these things and it really does help to make sense of what you're trying to say. "Look what Asa's hero, Bugliosi, said about the trial of Orange-Juice Simpson. The guy's now where he belonged a long time ago. Some nifty footwork allowed him to laugh in the faces of the families of the murdered couple, and the criminal justice system, for years. He was found not guilty, but who the hell actually believes he is? A civil court made some correction; but he's been free for years. I hope no-one minds if I prefer not to have that happen with the Guantanamo accused, when the consequences of releasing Islamic terrorists - uh, hair-dryer salesmen is rather more severe." Would you add "" please?
Re Saddam Hussein etc. All relevant arguments are in threads on Iraq. Misquotes on this thread serve to muddy your shallow waters and are meaningless.
Firstly, they should be tried in the manner that the US government decides - Bush's government. Why? And don't you think that NO trial rather makes a nonsense of that comment.
There's nothing worse than someone pretending they'd intended sarcasm when that person intended otherwise! ok, ther're plenty of worse things: phoney compassion; double standards; hypocrisy; fake liberalism; the defence of terrorism...
Misquotes? Missing quotation marks? I wonder if you actually believe your own words. I suppose that if one repeats bullshit often enough to oneself and others, one comes to believe it.
"Could you let me know what in your last post were Bugliosi's words and which were yours? ... followed by: "It's just that you missed the quotation marks. "
If all the words were mine, why the hell should I use quotation marks! Har de har! Then, just to make it worse on yourself, you ask me to use quotaion marks again, when the entire paragraph was again mine! Oh, ho, ho, ho! What the hell is the matter with you?
And if you didn't need to mention Zimbabwe, why did you??
I say: "Firstly, they should be tried in the manner that the US government decides - Bush's government." and you ask me why?? Because he's the President of The United States Of America! I immediately followed your selective quote (see above) with "If Obama decides to try to change the system of trials, and wins the right to make that change, then that's fine by me." See that? See how the quote in its entirity makes a bit of a difference? Unlike the quotes of yours, where the words speak for themselves. See, I can post my asking you: "Do you share my happiness that most Iraqis are optimistic?" and follow it with your quote: "Actually I don't give two hoots." and there's not a lot to misinterpret, is there?
But back to your defense of all things not American . As can be seen, democracy trumps terrorism every time in a free world...except in Glasgee . But that's 'cause schoolyard bullying (terrorism) is an accepted way of life, according to you, in the baron wee lands north of this great country of mine. Luckily for democracy, and the fight against the wee nasties in Guantanamo that you make apologies for, and wish restored to freedom (after all, if you don't want them tried, you must want them freed), Scotland isn't completely inhabited by selfless fake liberals. What's fine by the US, in this case, is also fine by me. Can't get more straightforward than that, can I?? But can you?
"Defending the pillars of Saddam's power until the end, embracing the evil that their hatred of America makes them love."
Posts: 1372 | Location: England | Registered: 07-14-02
quote:Originally posted by afenton: Look what Asa's hero, Bugliosi, said about the trial of Orange-Juice Simpson. The guy's now where he belonged a long time ago. Some nifty footwork allowed him to laugh in the faces of the families of the murdered couple, and the criminal justice system, for years. He was found not guilty, but who the hell actually believes he is? A civil court made some correction; but he's been free for years. I hope no-one minds if I prefer not to have that happen with the Guantanamo accused, when the consequences of releasing Islamic terrorists - uh, hair-dryer salesmen is rather more severe.
"Defending the pillars of Saddam's power until the end, embracing the evil that their hatred of America makes them love."
*instruction* "Look what Asa's hero, Bugliosi, said about the trial of Orange-Juice Simpson."
*new paragraph*
"The guy's now where he belonged a long time ago." That's Simpson belongs in prison, not Bugliosi. I assumed you'd at least take the trouble to see what it was that your chosen author had said about the Simpson trial. Obviously not.
"Some nifty footwork allowed him to laugh in the faces of the families of the murdered couple, and the criminal justice system, for years." Again, Simpson, not Bugliosi. I use quotation marks; you have a habit of not using them. I didn't use them 'cause it was me typing, ok?? I have used them above 'cause I am quoting me. Clear? Probably not, so I'll continue.
"Some nifty footwork..." This is me quoting me, so I'm using..., y'know.
"... allowed him to laugh in the faces of the families of the murdered couple, and the criminal justice system, for years."
NOW, Bugliosi, having - if you'd bothered to see what he had said about the Simpson trial - tore strips off the prosecution, defence, judge et al, seems to suggest that there are serious failings in the criminal justice system of The USA.
*waits for penny to drop*
The same system you would prefer, since it's the one most likely to release the likes of Simpson, and let Muslim terrorists back into our relatively peaceful societies - the same suicidal maniacs that regularly attempt to destroy democracies, which you no doubt hold valueless, and Glasgow airport.
"He was fou... "
That's me quo.. y'know.
"He was found not guilty, but who the hell actually believes he is?"
Being such a bastion of free speech for suicidal maniacs and mass-murderers, and civil liberties for all who indiscriminately kill women and children, in the name of Islam, obviously you do:
"He was found not guilty; so I believe that the criminal justice system of The USA has given him a fair trial, and he is obviously (if you take away common bleedin' sense) guiltless."
Now, I can't spell it out any more clearly.
"Defending the pillars of Saddam's power until the end, embracing the evil that their hatred of America makes them love."
Posts: 1372 | Location: England | Registered: 07-14-02
quote:Originally posted by afenton: Look what Asa's hero, Bugliosi, said about the trial of Orange-Juice Simpson. The guy's now where he belonged a long time ago. Some nifty footwork allowed him to laugh in the faces of the families of the murdered couple, and the criminal justice system, for years. He was found not guilty, but who the hell actually believes he is? A civil court made some correction; but he's been free for years. I hope no-one minds if I prefer not to have that happen with the Guantanamo accused, when the consequences of releasing Islamic terrorists - uh, hair-dryer salesmen is rather more severe.
"Defending the pillars of Saddam's power until the end, embracing the evil that their hatred of America makes them love."
So, in fact, all that Bugliosi said in the above was "The guy's now where he belonged a long time ago." The way you wrote that paragraph implied that Bugliosi said a lot more. This inept attempt to have others believe that Bugliosi said things that he obviously didn't is actually libellous.
The above also goes to prove that anything (everything) you write is suspect.
Wow! I didn't quote a single word he said. Do you understand? If you weren't so bloody lazy, you would read what he did say. He condemned the entire trial, ok? Line break; new paragraph...whatever. No quotation marks. Get past this. What the hell's the matter with you! Anyway, since you haven't a single new word to say that would convince anyone that Guantanamo should be closed, I'm a gonna leave this thread. My job's done, as far as I can see.
"Defending the pillars of Saddam's power until the end, embracing the evil that their hatred of America makes them love."
Posts: 1372 | Location: England | Registered: 07-14-02
quote: Originally posted by afenton: Look what Asa's hero, Bugliosi, said about the trial of Orange-Juice Simpson. ..... Wow! I didn't quote a single word he said. Do you understand? ---------------------------------------------------
Without referencing Bugliosi's comments we are to research his comments ourselves? C'mon!
And without quoting him you misquote him.
The implication was that Bugliosi said what you had written. And you meant it. Just like you misquote me and others here, make assumptions and simply spin fairy tales.
Too often you mislead in order to cover the fact that you have nothing to say.
Remember this?
[This message was edited by afenton on 11-08-08 at 07:30 AM.]
quote:Listening to the U.S. prosecutor who is trying to blow the whistle has brought back to mind the plight of the detainees. I’m sorry to say that the two and a half years for me has passed quickly compared to the detainees who are still being tortured, who have no idea what the future holds and whose gaolers have no evidence to take to trial.
Well Asa, your dreams have come to pass and poor Kevin Rudd for one, is having kittens! With pressure being put on Britian and Australia (lets call it team "Brown/KRudd") to take up the honour of housing these prized Guantanamo trophies - symbols of victimhood that they be - it turns out that they are not the soft bellied sensitive lambs Mr Rudd wants to play with.
"Australia has been warned of the risks of taking terror suspects from Guantanamo Bay military prison as the Rudd government admitted it's considering the move after a second request from the Bush administration.
US Major General John Altenburg, formerly an appointing authority to the US Military Commissions - the body that oversees the prosecution of terror suspects at Guantanamo Bay - told The Weekend Australian that a significant number of former detainees have subsequently undertaken terrorist acts or have been recaptured on the battlefield."
So Kevin said no way Jose (for the publics benefit at least) but of course they'll take them secretly. Boh, you must have a spare room at your Mums house?
Posts: 3724 | Location: Brisbane, Australia | Registered: 07-26-02
There's a little school in Glasgow that'd be only too pleased to house a few:
"Hop in the car, little Glaswegian boy; I just have to drop off a missile for Osama, then we'll be on our way. Yul be battlin' the Sassanachs before ye know it."
"Defending the pillars of Saddam's power until the end, embracing the evil that their hatred of America makes them love."
Posts: 1372 | Location: England | Registered: 07-14-02
