• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Terror inmates may be released in US: intel chief

zimmer said:
We haven't been able to profile everyone correctly, hence terrorists have been released and returned to the battle field.

If we get one instance wrong it could result in a blood bath.
Obama created.
.
Click to expand...
Obama created a bloodbath? You're right... it was Obama who decided to grab "terrorists" and ask questions later. Silly me. :roll:
 
Ikari said:
This is your dream situation, another attack could cement the fascist right takeover.

Even if some of the released commit acts of terrorism, fact is that I stand a much greater chance of being taken out by a drunk driver than I do being taken out by a terrorist. I'll accept those odds to keep my freedom thank you very much.
Click to expand...

Seems like Obama has taken over more stuff then bush did. Wait bush took over nothing, yet he is the fascist .. odd how that works.

A drunk driver can only kill a few people, and has limited scope, a terrorist attack can effect 1000's.
 
bilbus said:
A drunk driver can only kill a few people, and has limited scope, a terrorist attack can effect 1000's.
Click to expand...
He said that someone(read: single individual) has a better chance of being killed by a drunk driver. His point is clear and correct. So let me see if I have your position correct: You are fine with detaining these men and keeping them in gitmo, even though they have not been proven to be terrorists?
 
bilbus said:
Seems like Obama has taken over more stuff then bush did. Wait bush took over nothing, yet he is the fascist .. odd how that works.

A drunk driver can only kill a few people, and has limited scope, a terrorist attack can effect 1000's.
Click to expand...

Drunk driving deaths account of half of the vehicle deaths. The terrorists most successful attack ever, 9/11, didn't even kill as many as cars. Hell, they didn't even kill as many as drunk drivers do in a year. Cars have the far more reaching impact than terrorists. Nothing you say can distract from the fact that I have WAY more to fear from drunk drivers than I do from terrorists. Terrorists just don't have the impact they or you want them to have.

Obama isn't a solution, he like all of government is part of the problem. But the neo-fascist movement which has captured the Republicans have taken them out of contention for contributing to a solution. The party of Reagan is dead and gone, the Republocrats now rule from their protected classes. A new aristocracy engorging the already bloated government. Of the State, by the State, for the State! A new mantra of fascism. Make no beans about it, this is no path of socialism we've been persuing, it is one of classical fascism. Define life, liberty, and freedom through the State and its prosperity; not the prosperity of the individual. Bush, like Obama and Clinton, strove to increase the size and scope of government. To engage in nation building, to squash the freedoms of the individual and engaged (like Obama now) in fear tactics to convince a people whom have lost their resolve that only government can keep them safe.

Government is not part of the solution, it's part of the problem. Those whom rallied for Bush, those whom rally for Obama are not part of the solution, they are part of the problem. A fully beaten people who have forgotten the fight for freedom and why we risked it all. An honorless lot whom would trade freedom for safety and even worse trade freedom so that the static of their daily is not challenged. Bring on the terrorists, I will meet them if I must. But you can not have my freedom, you can not have my liberty; if you want them you'll have to fight me for them.
 
EgoffTib said:
It is not their responsibility. We detained them. Now we have decided that they are not a threat.
Click to expand...


Because we detained them we have to keep them?

It just seems to me there are a number of options. What do they want?

To go to the U.S., not to go to their home country, to go to a terrorist friendly country, to go to a neutral country?

Again, if these are inocents, why are there onty two options, stay in Gitmo or come to the U.S.?
 
Ikari said:
Drunk driving deaths account of half of the vehicle deaths. The terrorists most successful attack ever, 9/11, didn't even kill as many as cars. Hell, they didn't even kill as many as drunk drivers do in a year. Cars have the far more reaching impact than terrorists. Nothing you say can distract from the fact that I have WAY more to fear from drunk drivers than I do from terrorists. Terrorists just don't have the impact they or you want them to have.

Obama isn't a solution, he like all of government is part of the problem. But the neo-fascist movement which has captured the Republicans have taken them out of contention for contributing to a solution. The party of Reagan is dead and gone, the Republocrats now rule from their protected classes. A new aristocracy engorging the already bloated government. Of the State, by the State, for the State! A new mantra of fascism. Make no beans about it, this is no path of socialism we've been persuing, it is one of classical fascism. Define life, liberty, and freedom through the State and its prosperity; not the prosperity of the individual. Bush, like Obama and Clinton, strove to increase the size and scope of government. To engage in nation building, to squash the freedoms of the individual and engaged (like Obama now) in fear tactics to convince a people whom have lost their resolve that only government can keep them safe.

Government is not part of the solution, it's part of the problem. Those whom rallied for Bush, those whom rally for Obama are not part of the solution, they are part of the problem. A fully beaten people who have forgotten the fight for freedom and why we risked it all. An honorless lot whom would trade freedom for safety and even worse trade freedom so that the static of their daily is not challenged. Bring on the terrorists, I will meet them if I must. But you can not have my freedom, you can not have my liberty; if you want them you'll have to fight me for them.
Click to expand...

This is a strange post. I tried to read it but all I could see was your misuse of the word "whom." Who (pronoun) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

How would you have responded to 9/11 had you been president?
 
Last edited:
Ikari said:
Declared war against Afghanistan, went after the terrorists, stopped there.
Click to expand...

We wouldn't have had to go that far. We could have simply had an agreement with both Afghanistan and Pakistan to freely move military through their borders in pursuit of Al-Qaeda. They wouldn't have denied as they would realize our asking is just a courtesy. Of course, if they did deny then we would declare war and do it anyway.
 
Ikari said:
Awesome, thanks for contributing to...oh wait you didn't do ****.
Click to expand...

Testy, testy...

Declared war against Afghanistan, went after the terrorists, stopped there.
Click to expand...

We'll never know what the region would look like had we not invaded Iraq. What we're experiencing now with Iran and North Korea is not too promising. Surely, they'd be working towards nuclear weapons by now and the Baathist regime would be locked in place. In retrospect, we liberated a people from a ruthless genocidal dictator. Of that I am not ashamed.

We could have done without all the DHS, TIA, Patriot act crap though.
 
I've lived next to a Muslim neighbor for almost 2 years now. I wouldn't mind having one of these people near me, just to have my neighbor and me show how people of different religions can co-exist.

I sent Senator Reid (Even though I am voting to kick him out next election) a letter and email along with my Muslim neighbor to send one of these folks (and his family) to live close to us in the houses I listed that are for sale. We have 4 houses in our neighborhood up for sale. which is perfect.

The only way to end the cycle of violence is by education.
 
EgoffTib said:
Obama created a bloodbath? You're right... it was Obama who decided to grab "terrorists" and ask questions later. Silly me. :roll:
Click to expand...
First, when you are at war with people that dress like civilians it is better to ask questions later than yourself pushing up daisies... War is a little more violent than a liberal demonstration... let's put it that way.

I don't know if hooked on phonics has a related set of dvd's called hooked on reading comprehension... but the point was...

...releasing them and making a mistake could end up with Americans being killed.

That bit during the oath Obama took upon becoming president did mention something pertaining to "protecting against enemies foreign and domestic"... We know socialists lie, the Constitution means little to them.

The Constitution for libs is something to be gotten around.
.
 
zimmer said:
First, when you are at war with people that dress like civilians it is better to ask questions later than yourself pushing up daisies... War is a little more violent than a liberal demonstration... let's put it that way.

I don't know if hooked on phonics has a related set of dvd's called hooked on reading comprehension... but the point was...

...releasing them and making a mistake could end up with Americans being killed.

That bit during the oath Obama took upon becoming president did mention something pertaining to "protecting against enemies foreign and domestic"... We know socialists lie, the Constitution means little to them.

The Constitution for libs is something to be gotten around.
.
Click to expand...


There is just something about your last comment that makes me giggle.

"The Constitution for libs is something to be gotten around."

Yet... under the conservatives we have the most invasive things ever created... helloooo Patriot Act, hello... Military Act... Then we also have "protest points" setup, so that people exercising their first amendment rights cannot be anywhere near where they want to be protesting.

Lets not even get into the gay rights issues.

Your statement is full of ****... Sorry, but it had to be said.

Before it's said, the democraps are for everyone's rights as long as they don't involve religion, or guns... and they're just as stupid with their "it's us or them" mentality.


Now as far as the original topic, if we don't have enough evidence to try them... why are we holding them?
 
zimmer said:
First, when you are at war with people that dress like civilians it is better to ask questions later than yourself pushing up daisies... War is a little more violent than a liberal demonstration... let's put it that way.
Click to expand...
Then maybe we should not be fighting wars like that... ;)

I don't know if hooked on phonics has a related set of dvd's called hooked on reading comprehension... but the point was...

...releasing them and making a mistake could end up with Americans being killed.
Click to expand...
Great. Key word is "could". Or we could hold innocent men captive indefinitely. Either way we run a risk.

That bit during the oath Obama took upon becoming president did mention something pertaining to "protecting against enemies foreign and domestic"... We know socialists lie, the Constitution means little to them.
Click to expand...
So by releasing people who have been deemed not to be terrorists, he's failing at protecting us? And you think Liberals have absurd logic...
 
U.S. citizen or not, I would rather a guilty man go free than an innocent man be imprisoned. The chance that a terrorist could be among them is a chance we have to take. We don't detain people indefinitely on suspicion with no evidence. Of course war time is different, but if we're at war (which we aren't) then they are POWs and subject to Geneva protections. Otherwise they should be innocent until proven guilty - you know, one of the basic human rights we stand for. We cannot let terrorists terrorize us into becoming a country of fascists willing to disregard basic human rights out of fear.
 
binary_digit said:
u.s. Citizen or not, i would rather a guilty man go free than an innocent man be imprisoned. The chance that a terrorist could be among them is a chance we have to take. We don't detain people indefinitely on suspicion with no evidence. Of course war time is different, but if we're at war (which we aren't) then they are pows and subject to geneva protections. Otherwise they should be innocent until proven guilty - you know, one of the basic human rights we stand for. We cannot let terrorists terrorize us into becoming a country of fascists willing to disregard basic human rights out of fear.
Click to expand...

but it's for the safety of the american people!
 
EgoffTib said:
Tell that to Zimmer :mrgreen:
Click to expand...

Tell that to all the foaming mouth conservatives.

****, tell that to all the "coddle" them to the death liberals as well.
 
EgoffTib said:
Tell that to Zimmer :mrgreen:
Click to expand...

The Chinese folks they want to release were picked up at a Terror training camp working with the Jihadists. Aligned with Jihadists.

Our problem is their case is fuzzy. They are sympathetic to Jihdists, they would be neutralized in China, and nobody wants to take them.
Albania took 5... now the remainder "ain't got no home".

I don't see these folks as a "safe" bet... and the same goes for everyone else.

If you like them so much, then why not have your community offer to take one or two or 17 in your neighborhood.
Put signs out on your lawn; campaign for them to come to your hood.
Speak with your neighbors, and the local politicians... get them all excited about your potentially new neighbors.

Tell them you want them all and you want them now.
For the good of the country.
Because it is the safe and wise thing to do.
Because the EU will love America again.
... use any and all nutty, illogical ideas... but please... take them on your street.

Then tell me about "safety and liberty" being mutually exclusive.
Tell me how much your neighbors will love you.
Respect you.
Think you are so loving and compassionate.
Such a brilliant mind to have terrorists on your street.

Won't... you be... my neighbor? Ahmed Wang?

Perhaps you'd like criminal sex offenders too... and tell me about safety and liberty being mutually exclusive.

When they are in your community, don't ask for more policing funds, don't come whining about the fear in the community.

They're just a bunch of terrorists picked up at a training camp.

Don't worry... be nervous.

.
 
Last edited:
zimmer said:
The Chinese folks they want to release were picked up at a Terror training camp working with the Jihadists. Aligned with Jihadists.

Our problem is their case is fuzzy. They are sympathetic to Jihdists, they would be neutralized in China, and nobody wants to take them.
Albania took 5... now the remainder "ain't got no home".

I don't see these folks as a "safe" bet... and the same goes for everyone else.

If you like them so much, then why not have your community offer to take one or two or 17 in your neighborhood.
Put signs out on your lawn; campaign for them to come to your hood.
Speak with your neighbors, and the local politicians... get them all excited about your potentially new neighbors.

Tell them you want them all and you want them now.
For the good of the country.
Because it is the safe and wise thing to do.
Because the EU will love America again.
... use any and all nutty, illogical ideas... but please... take them on your street.

Then tell me about "safety and liberty" being mutually exclusive.
Tell me how much your neighbors will love you.
Respect you.
Think you are so loving and compassionate.
Such a brilliant mind to have terrorists on your street.

Won't... you be... my neighbor? Ahmed Wang?

Perhaps you'd like criminal sex offenders too... and tell me about safety and liberty being mutually exclusive.

When they are in your community, don't ask for more policing funds, don't come whining about the fear in the community.

They're just a bunch of terrorists picked up at a training camp.

Don't worry... be nervous.

.
Click to expand...
Umm this is complete bollocks. The US gov has already recognised they are not terrorists nor ever have been. They were in camps after fleeing Chinese oppression, where there may have been some undesirables. That is all. Their treatment I'm afraid is outrageous.
 
EgoffTib said:
Well good for him. Do you think they will be releasing these "terror suspects" on the unknowing populace if they think they are a hazard?
Click to expand...

Considering this administration has ignored what has worked in the past to right the economy... and keep Americans safe... I wouldn't put it past this crew to release hazardous material into the environment.

A walking Bio and Personal safety hazard.

It's a common Lib practice.

In Germany they release terror murderers, Clinton pardoned terrorist murderers, Obama befriends two terror supporters.

Libs have been hostile to America, the troops and the intel services for decades.

Looking at history... I wouldn't put ANYTHING past Libs.
The Collective in Office is The American Marxist/Chamberlain Alliance.
Full of Czars and folks more equal than others (tax cheats).

They're irrational, dangerous... and for these reasons should never be entrusted with power... but we have a merry band of Marxists in office now...
let's see what the loons do.

My bet is they will do something stupid. It's their nature.. it is their... history.

.
 
Last edited:
While I wouldn't mind one of these people living next to me, I hope and pray they put one next to Zimmer.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom