• 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!

More Ex-Detainees Resort to Terror, Officials Say

No, I did not overlook it, *sigh*, once more; the 20% is an estimate.

Yes, even 1% would be a problem, what about the 99% innocents you would want to keep locked up because of the 1%?
Care to address this central point I have raised?





show me 99% are "innocent". And please follow along with the conversation... Its not about if they don't return to attacking us they are "innocent"...


Please./
 
the president evidently sees it as a problem. no more detainees to yemen.

mtm1963
 
show me 99% are "innocent". And please follow along with the conversation... Its not about if they don't return to attacking us they are "innocent"...


Please./
No, you show what justifies keeping them locked up. They were released for a reason..."innocent until proven guilty" - ever heard of this? :rolleyes:

Care to justify incarcerating 99 not-proven-guilty persons for each 'terrorist' now, or are you going to continue to evade addressing my point?
 
No, you show what justifies keeping them locked up. They were released for a reason..."innocent until proven guilty" - ever heard of this? :rolleyes:


How long does one detain enemy combatants during a war?

When in the history of warfare has one belgerant released its war captured during a war.


Care to justify incarcerating 99 not-proven-guilty persons for each 'terrorist' now, or are you going to continue to evade addressing my point?



Wait we don't hold anyone ever before they are proven guilty? Is this REALLY your contribution to this thread? :lol:
 
If you're going to torture people, releasing them so they can return to their homelands and terrorist organizations is probably a bad idea. They have lots of fresh propaganda to relay back to their people, about the tales of torture chambers in U.S. detainment camps.

Who? Who was "tortured" at Gitmo, and how? Details, please.
 
Last edited:
How long does one detain enemy combatants during a war?
People kidnapped in the streets of countries not at war are not "enemy combatants".

When in the history of warfare has one belgerant released its war captured during a war.
The US has not declared any war, and GITMO detainees are not POWs.
Jeez, dude, this is stuff which has been covered in depth years ago...

Wait we don't hold anyone ever before they are proven guilty? Is this REALLY your contribution to this thread? :lol:
No it is not, but I note that you continue to avoid a direct answer to my point and spin the meaning of what I said.
- hardly surprising, which 'libertarian' would want to admit they support fascist policies.
 
People kidnapped in the streets of countries not at war are not "enemy combatants".

So what percentage of people in GITMO are these, links and proof please.


The US has not declared any war, and GITMO detainees are not POWs.
Jeez, dude, this is stuff which has been covered in depth years ago...


Should we release them in your town then?


No it is not, but I note that you continue to avoid a direct answer to my point and spin the meaning of what I said.


I've answered you directly on everything. The fact you do not like my answers is your tantrum, not my problem. :shrug:



- hardly surprising, which 'libertarian' would want to admit they support fascist policies.



You calling yourself a "moderate" I find it ironic you want to attack me as a libertarian. :shrug:
 
There is some amount of truth to that. Certainly there were terrorists in GITMO, but we picked them up and had people turn in others for rewards and such; so not all the people there were terrorists. We took no precaution as to which group we snatched and threw in prison with no means of defense. Those who may not have been terrorists were first kidnapped basically and unlawfully imprisoned and were in contract then with actual terrorists. It is not inconceivable that when released, some that were not terrorists would resort to such as a method of retribution.

Ok, I'm not sure if you were aware of this but these guys weren't at Gitmo for singing too loudly in the mosque. They were terrorists before or associated very closely with such. If they were trying to kill us before and someone says "Well now they're mad because their civil rights were violated".....ok WTF? :doh These people were trying to kill us before, so NOW they're mad? Then why were they so mad before?? What about the civil rights of the people in the twin towers? Does anyone not give a **** about them anymore?

I say we take no prisoners, period. You dont talk, a single .223 shot to the head and you leave in a bag. We gotta stop playing with these TERRORISTS. And stop feeling sorry for them! These were terrorists, people! These bleeding heart liberals feel worse off for terrorists trying to kill innocent Americans than for our own citizens in our own prisons being beaten for stealing money!

Whenever I can figure out the liberal mindset I will buy a lottery ticket because at that point I would have accomplished the impossible.
 
Last edited:
So what percentage of people in GITMO are these, links and proof please.
Sorry, I have done this too often over the last few years, this belongs in the realm of 'common knowledge' anybody who wants to rehash this subject should be expected to have - it's hardly news.
Should we release them in your town then?
No, release them in Washington D.C. near a gun shop. lol
I've answered you directly on everything. The fact you do not like my answers is your tantrum, not my problem. :shrug:
You have not refuted anything I said, but pretending ignorance instead and make silly diversions like bringing my town into this.
Hey, I have not kidnapped anybody, this is a legacy from the Bush regime you guys in the US will have to deal with - or maybe not, just keep them in GITMO or dump them in the sea, that's what you want, Mr. Libertarian, isn't it? lol
You calling yourself a "moderate" I find it ironic you want to attack me as a libertarian. :shrug:
What's wrong with me being a moderate?
Sorry if I do not fit your expectations, it's probably because I do not subscribe to the US value system, why should I, the world is much larger.
 
Ok, I'm not sure if you were aware of this but these guys weren't at Gitmo for singing too loudly in the mosque. They were terrorists before or associated very closely with such. If they were trying to kill us before and someone says "Well now they're mad because their civil rights were violated".....ok WTF? :doh These people were trying to kill us before, so NOW they're mad? Then why were they so mad before?? What about the civil rights of the people in the twin towers? Does anyone not give a **** about them anymore?

I say we take no prisoners, period. You dont talk, a single .223 shot to the head and you leave in a bag. We gotta stop playing with these TERRORISTS. And stop feeling sorry for them! These were terrorists, people! These bleeding heart liberals feel worse off for terrorists trying to kill innocent Americans than for our own citizens in our own prisons being beaten for stealing money!

Whenever I can figure out the liberal mindset I will buy a lottery ticket because at that point I would have accomplished the impossible.


Quote dontworrybehappy

(Ok, I'm not sure if you were aware of this but these guys weren't at Gitmo for singing too loudly in the mosque. They were terrorists before or associated very closely with such.)

Quote first paragraph, at the OP link.

(As many as one in five former Guantanamo Bay detainees are suspected of or confirmed to have engaged in terrorist activity after their release, U.S. officials said, citing the latest government statistics.)


kinda ignoring the first paragraph at the link aren’t you? That paragraph raises a couple of question to me, none of them justifies shooting innocent people in the head because I THINK that they MIGHT know something. It seems to me, considering the mindset of the people involved that just breeds more terrorism.
 
Very true. But before we can say much for sure, we need numbers verified and some study as to what actually happened. No matter what we do in the meantime, we should try to actually figure out what happened.

The interesting thing though is the 20% recidivism rate. People told us, "oh these were terrorists! We picked them up on the battle field!" True we picked up some on the battle field, but not all. We had cash rewards for people turning in "terrorists". We didn't have trials, we didn't do investigations, we did nothing to ensure that we were just picking up terrorists. But that's the claim, some people are blind enough to still even make that claim. They were terrorists!

Why is it then that ONLY 20% have returned to terrorist organizations? Shouldn't that number be higher? I mean, they were all terrorists right? When released, why didn't they all run back to do terrorist sorts of stuff? I would have expected something like 80+% recidivism had the "all been terrorists"

So what strikes me as funny about the 20% recidivism rate is that either GITMO was one of the most successful rehabilitation facilities ever, or not all the people in GITMO were terrorists.
 
Sorry, I have done this too often over the last few years, this belongs in the realm of 'common knowledge' anybody who wants to rehash this subject should be expected to have - it's hardly news.



I accept your concession that you lack the information to back up your claim, .

No, release them in Washington D.C. near a gun shop. lol


further demonstrating your ignorance, Guns are illegal in DC and I do not believe there are any gun shops. :shrug:


You have not refuted anything I said, but pretending ignorance instead and make silly diversions like bringing my town into this.



All you have said is unsubstantiated lunatic fringe liberal kookery! :shrug:



Hey, I have not kidnapped anybody, this is a legacy from the Bush regime you guys in the US will have to deal with - or maybe not, just keep them in GITMO or dump them in the sea, that's what you want, Mr. Libertarian, isn't it? lol

You haven't proved kidnappings yet punchy....


What's wrong with me being a moderate?



You are not a moderate.... Are you fooling yourself?


Sorry if I do not fit your expectations, it's probably because I do not subscribe to the US value system, why should I, the world is much larger.



Oh your sooooo bad...... :lol:
 
The interesting thing though is the 20% recidivism rate. People told us, "oh these were terrorists! We picked them up on the battle field!" True we picked up some on the battle field, but not all. We had cash rewards for people turning in "terrorists". We didn't have trials, we didn't do investigations, we did nothing to ensure that we were just picking up terrorists. But that's the claim, some people are blind enough to still even make that claim. They were terrorists!

Why is it then that ONLY 20% have returned to terrorist organizations? Shouldn't that number be higher? I mean, they were all terrorists right? When released, why didn't they all run back to do terrorist sorts of stuff? I would have expected something like 80+% recidivism had the "all been terrorists"

So what strikes me as funny about the 20% recidivism rate is that either GITMO was one of the most successful rehabilitation facilities ever, or not all the people in GITMO were terrorists.

Agreed. It should be higher, if they were what many claim them to have been. And we don't even know if the 20% is real.
 
People kidnapped in the streets of countries not at war are not "enemy combatants".

"Kidnapped" on the street? :lol:

The US has not declared any war,

Specific Authorization the same thing, pease read your rule of law.

and GITMO detainees are not POWs.

Congressionally designated enemy combatants.

Jeez, dude, this is stuff which has been covered in depth years ago...

You were wrong and making colossal errors then and now, so what?
 
I have a couple of reasons why Gitmo should be closed, and those charged with plotting terrorism standing trial in civilian courts:

1) Richard Reid

2) The blind Sheik, who carried out the first WTC bombing.

Both are in prison, and will no longer have a chance to hurt America. Not only that, but the world got to see what kind of people they are.

Gitmo will always be associated with one thing - Conviction by innuendo. Sure, there were some legitimate terrorists who ended up at Gitmo, but there were also plenty there whose only crime was to be a target of a political enemy, a neighbor who didn't like them, or someone hungry for a little cash, who told lies that ended up putting them in Gitmo, even though they were innocent. That is reason enough to close Gitmo.

Those who favor keeping Gitmo open do not have enough faith in a judical system that has worked ever since the founding of our nation. It has served it's purpose well. In the 2 cases I cited above, the legal system took the evidence, and they were convicted. Note that I said "evidence", not "innuendo" from a person who had an axe to grind.

Finally, when we close Gitmo, and try those cases in our courts, we show the whole world that the United States is honest, fair, and most of all, truly concentrating on putting an end to terrorism, instead of just pumping up statistics on the backs of innocent people, whose lives are ruined in the process. Those who are legitimate terrorsts will be convicted. That is a certainty. Those who were railroaded by their neighbors, and who are innocent will be able to return home to their families and their lives. That is also a certainty. What could be more fair than that? This is the United States of America, not the Old Soviet Union, or Iran, where innuendo and unreasonable suspicion ruled the day. Let us win the war on terror, but at the same time, let us also never forget who we are. For once we become like our enemies, there is no turning back. We will have lost, and this will no longer be America.
 
Last edited:
Leave Gitmo open, we should not allow the scum in our country....;)

Just out of curiosity, I wonder how many terrorists who have been tried and convicted of terrorism in U.S. Federal courts have gone back to committing terrorists acts while in Maximum Security Prisons.:2razz::lol:;)

There are a group of Federal Prosecutors and investigators who have become experts at convicting terrorists in the U.S. while not compromising national security. The Judges who hear these cases follow the law. The Marshals who manage these prisoners are extremely competent and well-trained.

I don't have a problem with Gitmo, enhanced interrogations, or electrocuting someone's testicles if it will save American lives. The mistake was trying to codify it--writing memos, trying to make it legal and on the books.

Regarding the story in the OP -- I had already heard this 1 in 5 stat. How many people total are we talking about? What was the circumstances of their release from Gitmo?
 
Just out of curiosity, I wonder how many terrorists who have been tried and convicted of terrorism in U.S. Federal courts have gone back to committing terrorists acts while in Maximum Security Prisons.:2razz::lol:;)

There are a group of Federal Prosecutors and investigators who have become experts at convicting terrorists in the U.S. while not compromising national security. The Judges who hear these cases follow the law. The Marshals who manage these prisoners are extremely competent and well-trained.

I don't have a problem with Gitmo, enhanced interrogations, or electrocuting someone's testicles if it will save American lives. The mistake was trying to codify it--writing memos, trying to make it legal and on the books.

Regarding the story in the OP -- I had already heard this 1 in 5 stat. How many people total are we talking about? What was the circumstances of their release from Gitmo?
Why this is wonderful. How about a link?
 
This wouldn't be happening right now if they had been granted POW rights from the very start.
 
Why this is wonderful. How about a link?

You're kidding, right?

You were not aware that terrorists have been prosecuted and sentenced to Federal Prison for some time now?

Seriously. You didn't know that?

Shoe Bomber -- does that ring a bell?
 
I accept your concession that you lack the information to back up your claim, .
:yawn:
Nothing better on offer? This is boring.

All you have said is unsubstantiated lunatic fringe liberal kookery! :shrug:

You haven't proved kidnappings yet punchy....
Don't believe everything you read on rabid wingnut blogs, try reading some other sources. :2razz:

Is there no thread about the CIA guys convicted of kidnapping in Italy recently?
Come on, don't ask me to waste my time and point you to news headlines, I don't buy your pretended ignorance.
 
"Kidnapped" on the street? :lol:
That's right.

Specific Authorization the same thing, pease read your rule of law.
I do not follow US law.

Congressionally designated enemy combatants.
Yep, a deliberate attempt to create a lawless area outside the Geneva Convention.

You were wrong and making colossal errors then and now, so what?
Nope, both Wiki or A.I. make good starting points to inform yourself.
 
:yawn:
Nothing better on offer? This is boring.


You are right, I accept your apology, and hope you strive to entertain the Greatness that is the Good Reverend in the future....


Don't believe everything you read on rabid wingnut blogs, try reading some other sources. :2razz:

Is there no thread about the CIA guys convicted of kidnapping in Italy recently?
Come on, don't ask me to waste my time and point you to news headlines, I don't buy your pretended ignorance.



Link..... I am aware of allegations, and I think one case, but the guy had been released......


john wayne gacy was a lib, do you dress like a clown and entice childeren to your house? (point being,extremist logic, makes little sense, you may have one case, but you are dishonest about it, taking it to the far extreme)



'
 
That's right.

I do not follow US law.

Yep, a deliberate attempt to create a lawless area outside the Geneva Convention.

Nope, both Wiki or A.I. make good starting points to inform yourself.




and yet you comment on it. :doh
 
...
john wayne gacy was a lib, do you dress like a clown and entice childeren to your house? (point being,extremist logic, makes little sense, you may have one case, but you are dishonest about it, taking it to the far extreme)
There is nothing extremist about logic, and no, I am not dishonest.
It's not that I "may have" one case, but I pointed at an obvious one which recently made headlines

and yet you comment on it.
...and?

Something you wish to say, or just blathering?
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom