Dallas-Mavs.com Forums

Go Back   Dallas-Mavs.com Forums > Everything Else > Political Arena

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 06-23-2009, 05:48 PM   #1
92bDad
Platinum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: TX
Posts: 2,505
92bDad has a brilliant future92bDad has a brilliant future92bDad has a brilliant future92bDad has a brilliant future92bDad has a brilliant future92bDad has a brilliant future92bDad has a brilliant future92bDad has a brilliant future92bDad has a brilliant future92bDad has a brilliant future92bDad has a brilliant future
Default Gitmo stuff...where's the outrage from Obama?

http://www.onenewsnow.com/Culture/De...aspx?id=576720

Where are the big spotlight reports on once captured terrorist, who have been released and enabled to murder again?
92bDad is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old 06-24-2009, 08:43 AM   #2
mcsluggo
Golden Member
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: McLean, VA
Posts: 1,970
mcsluggo has a brilliant futuremcsluggo has a brilliant futuremcsluggo has a brilliant futuremcsluggo has a brilliant futuremcsluggo has a brilliant futuremcsluggo has a brilliant futuremcsluggo has a brilliant futuremcsluggo has a brilliant futuremcsluggo has a brilliant futuremcsluggo has a brilliant futuremcsluggo has a brilliant future
Default

that article makes me feel stupid just for having read it.
mcsluggo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-24-2009, 08:53 AM   #3
Mavdog
Diamond Member
 
Mavdog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Texas
Posts: 6,014
Mavdog has much to be proud ofMavdog has much to be proud ofMavdog has much to be proud ofMavdog has much to be proud ofMavdog has much to be proud ofMavdog has much to be proud ofMavdog has much to be proud ofMavdog has much to be proud ofMavdog has much to be proud ofMavdog has much to be proud ofMavdog has much to be proud of
Default

willie horton part deux
Mavdog is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-24-2009, 09:57 AM   #4
MX425
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Addison
Posts: 339
MX425 is a name known to allMX425 is a name known to allMX425 is a name known to allMX425 is a name known to allMX425 is a name known to allMX425 is a name known to allMX425 is a name known to allMX425 is a name known to allMX425 is a name known to allMX425 is a name known to all
Default

Taken from their About Us section...


"Your Latest News from a Christian perspective

Whether it's a story about prayer in public schools, workplace restrictions on Christians, or battles for biblical truth within our denominations, the American Family News Network (AFN) is here to tell you what the newsmakers are saying.

AFN is a Christian news service - with more than 1,200 broadcast, print, and online affiliates in 45 states and 11 foreign countries - that exists to present the day's stories from a biblical perspective. We not only feature the latest breaking stories from across the United States and around the world, but also news of the challenges facing Christians in today's society.

At OneNewsNow.com, you will get your news from reporters you can trust to give the latest news without the liberal bias that characterizes so much of the "mainstream" media.

For a refreshing and informative change in where you get your news, log on to OneNewsNow.com."

Nothing like combating bias with bias.
__________________
F@*K THE SPURS!!
MX425 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-24-2009, 10:10 AM   #5
92bDad
Platinum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: TX
Posts: 2,505
92bDad has a brilliant future92bDad has a brilliant future92bDad has a brilliant future92bDad has a brilliant future92bDad has a brilliant future92bDad has a brilliant future92bDad has a brilliant future92bDad has a brilliant future92bDad has a brilliant future92bDad has a brilliant future92bDad has a brilliant future
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MX425 View Post
Taken from their About Us section...


"Your Latest News from a Christian perspective

Whether it's a story about prayer in public schools, workplace restrictions on Christians, or battles for biblical truth within our denominations, the American Family News Network (AFN) is here to tell you what the newsmakers are saying.

AFN is a Christian news service - with more than 1,200 broadcast, print, and online affiliates in 45 states and 11 foreign countries - that exists to present the day's stories from a biblical perspective. We not only feature the latest breaking stories from across the United States and around the world, but also news of the challenges facing Christians in today's society.

At OneNewsNow.com, you will get your news from reporters you can trust to give the latest news without the liberal bias that characterizes so much of the "mainstream" media.

For a refreshing and informative change in where you get your news, log on to OneNewsNow.com."

Nothing like combating bias with bias.
So are you saying that you support Missionaries being murdered by terrorist?
92bDad is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-24-2009, 10:50 AM   #6
MX425
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Addison
Posts: 339
MX425 is a name known to allMX425 is a name known to allMX425 is a name known to allMX425 is a name known to allMX425 is a name known to allMX425 is a name known to allMX425 is a name known to allMX425 is a name known to allMX425 is a name known to allMX425 is a name known to all
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 92bDad View Post
So are you saying that you support Missionaries being murdered by terrorist?
No, and I would expect such an illogical answer from someone who probably got hard at the phrase "your either with us or against us."

Listen, we agreed to a contract at the Geneva convention, and the very principles our country is founded on personal rights.

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness."

We cannot, in the name of "safety", strip people of the rights we built this country upon. I am in no way saying that war criminals shouldn't be punished and that these individuals who commit these heinous acts should be allowed to walk free, but until we can prove guilt we cannot act as if they are guilty.

I am simply calling out the source where you find your information, and noticing that in your effort to find "fair and balanced" news, you actually seem to find only news that substantiates what you have already decided is your view of the world.

It is impossible truly understand that issues if you refuse to look outside of your comfort zone of beliefs and ideals.
__________________
F@*K THE SPURS!!
MX425 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-24-2009, 11:18 AM   #7
alexamenos
Diamond Member
 
alexamenos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Basketball fan nirvana
Posts: 5,625
alexamenos has a reputation beyond reputealexamenos has a reputation beyond reputealexamenos has a reputation beyond reputealexamenos has a reputation beyond reputealexamenos has a reputation beyond reputealexamenos has a reputation beyond reputealexamenos has a reputation beyond reputealexamenos has a reputation beyond reputealexamenos has a reputation beyond reputealexamenos has a reputation beyond reputealexamenos has a reputation beyond repute
Default

recalling now my comments on how once upon a time, 70% of the country believed that Saddam was behind 9-11....

....the following is fairly typical of the sort of "evidence" that lead to the absurd connections:

Quote:
Terrorism experts say the crimes bear the mark of Al Qaeda, and they fear they are the handiwork of the international terror organization's number two man in the Arabian Peninsula -- Said Ali al-Shihri, an Islamic terrorist who once was in American custody but who was released from the U.S. detention center in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.
note the chain of logic which allows 92bdad to conclude that these christian missionaries were murdered by a former Gitmo detainee --

1) the missionaries were executed
2) Al Qaeda has executed people in the past -- >

The missionaries were executed by Al Qaeda.

1) Said Ali al-Shihri is part of Al Qaeda
2) uh...nothing here

ergo....The missionaries were executed by a recent Gitmo detainee!!!

A similar line of reasoning can also help us to determine whether a woman is a witch:

1) Witches are burnt at the stake
2) Wood burns

--therefore witches are made of wood

1) Wood floats on water
2) Ducks float on water

Accordingly, if a woman weighs less than a duck, she must be a witch!

Something like this, anyhoo...

The point is that there isn't any evidence, just an emotional appeal (terrorism experts fear that an evil-doer murdered good christians....boogity boogity).

You can fool some of the people some of the time...actually, you can fool most of the people something close to 99.95% of the time.
__________________
"It does not take a brain seargant to know the reason this team struggles." -- dmack24

Last edited by alexamenos; 06-24-2009 at 11:20 AM.
alexamenos is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-24-2009, 12:39 PM   #8
Usually Lurkin
Diamond Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 8,195
Usually Lurkin has a reputation beyond reputeUsually Lurkin has a reputation beyond reputeUsually Lurkin has a reputation beyond reputeUsually Lurkin has a reputation beyond reputeUsually Lurkin has a reputation beyond reputeUsually Lurkin has a reputation beyond reputeUsually Lurkin has a reputation beyond reputeUsually Lurkin has a reputation beyond reputeUsually Lurkin has a reputation beyond reputeUsually Lurkin has a reputation beyond reputeUsually Lurkin has a reputation beyond repute
Default

making fun of 92bdad is all good and well, but why ignore his larger point?

That is, unless you think the Christianists at this site are just trying to scare us into a religious war, all boogidy boogidy:

Ex-Gitmo Detainee, Al-Shihri, Joins Al Qaeda In Yemen

after all
A) "a sight claims to be Christian"
and B) "I don't know who the terrorist experts are"
strongly implies C) "it's just political propaganda," right?
Usually Lurkin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-24-2009, 12:51 PM   #9
Mavdog
Diamond Member
 
Mavdog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Texas
Posts: 6,014
Mavdog has much to be proud ofMavdog has much to be proud ofMavdog has much to be proud ofMavdog has much to be proud ofMavdog has much to be proud ofMavdog has much to be proud ofMavdog has much to be proud ofMavdog has much to be proud ofMavdog has much to be proud ofMavdog has much to be proud ofMavdog has much to be proud of
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Usually Lurkin View Post
making fun of 92bdad is all good and well, but why ignore his larger point?

That is, unless you think the Christianists at this site are just trying to scare us into a religious war, all boogidy boogidy:

Ex-Gitmo Detainee, Al-Shihri, Joins Al Qaeda In Yemen

after all
A) "a sight claims to be Christian"
and B) "I don't know who the terrorist experts are"
strongly implies C) "it's just political propaganda," right?
what exactly is the "larger point"? is it that the united states must jail every religious extremist encountered?

after all, the person you reference has not broken any us law. he did not attack us, as far as we know he has not attacked any amercans....he has not been tried nor convicted of any criminal act.

should we preemptively jail anybody who might act in the future?

no, I do not believe we should.
Mavdog is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-24-2009, 01:07 PM   #10
mcsluggo
Golden Member
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: McLean, VA
Posts: 1,970
mcsluggo has a brilliant futuremcsluggo has a brilliant futuremcsluggo has a brilliant futuremcsluggo has a brilliant futuremcsluggo has a brilliant futuremcsluggo has a brilliant futuremcsluggo has a brilliant futuremcsluggo has a brilliant futuremcsluggo has a brilliant futuremcsluggo has a brilliant futuremcsluggo has a brilliant future
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Usually Lurkin View Post
making fun of 92bdad is all good and well, but why ignore his larger point?

That is, unless you think the Christianists at this site are just trying to scare us into a religious war, all boogidy boogidy:

Ex-Gitmo Detainee, Al-Shihri, Joins Al Qaeda In Yemen

after all
A) "a sight claims to be Christian"
and B) "I don't know who the terrorist experts are"
strongly implies C) "it's just political propaganda," right?
if you or he can give a slight hint what that point might be... some might oblige
mcsluggo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-24-2009, 01:40 PM   #11
Usually Lurkin
Diamond Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 8,195
Usually Lurkin has a reputation beyond reputeUsually Lurkin has a reputation beyond reputeUsually Lurkin has a reputation beyond reputeUsually Lurkin has a reputation beyond reputeUsually Lurkin has a reputation beyond reputeUsually Lurkin has a reputation beyond reputeUsually Lurkin has a reputation beyond reputeUsually Lurkin has a reputation beyond reputeUsually Lurkin has a reputation beyond reputeUsually Lurkin has a reputation beyond reputeUsually Lurkin has a reputation beyond repute
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mavdog View Post
what exactly is the "larger point"? is it that the united states must jail every religious extremist encountered?

after all, the person you reference has not broken any us law. he did not attack us, as far as we know he has not attacked any amercans....he has not been tried nor convicted of any criminal act.

should we preemptively jail anybody who might act in the future?

no, I do not believe we should.
well, that's certainly better than the nanny-nanny boo-boo trolling.

I think he was originally captured because someone thought that he'd trained in a terrorist camp, and that he was helping to fund and transport terrorists.
Usually Lurkin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-24-2009, 01:40 PM   #12
MX425
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Addison
Posts: 339
MX425 is a name known to allMX425 is a name known to allMX425 is a name known to allMX425 is a name known to allMX425 is a name known to allMX425 is a name known to allMX425 is a name known to allMX425 is a name known to allMX425 is a name known to allMX425 is a name known to all
Default

My initial post was not discrediting the source because it was Christian based, per se, but the line that said

"At OneNewsNow.com, you will get your news from reporters you can trust to give the latest news without the liberal bias that characterizes so much of the "mainstream" media."

They site also admits to putting a spin on all the stories, seen here in the post, "to present the day's stories from a biblical perspective."

This site has already declared they are here to show news without the "liberal" bias, and then discusses how they present the news from a biblical prespective, which would be a bais. Especially in a story regarding the death of Christian minsitries. This would be like having a mother who lost a son to drunk driving writing about the effects of drinking, its not gonna present the facts clearly.

I understand his point about the tragedy, but I also see it as an attack against the policies of the current administration, which was his underlying point.
__________________
F@*K THE SPURS!!
MX425 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-24-2009, 01:40 PM   #13
Usually Lurkin
Diamond Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 8,195
Usually Lurkin has a reputation beyond reputeUsually Lurkin has a reputation beyond reputeUsually Lurkin has a reputation beyond reputeUsually Lurkin has a reputation beyond reputeUsually Lurkin has a reputation beyond reputeUsually Lurkin has a reputation beyond reputeUsually Lurkin has a reputation beyond reputeUsually Lurkin has a reputation beyond reputeUsually Lurkin has a reputation beyond reputeUsually Lurkin has a reputation beyond reputeUsually Lurkin has a reputation beyond repute
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mcsluggo View Post
if you or he can give a slight hint what that point might be... some might oblige
go back and read the single sentence of text in the original post. If you can't reply to it, why reply to the thread?
Usually Lurkin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-24-2009, 01:54 PM   #14
Usually Lurkin
Diamond Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 8,195
Usually Lurkin has a reputation beyond reputeUsually Lurkin has a reputation beyond reputeUsually Lurkin has a reputation beyond reputeUsually Lurkin has a reputation beyond reputeUsually Lurkin has a reputation beyond reputeUsually Lurkin has a reputation beyond reputeUsually Lurkin has a reputation beyond reputeUsually Lurkin has a reputation beyond reputeUsually Lurkin has a reputation beyond reputeUsually Lurkin has a reputation beyond reputeUsually Lurkin has a reputation beyond repute
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MX425 View Post
My initial post was not discrediting the source because it was Christian based, per se, but the line that said
.
That's a fair point, MX. I don't mind biased news sources, though. I'd much prefer ABC, for example, to say something like, "we don't present the news with that conservative bias that others do. We present news from a Democrat's perspective."

Otherwise, you can get the most basic facts (that Gitmo releasees are enabled to murder) pretty much anywhere, from sources with varying bias. It looks like you can get the interpreted 'facts' elsewhere as well (that this one guy is suspected of these murders), though mostly from conservative and religious sources, and relying on the same 1 or 2 "terrorism experts" as sources for the interpretation.

as to his "underlying point," we might ask under which president this terrorist was released.
Usually Lurkin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-24-2009, 02:07 PM   #15
dalmations202
Diamond Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Just outside the Metroplex
Posts: 5,537
dalmations202 has a reputation beyond reputedalmations202 has a reputation beyond reputedalmations202 has a reputation beyond reputedalmations202 has a reputation beyond reputedalmations202 has a reputation beyond reputedalmations202 has a reputation beyond reputedalmations202 has a reputation beyond reputedalmations202 has a reputation beyond reputedalmations202 has a reputation beyond reputedalmations202 has a reputation beyond reputedalmations202 has a reputation beyond repute
Default

We have this same question in America every day.

Killer gets caught but police stepped on his "rights". Judge lets killer go free.
Killer kills again, sometimes multiple times.

Who's to blame?
__________________


"A government big enough to give you everything you want, is strong enough to take everything you have". Gerald Ford

"Life's tough, it's even tougher if you're stupid." -John Wayne

There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty:
soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order.
-Capt. Bob "Wolf" Johnson
dalmations202 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-24-2009, 02:32 PM   #16
Mavdog
Diamond Member
 
Mavdog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Texas
Posts: 6,014
Mavdog has much to be proud ofMavdog has much to be proud ofMavdog has much to be proud ofMavdog has much to be proud ofMavdog has much to be proud ofMavdog has much to be proud ofMavdog has much to be proud ofMavdog has much to be proud ofMavdog has much to be proud ofMavdog has much to be proud ofMavdog has much to be proud of
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by dalmations202 View Post
We have this same question in America every day.

Killer gets caught but police stepped on his "rights". Judge lets killer go free.
Killer kills again, sometimes multiple times.

Who's to blame?
the killer.
Mavdog is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-24-2009, 02:34 PM   #17
dalmations202
Diamond Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Just outside the Metroplex
Posts: 5,537
dalmations202 has a reputation beyond reputedalmations202 has a reputation beyond reputedalmations202 has a reputation beyond reputedalmations202 has a reputation beyond reputedalmations202 has a reputation beyond reputedalmations202 has a reputation beyond reputedalmations202 has a reputation beyond reputedalmations202 has a reputation beyond reputedalmations202 has a reputation beyond reputedalmations202 has a reputation beyond reputedalmations202 has a reputation beyond repute
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mavdog View Post
the killer.
Understood, but if the killer killed some of my family and you had him, but let him go, I might return some of the favor.
__________________


"A government big enough to give you everything you want, is strong enough to take everything you have". Gerald Ford

"Life's tough, it's even tougher if you're stupid." -John Wayne

There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty:
soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order.
-Capt. Bob "Wolf" Johnson
dalmations202 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-24-2009, 02:37 PM   #18
Mavdog
Diamond Member
 
Mavdog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Texas
Posts: 6,014
Mavdog has much to be proud ofMavdog has much to be proud ofMavdog has much to be proud ofMavdog has much to be proud ofMavdog has much to be proud ofMavdog has much to be proud ofMavdog has much to be proud ofMavdog has much to be proud ofMavdog has much to be proud ofMavdog has much to be proud ofMavdog has much to be proud of
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Usually Lurkin View Post
well, that's certainly better than the nanny-nanny boo-boo trolling.

I think he was originally captured because someone thought that he'd trained in a terrorist camp, and that he was helping to fund and transport terrorists.
yeah, "someone thought"...

repeating, he was neither tried nor convicted of any crime, and further there was no crime committed on american soil either.

the question really is why anyone took him into custody, shipped his ass half way around the world, and interned him for what? 7 years, after which they realized they couldn't prove any crime and then sent him to saudi arabia.

those actions seem to be more criminal than anything this guy has been shown to have done.
Mavdog is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-24-2009, 02:44 PM   #19
Mavdog
Diamond Member
 
Mavdog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Texas
Posts: 6,014
Mavdog has much to be proud ofMavdog has much to be proud ofMavdog has much to be proud ofMavdog has much to be proud ofMavdog has much to be proud ofMavdog has much to be proud ofMavdog has much to be proud ofMavdog has much to be proud ofMavdog has much to be proud ofMavdog has much to be proud ofMavdog has much to be proud of
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by dalmations202 View Post
Understood, but if the killer killed some of my family and you had him, but let him go, I might return some of the favor.
sometimes preserving the civil rights of citizens results in undesired consequences.

we don't like extending the right of free speech to hatemongers such as the nazis or the klan.

we also cannot deny civil rights to criminals merely because they are truly evil people.

when a criminal gets off due to violation of their rights when they were caught, it maintains that right for those who are not guilty but get arrested anyway.

it's a tough trade off, but we must preserve the civil rights for all in spite of the risk.
Mavdog is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-24-2009, 03:07 PM   #20
alexamenos
Diamond Member
 
alexamenos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Basketball fan nirvana
Posts: 5,625
alexamenos has a reputation beyond reputealexamenos has a reputation beyond reputealexamenos has a reputation beyond reputealexamenos has a reputation beyond reputealexamenos has a reputation beyond reputealexamenos has a reputation beyond reputealexamenos has a reputation beyond reputealexamenos has a reputation beyond reputealexamenos has a reputation beyond reputealexamenos has a reputation beyond reputealexamenos has a reputation beyond repute
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Usually Lurkin View Post
making fun of 92bdad is all good and well, but why ignore his larger point?
Because his larger point rests upon a highly emotionally charged and factually challenged premise...

The facts as far as I can ascertain concerning Al-Shiri are these....

he was released from Gitmo in 2007, probably because he had a relative who knew the Bush family pretty well; and an "Internet statement, which could not immediately be verified, said al-Shihri was the group's second-in-command in Yemen". Everything else is speculation and fluff.

[Yes it's true that these missionaries were killed in Yemen and that the USS Cole was attacked in the Gulf of Yemen (how dare someone attack our Destroyer). The lesson I learn from all this is 'stay the fuck out of Yemen'.]

Anyhoo...why isn't the press making a bigger deal out of the fact a guy might be in yemen if an unverifiable internet statement is correct? I don't know, probably because the press hates freedom and want the terrorists to win.
__________________
"It does not take a brain seargant to know the reason this team struggles." -- dmack24

Last edited by alexamenos; 06-24-2009 at 03:09 PM.
alexamenos is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-24-2009, 03:17 PM   #21
dalmations202
Diamond Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Just outside the Metroplex
Posts: 5,537
dalmations202 has a reputation beyond reputedalmations202 has a reputation beyond reputedalmations202 has a reputation beyond reputedalmations202 has a reputation beyond reputedalmations202 has a reputation beyond reputedalmations202 has a reputation beyond reputedalmations202 has a reputation beyond reputedalmations202 has a reputation beyond reputedalmations202 has a reputation beyond reputedalmations202 has a reputation beyond reputedalmations202 has a reputation beyond repute
Default

Historically speaking........it's always a rich man's war ------ but the poor man's fight. And it always ends up being the poor man who pays the price when the rich man makes a poor decision.
__________________


"A government big enough to give you everything you want, is strong enough to take everything you have". Gerald Ford

"Life's tough, it's even tougher if you're stupid." -John Wayne

There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty:
soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order.
-Capt. Bob "Wolf" Johnson
dalmations202 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-24-2009, 05:05 PM   #22
Usually Lurkin
Diamond Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 8,195
Usually Lurkin has a reputation beyond reputeUsually Lurkin has a reputation beyond reputeUsually Lurkin has a reputation beyond reputeUsually Lurkin has a reputation beyond reputeUsually Lurkin has a reputation beyond reputeUsually Lurkin has a reputation beyond reputeUsually Lurkin has a reputation beyond reputeUsually Lurkin has a reputation beyond reputeUsually Lurkin has a reputation beyond reputeUsually Lurkin has a reputation beyond reputeUsually Lurkin has a reputation beyond repute
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mavdog View Post
the question really is . . .
The question really is whether this should all be treated as a war on terror or as a criminal case on terror.

You simply cannot win a war by taking every individual through their own personal episode of law and order.
Usually Lurkin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-24-2009, 05:08 PM   #23
Usually Lurkin
Diamond Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 8,195
Usually Lurkin has a reputation beyond reputeUsually Lurkin has a reputation beyond reputeUsually Lurkin has a reputation beyond reputeUsually Lurkin has a reputation beyond reputeUsually Lurkin has a reputation beyond reputeUsually Lurkin has a reputation beyond reputeUsually Lurkin has a reputation beyond reputeUsually Lurkin has a reputation beyond reputeUsually Lurkin has a reputation beyond reputeUsually Lurkin has a reputation beyond reputeUsually Lurkin has a reputation beyond repute
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by alexamenos View Post
Because his larger point rests upon a highly emotionally charged and factually challenged premise...
if this is enough to delegitimize a post, it's point, the poster and his argument, then

Quote:
probably because he had a relative who knew the Bush family pretty well; ... The lesson I learn from all this is 'stay the fuck out of Yemen'.... I don't know, probably because the press hates freedom and want the terrorists to win.
well, what can you say?
Usually Lurkin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-24-2009, 06:14 PM   #24
Mavdog
Diamond Member
 
Mavdog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Texas
Posts: 6,014
Mavdog has much to be proud ofMavdog has much to be proud ofMavdog has much to be proud ofMavdog has much to be proud ofMavdog has much to be proud ofMavdog has much to be proud ofMavdog has much to be proud ofMavdog has much to be proud ofMavdog has much to be proud ofMavdog has much to be proud ofMavdog has much to be proud of
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Usually Lurkin View Post
The question really is whether this should all be treated as a war on terror or as a criminal case on terror.

You simply cannot win a war by taking every individual through their own personal episode of law and order.
the treatment should be as per the existing laws and treaties we are party to.

if that requires a "personal episode of law and order", sobeit.
Mavdog is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-24-2009, 09:41 PM   #25
Usually Lurkin
Diamond Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 8,195
Usually Lurkin has a reputation beyond reputeUsually Lurkin has a reputation beyond reputeUsually Lurkin has a reputation beyond reputeUsually Lurkin has a reputation beyond reputeUsually Lurkin has a reputation beyond reputeUsually Lurkin has a reputation beyond reputeUsually Lurkin has a reputation beyond reputeUsually Lurkin has a reputation beyond reputeUsually Lurkin has a reputation beyond reputeUsually Lurkin has a reputation beyond reputeUsually Lurkin has a reputation beyond repute
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mavdog View Post
the treatment should be as per the existing laws and treaties we are party to.

if that requires a "personal episode of law and order", sobeit.
uh, yeah. If it were clear, there would be no argument.

I think Obama's outrage is being shipped to Bagram, by the way. Is yours following?
Usually Lurkin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-24-2009, 10:13 PM   #26
Robillion
Golden Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: San Diego, CA
Posts: 1,629
Robillion has a brilliant futureRobillion has a brilliant futureRobillion has a brilliant futureRobillion has a brilliant futureRobillion has a brilliant futureRobillion has a brilliant futureRobillion has a brilliant futureRobillion has a brilliant futureRobillion has a brilliant futureRobillion has a brilliant futureRobillion has a brilliant future
Default

I admit that I am would probably not have the best strategy in dealing with this particular situation, but I do know that we as U.S. CITIZENS have U.S. rights, and I can partly agree with the idea that terrorists should not have those same rights. However, we should always keep to our belief of human rights in general...

Personally, I just do not understand why we dont just send all the gitmo prisoners to a new prison governed by Iraq/Afganistan/etc. The crimes were on their soil. It's not like we have not had war prison camps at or near the country of war before. Afterall, we are no longer battling "Iraq" or "Afganistan" the countries, we are battling factions within them.

Anywho, Im not educated enough on this to really have a strong conviction myself.
Robillion is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-25-2009, 09:50 AM   #27
Mavdog
Diamond Member
 
Mavdog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Texas
Posts: 6,014
Mavdog has much to be proud ofMavdog has much to be proud ofMavdog has much to be proud ofMavdog has much to be proud ofMavdog has much to be proud ofMavdog has much to be proud ofMavdog has much to be proud ofMavdog has much to be proud ofMavdog has much to be proud ofMavdog has much to be proud ofMavdog has much to be proud of
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Usually Lurkin View Post
uh, yeah. If it were clear, there would be no argument.

I think Obama's outrage is being shipped to Bagram, by the way. Is yours following?
what is not clear? we follow our laws, we follow the geneva convention.

me, I don't really have any "outrage". do you?
Mavdog is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-25-2009, 10:05 AM   #28
Usually Lurkin
Diamond Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 8,195
Usually Lurkin has a reputation beyond reputeUsually Lurkin has a reputation beyond reputeUsually Lurkin has a reputation beyond reputeUsually Lurkin has a reputation beyond reputeUsually Lurkin has a reputation beyond reputeUsually Lurkin has a reputation beyond reputeUsually Lurkin has a reputation beyond reputeUsually Lurkin has a reputation beyond reputeUsually Lurkin has a reputation beyond reputeUsually Lurkin has a reputation beyond reputeUsually Lurkin has a reputation beyond repute
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mavdog View Post
what is not clear? we follow our laws, we follow the geneva convention.
ask the judges that keep overturning each other on whether geneva conventions apply to al qaeda, and ask all of the very well educated lawyers who keep arguing over exactly what aspects of Guantanamo Bay (and now Bagram) are legal.

Quote:
me, I don't really have any "outrage". do you?
by that statement, I'm asking whether Obama's supporters will protest Obama's use of Bagram like they've protested Bush's use of Guantanamo.
Usually Lurkin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-25-2009, 10:35 AM   #29
Mavdog
Diamond Member
 
Mavdog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Texas
Posts: 6,014
Mavdog has much to be proud ofMavdog has much to be proud ofMavdog has much to be proud ofMavdog has much to be proud ofMavdog has much to be proud ofMavdog has much to be proud ofMavdog has much to be proud ofMavdog has much to be proud ofMavdog has much to be proud ofMavdog has much to be proud ofMavdog has much to be proud of
Default

the issue in regard to al queda and the geneva convention on treatment of prisioners was a result of the bush administration decision to not apply those standards to al queda. if the bush administration followed the convention and applied the rules to al queda there isn't any argument.

guantanamo itself isn't the issue, just as the use of bagram isn't the issue. if there are people in custody there must be a facility to place them.

the issue is how these people are handled, keeping them for years and years without any charges nor trials is what causes the "outrage" you speak of.
Mavdog is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-25-2009, 11:16 AM   #30
Usually Lurkin
Diamond Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 8,195
Usually Lurkin has a reputation beyond reputeUsually Lurkin has a reputation beyond reputeUsually Lurkin has a reputation beyond reputeUsually Lurkin has a reputation beyond reputeUsually Lurkin has a reputation beyond reputeUsually Lurkin has a reputation beyond reputeUsually Lurkin has a reputation beyond reputeUsually Lurkin has a reputation beyond reputeUsually Lurkin has a reputation beyond reputeUsually Lurkin has a reputation beyond reputeUsually Lurkin has a reputation beyond repute
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mavdog View Post
the issue in regard to al queda and the geneva convention on treatment of prisioners was a result of the bush administration decision to not apply those standards to al queda. if the bush administration followed the convention and applied the rules to al queda there isn't any argument.
didn't some judge say that geneva conventions should apply to al qaeda, then another judge overturned that, saying that they don't? The problem with just saying, "it's so clear to just follow the law" is that we are actually creating law as we go along.

Quote:
the issue is how these people are handled, keeping them for years and years without any charges nor trials is what causes the "outrage" you speak of.
uh, right. And other things like access to lawyers and viewing evidence and allowing evidence that comes from torture and all that other stuff. And Obama's pushing back against US court rulings, trying to do these things at one place, while closing down another place in a big public show about how bad it is to do these things.

Last edited by Usually Lurkin; 06-25-2009 at 11:16 AM.
Usually Lurkin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-25-2009, 12:01 PM   #31
Mavdog
Diamond Member
 
Mavdog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Texas
Posts: 6,014
Mavdog has much to be proud ofMavdog has much to be proud ofMavdog has much to be proud ofMavdog has much to be proud ofMavdog has much to be proud ofMavdog has much to be proud ofMavdog has much to be proud ofMavdog has much to be proud ofMavdog has much to be proud ofMavdog has much to be proud ofMavdog has much to be proud of
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Usually Lurkin View Post
didn't some judge say that geneva conventions should apply to al qaeda, then another judge overturned that, saying that they don't? The problem with just saying, "it's so clear to just follow the law" is that we are actually creating law as we go along.
if the decision was made from the beginning to treat the prisioners according to the geneva covention, there would not have been any need to get a judge's decision, and no need to attempt to "create law".

Quote:
uh, right. And other things like access to lawyers and viewing evidence and allowing evidence that comes from torture and all that other stuff. And Obama's pushing back against US court rulings, trying to do these things at one place, while closing down another place in a big public show about how bad it is to do these things.
again, if the decision was made to follow the rules of the geneva convention, if the bush administration had not created the rationale of using what had previously been agreed was torture against the prisioners, these questions would not exist.

obama is not trying to use the torture against the prisioners, so the comment that "obama's...trying to do these things at one place" is wrong.

the issue isn't that people have been "arrested" so to speak for their acts, the issue is these people have been locked up for years and years without due process, and these prisioners had what is commonly viewed as torture done to them. don't lock them up without due process, don't torture them, and there isn't any problem....
Mavdog is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-25-2009, 12:26 PM   #32
Usually Lurkin
Diamond Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 8,195
Usually Lurkin has a reputation beyond reputeUsually Lurkin has a reputation beyond reputeUsually Lurkin has a reputation beyond reputeUsually Lurkin has a reputation beyond reputeUsually Lurkin has a reputation beyond reputeUsually Lurkin has a reputation beyond reputeUsually Lurkin has a reputation beyond reputeUsually Lurkin has a reputation beyond reputeUsually Lurkin has a reputation beyond reputeUsually Lurkin has a reputation beyond reputeUsually Lurkin has a reputation beyond repute
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mavdog View Post
if the decision was made from the beginning to treat the prisioners according to the geneva covention, there would not have been any need to get a judge's decision, and no need to attempt to "create law".
but if the geneva conventions don't apply (and that's what the final judge said) (I think it was the final judge, anyway), then it's perfectly legal (ie, we are following the law) in not applying those conventions.

Quote:
obama is not trying to use the torture against the prisioners, so the comment that "obama's...trying to do these things at one place" is wrong.

the issue isn't that people have been "arrested" so to speak for their acts, the issue is these people have been locked up for years and years without due process, and these prisioners had what is commonly viewed as torture done to them. don't lock them up without due process, don't torture them, and there isn't any problem....
"Less than a month after signing an executive order to close the Guantanamo Bay prison camp, President Barack Obama has quietly agreed to keep denying the right to trial to hundreds more terror suspects held at a makeshift camp in Afghanistan that human rights lawyers have dubbed “Obama’s Guantanamo”."
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/wo...l-1628958.html
Usually Lurkin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-25-2009, 02:04 PM   #33
Mavdog
Diamond Member
 
Mavdog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Texas
Posts: 6,014
Mavdog has much to be proud ofMavdog has much to be proud ofMavdog has much to be proud ofMavdog has much to be proud ofMavdog has much to be proud ofMavdog has much to be proud ofMavdog has much to be proud ofMavdog has much to be proud ofMavdog has much to be proud ofMavdog has much to be proud ofMavdog has much to be proud of
Default

no, if my memory is correct the scotus said the geneva convention should apply when they rejected the bush plan.

the independent article doesn't go into the reason there isn't a plan to try these detainees...that being the need for the obama administration to create the format of trials because the previous administration didn't do what was right.

there is not a situation where the trials will never be held (although obama has admitted there are a few who may continue to be held without trial) it is a question of when the trials will begin.

there is also no continued use of torture on the detainees, an act which made it more difficult to go to trial as some evidence may not be credible due to the means of obtaining it and the lack of veracity of that evidence.
Mavdog is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
fluff the tragic dragon, fluffy banter, smells like caca doo-doo

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump




All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:04 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.