Gitmo suicides 'a PR stunt'

The Reason

==These men knew what they were there for. They, and God, knew there hearts and plans. I 100% reject the notion that the majority of these men are just innocent guys being picked on by the bad US. They are there for a reason.

 

[FONT=&quot]Daisy, please enlighten us on the term “common suicide”? “Gittmo Hell” so do you believe it should be a place of pleasure and relaxation? You never cease to amaze me in your terrorist’s sympathizer compassion, it’s nauseating… [/FONT]



After reading posts such as yours, it reminds me how thankful I am for the Patriot Act.

http://www.whitehouse.gov/infocus/patriotact/

 

Moving this for more "enlightenment" in the Politics Forum.

Thanks for the puking smiley. That's about how I feel about all this sympathy right now for these terrorists. Bill O'Reilly interviewed the military down at Gitmo on his program the other night. They really are terrorists down there eating better meals than what our soldiers get.

http://www.gitmocookbook.com

 

[FONT=&quot]It means killing yourself for the purpose of killing yourself. That really needs explaining? [/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]

Nice strawman, Enoch. Since the prisoners at Gitmo haven't been charged with any crime, let alone found guilty and sentenced, they should be treated with decency. In fact, all prisoners should be treated decently. [/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]

And what act of terrorism did these particular prisoners commit? I find your cruelty nauseating and disturbing. Your xenophobia makes me puke.[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]Remember, anyone can love their friends, there is no credit in that. Jesus asks us to love our enemies (not that these particular people were ever shown to be such). [/FONT]

And after reading yours, I am more grateful than ever for the Bill of Rights and more scared of the Patriot Act. That people like you would use it as a threat against people like me is downright scary.

 

How do you know since they were never charged with anything?

And did God whisper that info into your ears or the ears of those who put them there?

Your 100% rejection doesn't mean much especially as you seem to be largely innocent of knowledge concerning these men. How was it determined who got sent to Gitmo, who got sent to ghost camps, who got released? 192 men who went to Gitmo have been released without charges.

Why do you reject the notion? Is it because it goes against your innate decency and sense of justice?

 

Matt Black says "And how do you guys know they're terrorists? What evidence have you seen, apart from Dubya saying "These are bad men" ? What evidence has been adduced before a court of law? What happened to 'innocent until proven guilty'? Would your tune change if the govt carted you off there without charge? "

So, Matt, if these guys are not bad men, that would mean we are the bad men, right? Have you considered giving our side the benefit of the doubt? Do you and Daisy have such a distaste for our current administration that you actually think we are the bad guys?

 

Isaiah 5:20 Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light, and light for darkness; that put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter!

That's all I have to say about that.

 

Where did you get that one Daisy?? LOL Enemy combatants have been in EVERY war we have had. (snicker)
Love your scripture post Blammo!

 

So, which the better choice? Detain these people in Gitmo with humane treatment and decent food, or should we release them to kill again?

This is war, after all. We could have just shot them and left them on the battlefield and been done with it.

All of this is just a show. They know how the bleeding-heart liberals of America will whip themselves into a frenzy over something like this. As was pointed out above, suicides happen in prisons way too often. These yahoos decide to off themselves together for publicity, and the liberal media is just playing their part in the whole song and dance.

 

How did I know you would say that? :smilewinkgrin:

 

Ok, provide a citation dating before 2001 from any war we have had that uses the term "enemy combatants" as distinct from POWs or enemy troops.

That shouldn't be too hard, if it's true.

 

Enemy Combatants is just a fancy name for the opposite side in a war. Who cares WHEN it came about. They still have always existed in EVERY war.

 

So Blammo, why not just answer Matt and Daisy's questions directly or are you afraid too?

 

Not true! Of course, generically, it means that. However, the current context and coining of that phrase was a way for the Administration to bypass the Geneva Convention and hold people without charges, without legal counsel, and without conviction for as long as they see fit. Dehumanizing your enemy is a way to justify atrocities.

 

I would rather they be held away from America, then IN America.

 

You're presuming that they have killed before which has not been shown to be true. That would be the basis of a charge.

Again, you are presuming that they actually were captured on a battlefield which is mostly not the case. Many were turned in for a bounty ($$$) or for political motives (rival tribes); many were rounded up because they happened to be in the neighborhood where an incident took place.

This is a war, but it is being fought in heavily populated areas - cities and towns.

The suicides are for show? What do Iraqis know or care about bleeding heart liberals of America? Where is the frenzy you speak of?

That makes it all right then.

Yahoos? You don't know who they are, but feel free to slime them nonetheless, rabid-right style.

Think about it...Why would they kill themselves "for publicity" when they don't have contact with the outside world and nobody who knows them knows where they are? Why would they not suppose it would just be hushed up as some rabid-righties would like?