And I wouldn’t go so far as to say they haven’t returned to the battlefield. Many have literally returned to the battlefield. There is a also a huge support group for these terrorists. Giving money, organizing, recruiting, smuggling, spying on troop movements. There is a gamut of things these people can do without actually carrying a gun.

Some of the released have blown themselves up and killed large numbers of “innocents” in the process. You are being ingenuous to worry about the one innocent held in Gitmo while not seeming to worry so much about the many innocents killed by Gitmo detainees that have been released. One is now the number 2 Al Qaeda guy in Somalia. No telling how many people he is responsible for killing since his release.

Many of the detainees released were on the battlefield fighting and perhaps killing US troops. They were motivated by many reasons. Local traditions, freedom fighter, unemployment, money to feed their families, fear of retribution by the Taliban, forced conscripment, doing jihad as preached by their Imams, etc.

Once they were captured, they were able to extricate themselves from that situation and appeared to have been rehabilitated. They were released and went home and do not participate anymore except to protect themselves.

Others told the same story but were liars. The pressure was on the US from the world community to release the Gitmo prisoners so we made a special effort to do so. The “innocent” myth drove that pressure. These liars did return to the battlefield and many are still killing innocents today.

Many others were released from Gitmo but were incarcerated in their home countries. Some are still incarcerated, others have since been released not due to innocence but due to the belief they were somehow rehabilitated, served their time, or were no longer considered a threat.

None of that makes them innocent dupes just out for a walk in the Afghan countryside and they were unjustly whisked away to Gitmo. That is a falsehood that is still being perpetuated. Thats my whole point here.

. I never claimed to know any innocents. I assume the process includes some. That would be a logical valid assumption.

That would be your first. There have been hundreds of people released from Gitmo. The vast majority of which have not “returned to the battlefield” no matter how absurdly openly you want to define that term. Please explain why the Bush administration released them. And many found not to be enemy combatants. Please explain why they were found to be so.

It is okay to admit that Bush screwed the pooch by not expeditiously setting up a procedure by which a bare minimum of due process would be available to detainees. If, as JD pointed out, he had done that, there would not be an issue. Instead, he was arrogant and stubborn. But that was par for his course.

You still can’t name one of your innocents so we can take a look at their particular case. Instead, you attack with snarky comments, as if that somehow proves your point.

If there were a couple of people picked up, sent to Gitmo, kept there for years when they were completely innocent of any wrongdoing, we should hear about it. Name them.

Your generalization that Gitmo is bad because they detain innocents for years without due process is a broad brush indictment of the entire situation and is flat out wrong. When you are called on it, you resort to “I didn’t say that”

Maybe I read it wrong but it seems pretty clear to me you were attacking Stephen Crowders assessment of Gitmo and attacking the notion that the Gitmo prisoners there now were a threat to the US.

People are detained, arrested, questioned, etc all over the world every day. It is a process to sort out wrongdoers from innocents. It is very common. It does not mean the entire process is flawed or there was wrongdoing involved. Some countries are more abusive than others. Ours is NOT one of them.

We went through this process with all the Gitmo prisoners. It was proper and done the best way possible under the circumstances. No one is perfect as your Obama critic in chief is finding out now. There are complexities involved. I never claimed to know any innocents. I assume the process includes some. That would be a logical valid assumption. I don’t extrapolate that into a many, most, or all scenario, nor condemn Gitmo as a whole because it possibly happened.

I read the military said the detainees at Gitmo were not benign and they posed a threat to the US. It would be obtuse to think the entire process worked to perfection and not one single person was treated wrongly. Yet, you hang your hat on the one innocent treated badly which you are unable to produce any evidence of, but now trumpet as your real point.

Name me these innocents you so loudly proclaim as evidence that there must be are a lot of accused jihadists in Gitmo but not many actual jihadists. Who are they? You don’t even know. You just like to jump on the I hate Gitmo bandwagon and snark at anyone who challenges you as if that proves some nebulous point.

When you play with the big dogs, sometimes you get bit.

How about… Yes, How about we fix up ol’ Alcatraz, install a court room, & do it all over there? That way Obama get’s his wish, & then we can dump the executed bodies directly into the ocean, thus feeding the ecosystem, saving the krill, the whales AND the reefs, & all of humanity at once!! Even the environmentalist will have a victory in all this! My Gosh I’m a genius!!!

Every day in America hundreds of guilty perps are released with no charges being brought at all. (Do you know any law enforcement officers, prosecutors, or criminal defense attorneys?)

What’s your point?

And even more are released because they are…wait for it… innocent. You think the previous administration released all of them just for the hell of it or because they knew they were guilty but just didn’t have quite the evidence to prove it? That flatly contradicts reality.

Do you really think that no innocent people were swept up and sent to Gitmo? Do you really have no problem with them being held indefinitely, with no charges being brought? And for that matter why wouldn’t you have a problem with GUILTY people being held indefinitely with no charges being brought?

Your original statement implied they were just accused of jihadism, but they weren’t jihadists and were later declared innocent by a military tribunal.

Wrong.

I also read into your statement a belief that most or a large % of detainees were innocent.

Wrong.

If it was only a small % of innocent detained, why bring it up.

I don’t know. Maybe because it is abhorrent to me that our country would detain even ONE innocent person for years on end with no guarantee of any procedural rights to prove their innocence.

As I said before, this has gone on too long. Try and convict or release and kill later on the “battlefield”. Keeping them indefinitely doesn’t do anyone any good. If the population at Gitmo was 0, it wouldn’t have been a campaign issue.

I agree. Due process is apparently a commie liberal idea John. Be careful.

Has Chap responded with his examples of innocents at Gitmo? Nope. He can’t.

Wait… You mean the innocents that you already conceded existed? “No doubt there were some “innocent” people detained. So what.” Do you even remember what your argument is from post to post?

I’m talking about the ones that are still there. If you have that data chap, I’d be happy to look it over.

You know what would be a super source of data? A trial. Or hell, even a military tribunal. Something. Anything.

As of November 2005, a total of 505 detainees were being held at Guantanamo. Of these, more than 100 hailed from Saudi Arabia, approximately 80 from Yemen, about 65 from Pakistan, and 50 from Afghanistan.

I guess if you live in Saudi Arabia, a visit to Afghanistan would be a nice vacation. Otherwise, I am not sure who would go there especially during a time when the US was poised to attack and make it a war zone or had already attacked. Only 50 Afghans in Gitmo. Doesn’t sound like many from the area. Oh yeah, they were all aid workers. Ha!

Any dolt can see the nexus here.

Has Chap responded with his examples of innocents at Gitmo? Nope. He can’t. Out of 500+ held at Gitmo, very few were true innocents. Many fought US forces, or supported the fight and were simply captured. Once they found out the consequensces of their actions, they changed their tune and were released as no longer being a threat. Read that as they once were a threat.

But yet the media and world opinion portray that reality as hundreds of innocents all being tortured. Who cares about the truth right? It’s all about destroying America or electing a particular political party. How proud they must be.

Still waiting on that list so we can get to the real facts on these Islamic thugs.

Speak truth to power!

On November 17th, 2009 at 5:48 pm, chapoutier said:
No doubt there is some recidivism.

Even if it’s 0.01%, then they’re not innocent.

As I said before, this has gone on too long. Try and convict or release and kill later on the “battlefield”. Keeping them indefinitely doesn’t do anyone any good. If the population at Gitmo was 0, it wouldn’t have been a campaign issue.

chapoutier said:

It seems hard to argue with the fact that those deemed “innocent”, or whatever term is preferred, are released and not held without reason.

Huh? The instances of people being held without reason are numerous and well documented.

Did the 82nd Airborne and the 1st Marine Division take these people into custody at the local mall or movie theater?

I don’t recall seeing or reading about the details of each of these detainees capture. I’m talking about the ones that are still there. If you have that data chap, I’d be happy to look it over.

However these are POWs and you don’t treat POWs like that. And it’s a RIOT watching liberals trying to deny that they are POWs. Especially here… I love reading people’s opinions about how to treat prisoners of war… especially when they have no frelling clue what they’re talking about.

You don’t bring charges against a POW, you just feed them and keep them out of the fray. That’s it. And for this situation they’re being treated absolutly correctly, regardless of the panty wetting and hand wringing.

However this nonsensical disaster of a show trial that Obama has arranged for actual war criminals will be Obama’s final downfall. War criminals are tried at a MILITARY TRIBUNAL not in criminal court. These animals are going to behave, keep their mouths shut and when time comes to testify they’ll simply say they didn’t get their Miranda rights and their confession was coerced through torture (because Obama himself accused their questioners of torture even though the facts show this to be a lie)

I can hear the fourth graders singing their hymns now:

mmmm mmmm mmmm Barak Hussein Obama
mmmm mmmm mmmm Let the terrorists go
mmmm mmmm mmmm Barak Hussein Obama
mmmm mmmm mmmm now innocent blood will flow

I guess Rush’s Club Gitmo joke really isn’t a joke!

That doesn’t constitute innocence. In fact, it suggests they were guilty of fighting against our country as enemy combatants but are no longer considered a threat.

Being released without charges does not constitute innocence either. There could be many reasons why that happened including releasing them to their home countries for further detention. Not exactly a poster child event for innocence.

No doubt there were some “innocent” people detained. So what. The enemy created that problem by blending in with the local population.

If your story is truthful, you will soon be released. If your story is suspect, you end up in Gitmo. You may be released later but that doesn’t mean you are or were innocent.

Your original statement implied they were just accused of jihadism, but they weren’t jihadists and were later declared innocent by a military tribunal. I refute that. I also read into your statement a belief that most or a large % of detainees were innocent. If it was only a small % of innocent detained, why bring it up. You are perpetuating an urban myth that Gitmo is a place where the evil Bush tortures innocent Muslims.

Name me the specific “innocents” you are referring to. I would love to see what their real story is as to why they were there and how they got detained. Perhaps their stories changed several times. Perhaps there were inconsistancies and invalid facts in their stories. There may not be enough to convict them of certain crimes but it does not mean they were not trying to kill US soldiers or supporting those who were. Innocence my foot.

And, of course, hundreds were released with no charges being brought at all.

Every day in America hundreds of guilty perps are released with no charges being brought at all. (Do you know any law enforcement officers, prosecutors, or criminal defense attorneys?)

What’s your point?

It is a perfect place for jihadists. Not so perfect for those accused of jihadism.

Well then perhaps the accused Jihadists shouldn’t hang around those that do, eh Chap?