• Please take a moment and update your account profile. If you have an updated account profile with basic information on why you are on Air Warriors it will help other people respond to your posts. How do you update your profile you ask?

    Go here:

    Edit Account Details and Profile

"Ex-Gitmo Prisoner commits suicide attack"

mmx1

Woof!
pilot
Contributor
You said it, Flimsiest of Evidence, not enough to convict as well as not enough to hold, He could have been as guilty as we thought, just we were unable to prove it. Therefore we set him free, and he proved us right. You also said they might not have heldus in the highest regard to begin with. People are detained for a reason, not just because they have brown skin and where a turbine on their head.

No, he didn't prove us right. Not holding the US in high regard is no reason to detain anyone. Did you miss the part where people have been turned in for bounties? Or because an informant held a grudge against someone for sectarian/tribal/screwed my sister/I just don't like the cut of his jib?
 

lmnop

Active Member
People are detained for a reason, not just because they have brown skin and where a turbine on their head.

If I had to wear one of these on my head, I'd be pissed too...

220px-Dampfturbine_Montage01.jpg
 
No, he didn't prove us right. Not holding the US in high regard is no reason to detain anyone. Did you miss the part where people have been turned in for bounties? Or because an informant held a grudge against someone for sectarian/tribal/screwed my sister/I just don't like the cut of his jib?

Clearly the man was detained for something. I don't know why. It's not my job. It's not your job either. We detained him for a reason and let him go for a reason. We can't be afraid of detaining possible terrorists just because a few "good apples" might fall in with the rest.
 

BourneID

Member
pilot
Clearly the man was detained for something. I don't know why. It's not my job. It's not your job either. We detained him for a reason and let him go for a reason. We can't be afraid of detaining possible terrorists just because a few "good apples" might fall in with the rest.

Nail on the head.
 

BourneID

Member
pilot
No, he didn't prove us right. Not holding the US in high regard is no reason to detain anyone. Did you miss the part where people have been turned in for bounties? Or because an informant held a grudge against someone for sectarian/tribal/screwed my sister/I just don't like the cut of his jib?

I didn't say it was either, I said " You also said they might not have held us in the highest regard to begin with. People are detained for a reason, not just because they have brown skin and where a turbine on their head."

For future note most bounties are out there with an associated name or face, if a person has a bounty on them, they are already wanted for a specific reason,, Now if Haji turns akmed in because he looked at his sister, as one ofhis possible future wives, maybe Akmed needs to attack Haji.
 

mmx1

Woof!
pilot
Contributor
Clearly the man was detained for something. I don't know why. It's not my job. It's not your job either. We detained him for a reason and let him go for a reason. We can't be afraid of detaining possible terrorists just because a few "good apples" might fall in with the rest.

It's not a matter of whether or not we detain people. It's whether or not we condone or overlook prisoner mistreatment and the deprivation of due process because of a mistaken blanket presumption of guilt or complicity.
 

squeeze

Retired Harrier Dude
pilot
Super Moderator
Contributor
Clearly the man was detained for something. I don't know why. It's not my job. It's not your job either. We detained him for a reason and let him go for a reason. We can't be afraid of detaining possible terrorists just because a few "good apples" might fall in with the rest.

William Blackstone would beg to differ.
 

SDNalgene

Blind. Continue...
pilot
Clearly the man was detained for something. I don't know why. It's not my job. It's not your job either. We detained him for a reason and let him go for a reason. We can't be afraid of detaining possible terrorists just because a few "good apples" might fall in with the rest.
Agreed.

Nor can we try to justify not releasing those against whom we have insufficient evidence to try and convict just because the rest of the detainees are "bad apples". This whole incident doesn't prove anything. We don't know if he was really guilty and we just didn't have the goods on him. We don't know the circumstances that resulted in his detention. We don't know if he was treated inhumanely in prison or not and if that was the driving cause for his actions.

What we do know is that we are a nation of laws. We are not a nation that is in the business of incarcerating people forever with no (fine, insufficient) evidence of wrongdoing. This whole enemy combatant arena is a relatively new problem, legally and morally, and our process is by no means perfect, but it is what we have and we have to work with it.

We aren't going to be 100% right on who we detain and we obviously aren't going to be 100% right on who we let go. At some point we do have to release people when we can't prove they did anything wrong, even if we don't like them very much. The fact that later on down the line they do something doesn't do anything to change the fact that at the time we detained them we were unable to prove that they were guilty of anything.

We hold ourselves out as a beacon of freedom and justice to the world. When we indefinitely detain individuals without evidence to charge them it is a blot on our reputation. And yes I think we need the prison at Gitmo, but it certainly doesn't advance our standing in the world. And pointing that out doesn't make me a terrorist sympathizer, I am quite the opposite in fact, lest I risk disgusting Bourne.
 

BigRed389

Registered User
None
Agreed.

Nor can we try to justify not releasing those against whom we have insufficient evidence to try and convict just because the rest of the detainees are "bad apples". This whole incident doesn't prove anything. We don't know if he was really guilty and we just didn't have the goods on him. We don't know the circumstances that resulted in his detention. We don't know if he was treated inhumanely in prison or not and if that was the driving cause for his actions.

What we do know is that we are a nation of laws. We are not a nation that is in the business of incarcerating people forever with no (fine, insufficient) evidence of wrongdoing. This whole enemy combatant arena is a relatively new problem, legally and morally, and our process is by no means perfect, but it is what we have and we have to work with it.

We aren't going to be 100% right on who we detain and we obviously aren't going to be 100% right on who we let go. At some point we do have to release people when we can't prove they did anything wrong, even if we don't like them very much. The fact that later on down the line they do something doesn't do anything to change the fact that at the time we detained them we were unable to prove that they were guilty of anything.

We hold ourselves out as a beacon of freedom and justice to the world. When we indefinitely detain individuals without evidence to charge them it is a blot on our reputation. And yes I think we need the prison at Gitmo, but it certainly doesn't advance our standing in the world. And pointing that out doesn't make me a terrorist sympathizer, I am quite the opposite in fact, lest I risk disgusting Bourne.

Best way to put it.

We should hold ourselves to a higher standard.
 

Flugelman

Well-Known Member
Contributor
Well excuse me for screwing up the term for raping another man's mouth! :D

Thanks for the uh...."enlightenment" though. :D

"My baloney has a first name... It's O-S-C-A-R

My baloney has a last name... It's M-E-Y-E-R... "

Back in they day it was called "Horse Cock"

No rape involved, just lunch. :D
 
Top