This has been a great week. 4 terroists scum are going to meet their maker. bye bye

Facism -- Alive and well in the United States of America and already in a neighbourhood near you.

Why the automatic presumption of guilt here, and what's the problem with these detainees getting a fair trial?

The views in this thread of some of the members here don't surprise me - (the one-time schoolyard bully?.....Another who was the one the schoolyard bullies picked on and is now getting even by becoming part of the herd?) - but I'm really surprised that there are those whose views I respect (altho I may not agree with) also applauding the deaths of individuals who have been imprisoned without a trial or hearing.

Do you people really want the government to have the power to arrest and imprison anyone they wish to for any reason, without a trial?

What took you so long Plaw to voice your opinions on this Plaw?

= GUILTY IMHO

What took me so long?

I was enjoying reading some of the posts as they becaame, I think, sillier and sillier.

I might feel the same way if I was incarcerated for a few years without being charged, without a trial, without a lawyer to protect my rights, and without being able to communicate with those in the outside world.

So anyway, Mig, if someone is guilty in your opinion they're not entitled to a trial?

You're perfectly entitled to think they're guilty.

AAMOF, despite my dwindling confidence in our government's desire and ability to tell us the truth, I still have enough confidence to believe that most, if not almost all, of these detainees are guilty.

But that doesn't change the fact that I think they should all have their day in court and be proven guilty.

Especially if one of our goals is to set an example for the rest of the world that a democracy, in which everyone's rights are protected, is the best form of government that there is.

Yea Plaw give these al-Qaida scum a fair trial. I just hope they find 'em all guilty.

It is so nice to know that you feel that way.

All?

I understand that you believe them all to be guilty for no other reason than our government says that they are guilty, but would you want someone who is innocent to be found guilty?

I would hope that there is enough evidence to find guilty those who actually are guilty, and that those who are not guilty are set free.

No I am not that cold hearted Plaw.

Agreed.

The only day in court that they deserve is to face a firing squad!


Don Cardi

Right. Because we are advocating indiscriminate violence against Muslims, and I didn't specifically blame Islamic fundamentalism for 9/11.

What is pathetic is someone shouting 'racist' and then running away.

But keep going.

Right. Because Islamic terrorists don't promote these heaven-bound rewards to their jihadists in hopes of inspiring them to martyrdom.

In all fairness, you're probably right, the 72 virgins thing is untrue.

I recently heard the translation may be incorrect, and it may mean 72 raisins.

Sorry for the confusion (I martyred myself and all I got was this lousy box of Sunmaid raisins). Though you have to admit, the girl on the box is rather attractive, in an American imperialistic slave sort of way.

I'm not sure what a torrorist is, but I find more hilarity in the fact that "condem"-ing (that's right - when you meet the 72 virgins, 'wrap-it-up,' lest you catch a disease from Allah’s rewards) of these torrirists is met with such anger.

I mean, you've admitted they are "torrists," but I thought the thread was "racist" and "untrue?"
Ooh! The buzzword of the week is "facism." Now, if you can actually define that word, I'd be impressed. However, I suspect you've just thrown it in there because it sounded good, and it also conveniently makes you seem so much more intelligent since, after all, you've summed up the entire thread without refuting anything! Cheers!

Here's another one - ineptitude -- Alive and well across the world and clearly originating from a keyboard near you!
You're right, Plaw. What we need to do is be entirely fair with these people, and treat them with the religious and judicial freedoms they so truly deserve.

So, according to Shari'a law, what would their fate be? Stoning, or beheading? Because, last time I checked, there wasn't a whole lot of legal wiggle room for anything like deliberation, presumed innocence, or a jury of ones peers.

That would be fair, after all?

Well, by all means please, divulge the identities of these members with whom you are in such universal "condem"-nation of! Though, it shouldn't be too hard to figure out.

Now give me your lunch money.

What a surprise! The slippery slope. The proverbial horse that has been ridden more than Seattle Slew.

Yes, I do think we need a Gulag...err...military prison for these non-POW's, non-US citizens for whom the Constitution nor the Geneva Convention applies.

Should I pull out that 'compassion for criminals' quote again? It never grows old.

But don't worry, Plaw. I don't think good 'ol G.W. is going to be knocking on your door, arresting you and throwing away the key without any fair trial anytime soon.

Why the wait?

I mean, after all, I don’t think we’ve ever had to wait for very long before realizing your posts grew increasingly sillier as a thread aged. :p

Ding ding ding! Here is the kicker.

"My rights..."

"Without a trial..."

"Without being charged..."

I must have missed the part of the Constitution that said these enemies of the state were entitled to "rights." Of course, keep in mind that the same people who advocate "rights" for these terrorists (for shame! I didn't use any adjective to imply their obvious innocence...) are likely (though not always, qualifier!) the same people who support illegal immigrants receiving welfare, social security and other social program benefits without being American citizens!

I guess in either case, the Constitution applies to people who aren't American citizens...hmm.

So much for "we the people..."

Why waste taxpayer money when, as you've stated, you think "most if not almost all of these detainees are guilty?"

And, should they go to trial, and they manage to find a loophole, or were treated unfairly and get a mistrial, or some other technicality, and they were set free, and then participated in a terrorist attack on America...whoa.

To quote another movie...

Anakin Skywalker: "He must stand trial!"

Mace Windu: "He's too dangerous to be left alive."

Perhaps if these people weren't terrorists (or connected to them), I might agree with you. But to deal with reason and fairness with this people will serve to do little, when they have sworn to kill our children, rape our women, and destroy our way of life, declaring absolute war on America.

And I'm sure we probably will end up seeing some sort of trials for these people, so Plaw, don't get all riled up. I just think that it would most likely serve the security and people of our nation better if we extracted as much information as possible from these animals, and then ordered them to start digging holes.

Well, as someone said, the truth shall set you free.

As long as they keep telling us about their buddies in Al Qaeda, they'll be fine.

And then, we'll make sure they meet up with Allah one way or another.

Don't copy me, wannabe bully. You could never hang with me, and now you've disappointed your friends.

Now give me your lunch money. All of you.
Double-J

The typical "we need to understand them" approach that some from the left constantly revert back to.

So if you feel that way then you must also feel that because these terrorists have been incarcerated for so long that they have the right to regularly attack the guards, pelt them with feces, urine, semen, and spit?

Tell me something, who represented Nick Berg at his sentencing trial?


Don Cardi

DJ
You get one side of the building and fire away
DC
You get the other side and fire away

Now both of you give me your lunch money :p

There are many reasons to hold these dangerous terrorists. One of those reasons is that they provide us with a wealth of important information that we must continue to collect. But to make this happen, they need to be confined in a special facility away from everyone else where they can be controlled effectively and interrogated properly. Gitmo Bay fits these requirements in ways no other facility would. This high security prison is keeping extremely dangerous terrorists from killing more innocent Americans. That's the bottom line in my book. It is not a gulag or torture camp, it is a high security prison housing the scumbags who want to behead our people, blow up our buildings and destroy our way of life.


Don Cardi

Mignon, congrats on the line of the week! But didn't you know...all good things come to those who wait.

Well, since these particular individuals chose to take their own lives and did so in a planned, calculated manner...we may as well applaud (along with those whose views you respect ) their ingenuity and success.

If only thier fellow inmates would do the same. Alas, now with the bedsheets confiscated for most of the day, they'll have to come up with some other plan.

AppleOnYa
(President, Ann Coulter Fan Club)

GIVE ME YOUR LUNCH MONEY!!!

ALL OF YOU!!!

None of the clever and/or not so-clever quips managed to address the issue of presumption of guilt without a trial.

Actually, Mig's did, and only her comments deserve a measure of respect IMO.

So, once again, another thread degenerates.

Carry on, people.

Oh, darn...I was so hoping just this once to be awarded a measure of respect.

Weren't you Double-J??? Don Cardi???

But there you go ... once again, the above-it-all, holier-than-thou attitude we've so grown to know & love.

Clever? Or not so clever? Only a fair trial will reveal the truth.

Apple

Frankly, I'm tired of these neoimpeereealists not giving the torrorists a fair tryal. In fact, I condem Plaw for his silly post!

Give me your lunch money.
Double-J

Neither does your post, FYI.

I rest my case.

I rest my case. [/b][/quote]But...you've denied us a fair trial?

Oh, whatever shall we do?

*suicide*

I will haunt you for your lunch money.
Double-J

Is that all I get Plaw is just a measure? But thanks for that measure

Well, it's a full measure


No, I've only rested my case.

Anytime you're ready to address the issues, feel free.

No, I've only rested my case.

Anytime you're ready to address the issues, feel free. [/b][/quote]Forgive me...was that supposed to fit inbetween the part where we were called bullies, or where the argument was called "silly?"

I really am not sure.

Though for someone who now has "rested" their case twice, shall we await for an unprecedented third response?

Now give me your lunch money.
Double-J
Bully Pulpit

Why, because you don't happen to agree with the way that some of us feel about this issue? If I happen to feel strongly that these people do NOT deserve a trial for the reasons that I posted earlier, that makes this thread degenerate?

Here, I'll state my case for you once again :

So because this is my view on this matter, and you don't agree with it, then according to you this thread has degenerated once again.

Hey, as our Don has pointed out to us this past week :

....so if you don't agree, please don't accuse us of degenerating this thread. Just move on.


Don Cardi

Please, Don Cardi. Spare us your racist, increasingly silly intimidation.

We all know you were a bully as a kid!

Yes, Don Cardi...instead of re-posting your articulate, intelligent thoughts on the matter, why don't you simply 'rest your case'.

That seems to be the latest form of arrogant, self-serving, self-indulgence on the BB.



Apple

Why, because you don't happen to agree with the way that some of us feel about this issue? If I happen to feel strongly that these people do NOT deserve a trial for the reasons that I posted earlier, that makes this thread degenerate?

[/b][/quote]No, it's degenerated because some people are more interested in making the thread a laugh-fest with a bunch of clever quips rather than address the issue of why they presume all of these detainees to be guilty without a trial.

As far as your opinion is concerned, DC, you are still not addressing the question. I understand why you think they don't deserve a trial, but that assumes first that they are guilty.

In fact, if I were completely sure that they were all guilty, I might even agree with you.

But since we don't know whether or not they are guilty without a trial, I don't understand how you can make that assumption without first giving them a trial.

Imprisoning these people without a trial or the airing of the evidene against them does nothing more than make people wonder whether or not there actually is any evidence, and provides even more anti-American political ammunition for our enemies and those who we are trying to convert to democracy.

No, this thread had degenerated because rather than address the issues and questions involved here, some choose instead to find humor in it and make jokes about it.

It has nothing whatsoever to do with the fact that you and I disagree here, and you know it doesn't.

And I certainly don't intend to "move on" simply because I may disagree with the opinions of others.

You don't like it that I said another thread was degenerating (something which you have said any number of times yourself in other threads)?

You don't agree with my opinions?

Then why don't you move on?

I think its probably more like the situation where a man shoots three people in broad daylight, there are at least two dozen witnesses, and the news story still has to say "alleged" murderer even though its obvious who the perpetrator was.

Which brings into discussion whether its better to be fair, or to be feared.

I think, if I was running the country, in the case of terrorism, I'd prefer the latter.

Was that before or after you called us (its obvious you implied myself, though I'll give you the benefit of a generalization before I "condem" you) and our arguments a bunch of silly bullies?