Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 25
  1.    #1  
    Hey demules, how's this one grab ya?

    "The Taliban's new top operations officer in southern Afghanistan had been a prisoner at the Guantanamo Bay detention center, the latest example of a freed detainee who took a militant leadership role and a potential complication for the Obama administration's efforts to close the prison.
    U.S. authorities handed over the detainee to the Afghan government, which in turn released him, according to Pentagon and CIA officials.
    Abdullah Ghulam Rasoul, formerly Guantanamo prisoner No. 008, was among 13 Afghan prisoners released to the Afghan government in December 2007. Rasoul is now known as Mullah Abdullah Zakir, a nom de guerre that Pentagon and intelligence officials say is used by a Taliban leader who is in charge of operations against U.S. and Afghan forces in southern Afghanistan.... "


    Well done, demulecrats, well done.

    I really have to laugh You pull the troops out of Iraq so that they can deploy more in Afghanistan. Then you and your obamination release all the gitmo detainees so that US troops have more enemies to fight when they get there.

    Brilliant. Just brilliant.

    Oh yeah, our government knows how to keep us safe. No doubt.
    Last edited by treosensei; 03/10/2009 at 10:49 PM.
  2. #2  
    Quote Originally Posted by treosensei View Post
    Abdullah Ghulam Rasoul, formerly Guantanamo prisoner No. 008, was among 13 Afghan prisoners released to the Afghan government in December 2007.
    Was he released in 2007?
    Just call me Berd.
  3. #3  
    I googled, found some stuff at nytimes.
    But after some reading, it seems this guy was released in 07.
    How did Obama have anything to do with this guy rejoining with the Taliban?
    Just call me Berd.
  4. #4  
    Besides that, they didn't have anything to charge him with after holding him for however many years, aka he wasn't a terrorist when they locked him up, and now he is.

    Honestly, locking up tons of people with very tenuous ties to terrorism, giving them no rights, torturing them, and locking them up with a few people who actually are terrorists... we're doing the recruiting for them.

    In other words, we couldn't make it any easier for the terrorists to gain more followers than Guantanamo.
  5. #5  
    So Obama didn't release him?
    Thread title is:
    "Obama releases Gitmo detainee, who then becomes the Taliban war chief in Afghanistan."
    Just call me Berd.
  6. #6  
    Yes, he was released in 2007, by Bush. The only mention of Obama that is related to this is that most of the newspapers use this as a way to discuss why Obama's planned closing of Guantanamo isn't an easy task.

    Edit: Wait, there might be two separate guys being discussed. The one released in 2007 was involved in Yemen groups after his release.

    Edit 2: Found the article, and every one of the people that was released who has gone on to become a terrorist so far was released in 2007.

    Although the militant detainees who have resurfaced were released under the Bush administration, the revelation underscores the Obama administration's dilemma in moving to close the detention camp at Guantanamo and figuring out what to do with the nearly 250 prisoners who remain there.
    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/0..._n_173690.html

    Edit 3: They also mention that while it's been claimed that maybe up to 43 people who were released have 'returned to the battlefield' that there is no proof given about this number, and not even any names released of who these supposed 43 might be.

    http://mediamatters.org/items/200901230002
    Last edited by jhoff80; 03/11/2009 at 02:01 AM.
  7. #7  
    All I want to resolve is the thread title.
    So is the thread title incorrect?
  8. #8  
    I believe so, yes.
  9. #9  
    Thanks

    I'll let treosensei decide on a more accurate Thread title.

    I doubt he/she would want it to read;
    "Bush releases Gitmo detainee, who then becomes the Taliban war chief in Afghanistan."
  10. #10  
    Quote Originally Posted by treosensei View Post
    Hey demules, how's this one grab ya?

    "The Taliban's new top operations officer in southern Afghanistan had been a prisoner at the Guantanamo Bay detention center, the latest example of a freed detainee who took a militant leadership role and a potential complication for the Obama administration's efforts to close the prison.
    U.S. authorities handed over the detainee to the Afghan government, which in turn released him, according to Pentagon and CIA officials.
    Abdullah Ghulam Rasoul, formerly Guantanamo prisoner No. 008, was among 13 Afghan prisoners released to the Afghan government in December 2007. Rasoul is now known as Mullah Abdullah Zakir, a nom de guerre that Pentagon and intelligence officials say is used by a Taliban leader who is in charge of operations against U.S. and Afghan forces in southern Afghanistan.... "

    Well done, demulecrats, well done...

    Brilliant. Just brilliant.

    Oh yeah, obama knows how to keep us safe. No doubt.
    I have no doubt that you're smarter and better read than the rest of us -- but it has been traditional around here to post a link to a responsible place to support the basic facts of an arguement -- to for example cite an article in the NYTimes, The BBC, The Washington Post, etc.

    Something anything ...

    And then to defend at least somewhat the arguement that you've put forth when others say your idea is dumb.

    i.e:

    BARYE is the planet's brainiest, and most modest monkey --

    NYT:

    BBC::


    This is different from posting an opinion:

    i.e.: I think BARYE is the planet's brainiest, most modest monkey...


    which doesn't need to have a factual cite in support of it (though it would be best if it did)

    (everything I've written btw, is just my opinion ...)
    Last edited by BARYE; 03/11/2009 at 04:35 AM.
    755P Sprint SERO (upgraded from unlocked GSM 650 on T-Mobile)
  11. Zcu
    Zcu is offline
    Zcu's Avatar
    Posts
    31 Posts
    #11  
    While Bush made a mistake, he shouldn't have captured any terrorist's just kill'em and for heavens sake don't release them. The point is still a valid one, since releasing them gives them an opportunity to harm us, then the current administration should have a one way policy only in.
  12. #12  
    Regardless of the title, I am sure we have all heard the rumor that there are a "few" in the prison who are very glad they openly participated in their terrorist career. Maybe they should be housed in San Francisco next to Nancy's mansion? Eat dinner with her hubby and grandchildren? Fly with her on Air Force 3? Public expense of course!
  13. #13  
    Yeah,
    Even Title aside, I'm not sure if treosensei is reading a lot of the articles he/she posts, because they seem often misapplied.

    I typically had stayed away from OT, but some of these articles have been interesting to me.
    But there's like thread after thread where it's just a title with some propaganda, and no discussion.
    Just call me Berd.
  14. #14  
    I think we can all agree that we'd all feel safer if terrorists (as well as murderers, rapists, etc.) were isolated from the rest of us...at the very least.

    The question, in my mind, is whether we can just round folks up and put them behind bars - for years - without trial or formal charges. That seems....un-American.

    As Ben Franklin said: "They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety."
    Everything's Amazing and Nobody's Happy

    Treo600 --> Treo650-->PPC6700-->Treo700P-->Treo755P-->Treo800W --> Touch Pro-->Palm Pre --> EVO 4G
  15. #15  
    These people are not what one would consider regular soldiers. In addition, they are not citizens of this country. They are terrorists. Turn them loose, right back to what they were doing before. Turn them loose in this country, would that be an intelligent thing to do? These people are not due the civil processes of this country. Loose they kill. Locked up, they do not kill.

    Quote Originally Posted by Bujin View Post
    I think we can all agree that we'd all feel safer if terrorists (as well as murderers, rapists, etc.) were isolated from the rest of us...at the very least.

    The question, in my mind, is whether we can just round folks up and put them behind bars - for years - without trial or formal charges. That seems....un-American.

    As Ben Franklin said: "They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety."
  16. #16  
    I've always struggled with both sides of the argument.
    On one hand, if they are being held on nothing but suspicion, is it civilized to treat them as convicted?
    On the other hand; if they are a convicted criminal, war or otherwise, why risk another innocent victim just to appear civilized?
    Just call me Berd.
  17. #17  
    Quote Originally Posted by berdinkerdickle View Post
    Yeah,
    Even Title aside, I'm not sure if treosensei is reading a lot of the articles he/she posts, because they seem often misapplied.

    I typically had stayed away from OT, but some of these articles have been interesting to me.
    But there's like thread after thread where it's just a title with some propaganda, and no discussion.
    Then they should start being deleted... stuff like this makes OT less interesting and downright worthless.

    The thread does point out how much of a failure Bush was!!!
    01000010 01100001 01101110 00100000 01010100 01101000 01110010 01100101 01100001 01100100 00100000 01000011 01110010 01100001 01110000 01110000 01100101 01110010 01110011 00100001
  18. #18  
    Quote Originally Posted by theog View Post
    The thread does point out how much of a failure Bush was!!!
    No, he wasn't. It is entirely to his credit that he managed to imprint terrorism on the world's (and especially the USs') collective consciousness, when there are more important things to be dealt with (and no, none of those things are the climate and global warming).

    You people must learn from us Indians, what it is to be civilized... we captured the lone surviving terrorist after the last attack and took sufficiently good care of him to enable him to face the courts of law. And life goes on... Who knows, he may even become our next cabinet minister or MP (that's Member of Parliament) or a film hero. We are nothing if not forgiving.

    On the topic of the above mentioned Gitmo detainee, it is possible that he decided to become what he did, after the experience... or other people looked up to him for having survived the experience...
  19. #19  
    Quote Originally Posted by GreenHex View Post
    No, he wasn't. It is entirely to his credit that he managed to imprint terrorism on the world's (and especially the USs') collective consciousness, when there are more important things to be dealt with (and no, none of those things are the climate and global warming).

    You people must learn from us Indians, what it is to be civilized... we captured the lone surviving terrorist after the last attack and took sufficiently good care of him to enable him to face the courts of law. And life goes on... Who knows, he may even become our next cabinet minister or MP (that's Member of Parliament) or a film hero. We are nothing if not forgiving.

    On the topic of the above mentioned Gitmo detainee, it is possible that he decided to become what he did, after the experience... or other people looked up to him for having survived the experience...
    what are the: "when there are more important things to be dealt with (and no, none of those things are the climate and global warming)."

    And that lone surviving terrorist -- he has been treated sufficienty well to talk rather profusely as to what and how it was done.

    You may not like him very much -- but a captured living terrorist is a whole lot more valuable than a dead one
    755P Sprint SERO (upgraded from unlocked GSM 650 on T-Mobile)
  20. #20  
    Quote Originally Posted by BARYE View Post
    what are the: "when there are more important things to be dealt with (and no, none of those things are the climate and global warming)."
    ...things like hunger, and disease and - just maybe - improving the quality of life of maybe the rest of the 90% of the "human beings" inhabiting the world?

    Quote Originally Posted by BARYE View Post
    And that lone surviving terrorist -- he has been treated sufficienty well to talk rather profusely as to what and how it was done.

    You may not like him very much -- but a captured living terrorist is a whole lot more valuable than a dead one
    Oh... I do know how it's done. But there is a very slim chance that we respect (or our system respects) life that is not our own.

    I'll better shut up, though I do like a good discussion. this is somebody else's thread.
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions