Chavez loses bid to become president-for-life

[Good Old Neon]

We aint living in the same country.

 

Apparently.

[Guest Golyadkin]

America are the bad guys

 

I knew I would read this sooner or later.

[MrRain422]

Not all of the people who have been imprisoned have been "hanging around al Qaeda" or even anything remotely similar to consorting with them.

 

Let's not forget about the sad case of Maher Ara. He wasn't sent to Gitmo, but he's a good illustration of the dangers of assuming that someone is guilty or affiliated with someone who is guilty, just because we've arrested them.

 

Anyway, this Golyadkin guy is pretty clearly either a troll or Rudy Guiliani, so I don't know why I'm bothering.

[EL the Famous]

Not all of the people who have been imprisoned have been "hanging around al Qaeda" or even anything remotely similar to consorting with them.

 

but how many of them have? what's the split?

[Guest Golyadkin]

Not all of the people who have been imprisoned have been "hanging around al Qaeda" or even anything remotely similar to consorting with them.

 

Let's not forget about the sad case of Maher Ara. He wasn't sent to Gitmo, but he's a good illustration of the dangers of assuming that someone is guilty or affiliated with someone who is guilty, just because we've arrested them.

 

Anyway, this Golyadkin guy is pretty clearly either a troll or Rudy Guiliani, so I don't know why I'm bothering.

 

Yeah your first paragraph has been established, and the % is small.

 

Second paragraph is the reality of war.

 

So, Doug and I are not allowed on here? I figured you free thinkers are open to others, no?

 

Rudy is a punk and Doug tears trolls up.

[ikol]

I

[MattZ]

Are most there for fighting the US military and for supporting Al-Qaida?

 

Are some there for being in the wrong place at the wrong time?

 

Again don't let your hatred confuse you

 

 

but how many of them have? what's the split?

 

Not to put words in your mouths, but I suppose you don't agree with the saying that it is better to have 10 guilty persons walk free than to have one innocent person jailed? It shouldn't matter what the split is if you believe in due process. I suppose it's all a matter of opinion, and I am certainly an idealist, but "wrong place wrong time" don't cut it for me.

 

Charge these folks and give them due process.

[blindgonzo]

I knew I would read this sooner or later.

 

well its true, no?

 

the US invaded a country, the people fought back, and they're being punished?

imagine the situation in reverse. if a country invaded the US, wouldn't you think

that US citizens and the army would fight back? of course they would.

 

and it is extremely sad that human rights abuses committed by America can be

so easily brushed aside for the sake of "national security". Golyadkin, earlier

you mentioned China's human rights abuses, yet you continue to brush aside

America's abuses as 'just a part of war'. this "War on Terror" is so poorly

defined that it can never end. does that mean that it will always be ok for the

US to torture innocent people (Arar) and detain people without any proof of

guilt?

 

i don't believe that innocent people should be continually punished because

many Americans are afraid of Muslims.

[EL the Famous]

Second paragraph is the reality of war.

 

i don't think you're a troll by any means of the popular definition, but i would submit that reality doesn't = right.

 

i'm no winger right or left...i believe we have an inept administration that is doing a lot stupid and unsavory stuff, but taking it to the point that i even remotely endorse/kind of like a dictator just because they stand up to the US (aka 'The Bad Guys') is silly.

[EL the Famous]

Not to put words in your mouths, but I suppose you don't agree with the saying that it is better to have 10 guilty persons walk free than to have one innocent person jailed? It shouldn't matter what the split is if you believe in due process. I suppose it's all a matter of opinion, and I am certainly an idealist, but "wrong place wrong time" don't cut it for me.

 

Charge these folks and give them due process.

 

no, you pretty much put words in my mouth. i agree w/ everything you've said...i was merely trying to put some tangible discussion points to the discussion. there is a tendency to make things sounds like the entire population there are unfairly being held and that's not true, either. okay, i also don't see how releasing ten that are guilty versus just validating the release of the one make sense either.

 

bottom line, none of this is that cut and dry...armchair quarterbacking.

[bjorn_skurj]

Bjorn thinks invading Iraq was a bad, bad idea. The seductiveness of the U.S. lifestyle spreads democracy much more effectively than M-16's. Bjorn doesn't mind the invasion of Afghanistan so much - it's al-Qaida's base of ops, and al-Qaida is the self-declared sworn enemy of the U.S., where Bjorn and pretty much everybody he loves or has ever loved lives. One of the reasons Bjorn is in Obama's camp now is Obama said he might go into Pakistan without Musharraf's consent to chase al-Qaida. (Bjorn doesn't trust Pakistan as far as he can throw it.) Bjorn feels there's a certain base value to everybody's life, but doesn't believe that goes so far as not killing people who have sworn to their particular interpretation of SkyGod to kill him and his loved ones. He is reminded of what William Tecumseh Sherman said: "War is the remedy our enemies have chosen, and I say let us give them all they want." And, "My aim, then, was to whip the rebels, to humble their pride, to follow them to their inmost recesses, and make them fear and dread us. Fear is the beginning of wisdom."

[EL the Famous]

good post.

[MattZ]

no, you pretty much put words in my mouth. i agree w/ everything you've said...i was merely trying to put some tangible discussion points to the discussion. there is a tendency to make things sounds like the entire population there are unfairly being held and that's not true, either. okay, i also don't see how releasing ten that are guilty versus just validating the release of the one make sense either.

 

bottom line, none of this is that cut and dry...armchair quarterbacking.

 

Haha, I didn't mean to put words in your mouth. Sorry about that.

 

The point of the saying that I raised is that we have chosen to live with a system that, at it's core, values the freedom of the innocent (or wrongly accused) to the point that we are willing to let otherwise "guilty" people walk in the interests of protecting the innocent (or wrongly accused). For example, why are coerced confessions not admissable as evidence in many criminal trials? Because notwithstanding the fact that 90% of the time they are made by guilty people, we think that 10% of the time it is done by innocent people. And because we can never be sure of the percentages, and we want to avoid imprisoning an innocent person at all costs, we are willing to see 9 guilty confessors walk free if it means that 1 innocent person walks free too.

 

We can argue til the cows come home about whether the people at Gitmo are enemy combatants or war criminals or something else entirely. My point was to the larger themes that are being raised here about whether "wrong place wrong time" is a principle consistent with our country's principles. I suppose the argument from the right (mostly) is that the laws of our country don't apply to these prisoners -- and that may be a fine legal argument -- but the fact that people are willing to shrug off the imprisonment of innocent prisoners because of a "wrong place wrong time" mentality is very disturbing and isn't grounded in the principles that our legal system is based on.

 

EDIT: I agree with you EL F that getting a split (if even possible, which I am not sure) certainly grounds the argument here and avoids us getting lost in hyperbole. But again, I suppose my point was, that even if 10% of the folks there are innocent, that maybe that's too high a percentage. Either way, that's why I say charge em all and then we don't have this issue any more.

 

EDIT2: Sorry- I shouldn't assume it goes without saying. Every number in this post was pulled outta my tailpipe. I have no idea if 90% of coerced confessions are made by guilty folks. Was just trying to make a point.

[blindgonzo]

"make them fear and dread us."

 

Machiavelli? is that you?

 

[Guest Golyadkin]

Not to put words in your mouths, but I suppose you don't agree with the saying that it is better to have 10 guilty persons walk free than to have one innocent person jailed? It shouldn't matter what the split is if you believe in due process. I suppose it's all a matter of opinion, and I am certainly an idealist, but "wrong place wrong time" don't cut it for me.

 

Charge these folks and give them due process.

 

Doug and I agree with that quote... I think it was Thoreau's, Doug thinks Dostoevsky, we are probably both wrong.

 

The problem is the world is not perfect.

[bjorn_skurj]

Machiavelli? is that you?

 

The Scorpio is on the loose!

[Guest Golyadkin]

Fighting the U.S. military outside the States is not a crime

 

Actually, in this case America are the bad guys (perish the thought). America invaded a country, arrested those who fought back and imprisoned them in outside America to avoid harsher laws with virtually no evidence. They then released a few just because they were british and once released the prisoners weren't exactly complimentary

 

You must not forget history. That same country (Iraq) invaded an unarmed country (Kuwait) 15 years earlier. That same country (Iraq) signed many agreements that stated they would be good. That same country (Iraq) broke every single one of them.

 

Don't forget that

[Guest Golyadkin]

well its true, no?

 

the US invaded a country, the people fought back, and they're being punished?

imagine the situation in reverse. if a country invaded the US, wouldn't you think

that US citizens and the army would fight back? of course they would.

 

and it is extremely sad that human rights abuses committed by America can be

so easily brushed aside for the sake of "national security". Golyadkin, earlier

you mentioned China's human rights abuses, yet you continue to brush aside

America's abuses as 'just a part of war'. this "War on Terror" is so poorly

defined that it can never end. does that mean that it will always be ok for the

US to torture innocent people (Arar) and detain people without any proof of

guilt?

 

i don't believe that innocent people should be continually punished because

many Americans are afraid of Muslims.

 

We got our problems of course, like I stated in the above posts. But it is a war. I don't buy that War on terror shit either. But there is a war going on.

 

Torture is bad mmmkay, and like I said I agree with the quote, about having nine guilty go free rather than one innocent be jailed, but that is not going to happen. It does not happen here in Detroit and it will not happen anywhere else.

 

American is not afraid of Muslims. We will bash them.

 

No no just joking, America welcomes Muslims.

[blindgonzo]

Torture is bad mmmkay, and like I said I agree with the quote, about having nine guilty go free rather than one innocent be jailed, but that is not going to happen. It does not happen here in Detroit and it will not happen anywhere else.

 

i think this is the main problem with every person in the world. we don't want to do anything about things that we disagree with and then we become complacent about them.

 

you're right. nothing will happen unless people decide to stand up for what they believe in. i do think it is possible for things to change. i guess i'm an idealist.

[Guest Golyadkin]

i think this is the main problem with every person in the world. we don't want to do anything about things that we disagree with and then we become complacent about them.

 

you're right. nothing will happen unless people decide to stand up for what they believe in. i do think it is possible for things to change. i guess i'm an idealist.

 

Hey man I am going with Paul. He wants to end the war now. I don't think it is a good idea, I think we have to finish what is over there (however you want to look at it - we started it or they were there first argument, but we need to finish)

 

But I think Paul is the closest thing we have to general freedom and well being. I think Paul is right on for what needs to be done domestically to get America back on its feet.

 

That is my ideal...

[caliber66]

He is reminded of what William Tecumseh Sherman said: "War is the remedy our enemies have chosen, and I say let us give them all they want." And, "My aim, then, was to whip the rebels, to humble their pride, to follow them to their inmost recesses, and make them fear and dread us. Fear is the beginning of wisdom."

My agreement with the rest of this post aside, the problem with General Sherman's (and therefore Bjorn's) logic is that Confederate soldiers and other American secessionists from the 1860s don't exactly equate with Islamic fundamentalists of the 21st Century. The same methods will not produce the same results.

[bjorn_skurj]

My agreement with the rest of this post aside, the problem with General Sherman's (and therefore Bjorn's) logic is that Confederate soldiers and other American secessionists from the 1860s don't exactly equate with Islamic fundamentalists of the 21st Century. The same methods will not produce the same results.

Well, you do have a point. My strategy would be to kill the crazy ones and give the rest bourbon and Baywatch DVD sets. Allahu akbar indeed.

[bjorn_skurj]

[MrRain422]

but how many of them have? what's the split?

 

Impossible to know without affording them some due process rights and actually working through the facts.

[MrRain422]

Haha, I didn't mean to put words in your mouth. Sorry about that.

 

The point of the saying that I raised is that we have chosen to live with a system that, at it's core, values the freedom of the innocent (or wrongly accused) to the point that we are willing to let otherwise "guilty" people walk in the interests of protecting the innocent (or wrongly accused). For example, why are coerced confessions not admissable as evidence in many criminal trials? Because notwithstanding the fact that 90% of the time they are made by guilty people, we think that 10% of the time it is done by innocent people. And because we can never be sure of the percentages, and we want to avoid imprisoning an innocent person at all costs, we are willing to see 9 guilty confessors walk free if it means that 1 innocent person walks free too.

 

We can argue til the cows come home about whether the people at Gitmo are enemy combatants or war criminals or something else entirely. My point was to the larger themes that are being raised here about whether "wrong place wrong time" is a principle consistent with our country's principles. I suppose the argument from the right (mostly) is that the laws of our country don't apply to these prisoners -- and that may be a fine legal argument -- but the fact that people are willing to shrug off the imprisonment of innocent prisoners because of a "wrong place wrong time" mentality is very disturbing and isn't grounded in the principles that our legal system is based on.

 

EDIT: I agree with you EL F that getting a split (if even possible, which I am not sure) certainly grounds the argument here and avoids us getting lost in hyperbole. But again, I suppose my point was, that even if 10% of the folks there are innocent, that maybe that's too high a percentage. Either way, that's why I say charge em all and then we don't have this issue any more.

 

EDIT2: Sorry- I shouldn't assume it goes without saying. Every number in this post was pulled outta my tailpipe. I have no idea if 90% of coerced confessions are made by guilty folks. Was just trying to make a point.

 

Good post.