- Joined
- Aug 26, 2007
- Messages
- 50,241
- Reaction score
- 19,243
- Location
- San Antonio Texas
- Gender
- Female
- Political Leaning
- Conservative
Guantánamo detainee resurfaces in terrorist group - International Herald TribuneBEIRUT: The emergence of a former Guantánamo Bay detainee as the deputy leader of Al Qaeda's Yemeni branch has underscored the potential complications in carrying out the executive order that President Barack Obama signed that the detention center be shut down within a year.
The militant, Said Ali al-Shihri, is suspected of involvement in a deadly bombing of the U.S. Embassy in Yemen's capital, Sana, in September. He was released to Saudi Arabia in 2007 and passed through a Saudi rehabilitation program for former jihadists before resurfacing with Al Qaeda in Yemen.
His status was announced in an Internet statement by the militant group and was confirmed by a U.S. counterterrorism official. "They're one and the same guy," said the official, who insisted on anonymity because he was discussing an intelligence analysis. "He returned to Saudi Arabia in 2007, but his movements to Yemen remain unclear."
Guantánamo detainee resurfaces in terrorist group - International Herald Tribune
Gee, this doesn't bode well for Obama's "Close Gitmo" policy and is good evidence that Bush's policies of holding terrorist was right, the sad thing is, if it wasn't for all the screaming and whining about Gitmo this guy might still be in there... and not helping kill people.
But hey, what's ONE guy right? :roll:
I'd bet alot he wasn't a terrorist before he entered the prison ...
This is laughable.
And you believe it?
Some people think Terrorist are a creation of US policy.
Terrorists to us are those who wish to Terrify US.
Why would someone wish to terrify, or cause a terrifying reaction, from us?
Because American foreign policy.
Let me break this down. If it wasn't for the habitual sodomizing of the term "terrorism" then there would be "no terrorists" just militants who have a different world-view then us.
Tell me. You take all of those resurfaced detainees and you kill them all, what did you accomplish?
Let me give you a hint. Not a damn thing. Infact, you probably created more who favor that ideology then you took away from. WE ARE NOT FIGHTING PEOPLE WE ARE FIGHTING AN IDEOLOGY. AND YOU CANNOT KILL AN IDEOLOGY WITH GUNS.
FFS learn something.
They shoulda just dropped him off in the middle of the ocean and told him to swim home.
Terrorists to us are those who wish to Terrify US.
Why would someone wish to terrify, or cause a terrifying reaction, from us?
Because American foreign policy.
Let me break this down. If it wasn't for the habitual sodomizing of the term "terrorism" then there would be "no terrorists" just militants who have a different world-view then us.
Tell me. You take all of those resurfaced detainees and you kill them all, what did you accomplish?
Let me give you a hint. Not a damn thing. Infact, you probably created more who favor that ideology then you took away from. WE ARE NOT FIGHTING PEOPLE WE ARE FIGHTING AN IDEOLOGY. AND YOU CANNOT KILL AN IDEOLOGY WITH GUNS.
FFS learn something.
Quit playing stupid Kandahar. This is but one example of Gito releases returning to the battlefield. How many times are we going to read about Gito releases being killed by US forces in Afghanistan or being picked up as part of a terror cell in East Asia or...or...or for you to acknowledge that, you know, there are bad guys locked up at Gitmo?
Secondly, you said, "If this guy was a terrorist, then the government should have tried him and convicted of him of a crime" which is completely ignorant or at a minimum completely ignores the problems associated with treating terrorism like a common liquor store robbery.
This is laughable.
And you believe it?
I think you miss a big point or two Pete.Quit playing stupid yourself. Just because fuhrer Bush and his minions claim that the people at Gitmo were or are terrorists does not mean they are. In the western world we still try to live after the rule of law, including the principle that you are innocent until proven guilty.
So what's the difference between terrorists sending car bombs into residential neighborhoods expressly to maximize civilian casualties and a militant that launches rockets into residential neighborhoods to maximize civilian casualties?
Answer: f'ing nothing. You're merely defending the use of terrorism as a responsible, reasonable method to address political grievances.
Good luck with that!
Im merely suggesting it.
You don't know how people may have changed after spending years locked up. Im just saying a few cases of bad apples does not take away from the fact that alot of those who were released ended up innocent of wrongdoing.
You're suggesting makes a me a laughing.
:2wave:
Funny, we cannot fight an ideology with ideas it will never accept.
Like Freedom. Freedom of Religion. Freedom of choice. Freedom of <insert here a freedom western culture allows that Islamo-fascist don't>.
So we can fight them with guns, and kick the CRAP out of them.
We can send them flowers and tell them to like us.
We can convert to their brand of Islam and have them love us.
I have a feeling you'd send flowers then opt to convert rather then fight.
Our military does a good enough job sorting through the mess. You may not trust them, but I do. They have no reason to keep non-terrorists. For what? Play toys?
Quit playing stupid Kandahar. This is but one example of Gito releases returning to the battlefield. How many times are we going to read about Gito releases being killed by US forces in Afghanistan or being picked up as part of a terror cell in East Asia or...or...or for you to acknowledge that, you know, there are bad guys locked up at Gitmo?
JMak said:Secondly, you said, "If this guy was a terrorist, then the government should have tried him and convicted of him of a crime" which is completely ignorant or at a minimum completely ignores the problems associated with treating terrorism like a common liquor store robbery.
I doubt it, the military probably have their hands ties with targets by the politicans
By saying you have so and so amount of "terrorists" you make yourselves look better, especially a Government in the eyes of the citizens
No. What you do to eliminate an ideology is you make it irrelevant.
Yep, and kill enough of them, the ideology diesShooting weaponry at a person does not kill the ideology it kills the person.
How do you make an ideology irrelevant? Well, you take up the cause of the people who are buying into the ideology as an option to make their own lives better.
You forget that groups like Hamas and Hezbollah have large wings that do nothing but give aid to the slums of their respective countries. If someone is able to smuggle food into your country, you are not going to immediately turn your back on them.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?