Harmor
Error_Name_Not_Found
+605|6541|San Diego, CA, USA
Source: http://www.nypost.com/seven/06072009/ne … 172957.htm

NY Post wrote:

THE Pentagon now confirms that at least 74 former Guantanamo detainees have resumed terror ist activities after claiming they weren't terrorists.

Such recidivism points up an alarming intelligence failure.

These dangerous prisoners should never have been cleared for release. Why did interrogators fail to find the cracks in their stories and alibis?

Why wasn't more intelligence gathered to predict they'd rejoin al Qaeda or the Taliban?

In a word, politics. Gitmo interrogations have been emasculated to placate critics of waterboarding and other "torture," say two senior officials there.

Even known terrorists are spared high-pressure techniques -- tactics that have worked before in squeezing out information.

For that matter, Gitmo doesn't even do "interrogations" anymore. They're now called interviews, and they're voluntary.

Many recidivists used the interviews as an opportunity to argue for release, spinning familiar excuses for why they were in Afghanistan after 9/11. They were freed after interrogators, many of them inexperienced, for the most part bought their sob stories and review boards judged them least likely to return to jihad.

"We have on numerous occasions gotten literally straight-from-the-schoolhouse interrogators who are being stuck in with these hardened jihadists," a top security official at Gitmo told me. "And they essentially look at them and laugh."

He says many are 19-year-olds who lack battlefield skills and don't understand the first thing about jihad and militant Islam.

"They get played by detainees, who end up getting released because the interrogators believe them when they say they don't know anything and just want to go home and be a goat herder," he says.

As a condition of their release, the Gitmo detainees signed pledges to renounce violence and enroll in "reintegration programs" in countries that agreed to repatriate them.

Terrorist Said Ali al-Shihri went through the resort-like Saudi program after his release in 2007.

Afterward, he helped plan last year's deadly attack on the US Embassy in Yemen as al Qaeda's operations chief there.

Another Gitmo recidivist, Slimane Hadj Abderahmane, laughed at the anti-violence agreement he signed. Once free, he re-engaged in terror and said, "This document is toilet paper for the Americans if they want it."

That so many ex-detainees remain violent should come as little surprise, considering Gitmo is now more madrassa than prison camp.

Detainees are fed a diet of violent anti-Western agitprop by sympathetic Muslim chaplains and librarians who have unfettered access to their cell blocks.

The chief librarian at Gitmo, Mohammed Abdelaal, is an Egyptian-born civilian contractor who speaks Arabic.

He has developed an affectionate rapport with the prisoners, who have nicknamed him "Abu Saleh," or Father of Righteousness.
How dare they lie to us!!!  lol  sad
Macbeth
Banned
+2,444|5578

If we know they went back to terrorism then it means we're tracking them. Perhaps they were released for tracking purposes?
Harmor
Error_Name_Not_Found
+605|6541|San Diego, CA, USA

Macbeth wrote:

If we know they went back to terrorism then it means we're tracking them. Perhaps they were released for tracking purposes?
I wonder if that same reasoning work with murderers in our prisons?
Macbeth
Banned
+2,444|5578

Harmor wrote:

Macbeth wrote:

If we know they went back to terrorism then it means we're tracking them. Perhaps they were released for tracking purposes?
I wonder if that same reasoning work with murderers in our prisons?
Stupid analogy, a murderer in prison can't led you to Nuclear weapons or leaders of international terrorist groups or help you break up a huge terrorist plot.
You are smarter then that Harmor.

Last edited by Macbeth (2009-06-07 22:11:06)

Spark
liquid fluoride thorium reactor
+874|6667|Canberra, AUS

Harmor wrote:

Macbeth wrote:

If we know they went back to terrorism then it means we're tracking them. Perhaps they were released for tracking purposes?
I wonder if that same reasoning work with murderers in our prisons?
Because murderers have little get-togethers and planning sessions to suss out their next targets.

...
The paradox is only a conflict between reality and your feeling what reality ought to be.
~ Richard Feynman
PureFodder
Member
+225|6278
Alternative title: 74 people driven to terrorism by Gitmo.

The OP assumes that they were terrorists prior to ending up in Gitmo despite the lack of a trial or conviction, or are we ditching the whole innocent until proven guilty thing?

Last edited by PureFodder (2009-06-08 01:46:24)

Beduin
Compensation of Reactive Power in the grid
+510|5743|شمال

PureFodder wrote:

Alternative title: 74 people driven to terrorism by Gitmo.
الشعب يريد اسقاط النظام
...show me the schematic
M.O.A.B
'Light 'em up!'
+1,220|6215|Escea

So, you say you're innoncent the entire time, get released, and then decide to fux up your dignity by becoming one?
Kmar
Truth is my Bitch
+5,695|6593|132 and Bush

Alternative title.. kill them on site if they attack you.
Xbone Stormsurgezz
PureFodder
Member
+225|6278

M.O.A.B wrote:

So, you say you're innoncent the entire time, get released, and then decide to fux up your dignity by becoming one?
Being flasely imprisoned and subjected to 'enhance interrogations' for several years is the sort of thing that's going to drive people to terrorism.

For all we know they could all heve been innocent or evil terrorists before they got to Gitmo, but as we base our legal system on innocent until proven guilty, the lack of any convictions means we have to assume that they were innocent.
M.O.A.B
'Light 'em up!'
+1,220|6215|Escea

PureFodder wrote:

M.O.A.B wrote:

So, you say you're innoncent the entire time, get released, and then decide to fux up your dignity by becoming one?
Being flasely imprisoned and subjected to 'enhance interrogations' for several years is the sort of thing that's going to drive people to terrorism.

For all we know they could all heve been innocent or evil terrorists before they got to Gitmo, but as we base our legal system on innocent until proven guilty, the lack of any convictions means we have to assume that they were innocent.
Well if they were then they flushed their argument down the crapper. If you're truly innocent, you wouldn't take up the very thing you tried so hard to prove you weren't.
Varegg
Support fanatic :-)
+2,206|6803|Nårvei

M.O.A.B wrote:

PureFodder wrote:

M.O.A.B wrote:

So, you say you're innoncent the entire time, get released, and then decide to fux up your dignity by becoming one?
Being flasely imprisoned and subjected to 'enhance interrogations' for several years is the sort of thing that's going to drive people to terrorism.

For all we know they could all heve been innocent or evil terrorists before they got to Gitmo, but as we base our legal system on innocent until proven guilty, the lack of any convictions means we have to assume that they were innocent.
Well if they were then they flushed their argument down the crapper. If you're truly innocent, you wouldn't take up the very thing you tried so hard to prove you weren't.
Double jeopardy my friend ...
Wait behind the line ..............................................................
M.O.A.B
'Light 'em up!'
+1,220|6215|Escea

Varegg wrote:

M.O.A.B wrote:

PureFodder wrote:


Being flasely imprisoned and subjected to 'enhance interrogations' for several years is the sort of thing that's going to drive people to terrorism.

For all we know they could all heve been innocent or evil terrorists before they got to Gitmo, but as we base our legal system on innocent until proven guilty, the lack of any convictions means we have to assume that they were innocent.
Well if they were then they flushed their argument down the crapper. If you're truly innocent, you wouldn't take up the very thing you tried so hard to prove you weren't.
Double jeopardy my friend ...
Kebert Xela!
Varegg
Support fanatic :-)
+2,206|6803|Nårvei

M.O.A.B wrote:

Varegg wrote:

M.O.A.B wrote:


Well if they were then they flushed their argument down the crapper. If you're truly innocent, you wouldn't take up the very thing you tried so hard to prove you weren't.
Double jeopardy my friend ...
Kebert Xela!
Family guy ftw
Wait behind the line ..............................................................
FEOS
Bellicose Yankee Air Pirate
+1,182|6404|'Murka

PureFodder wrote:

Alternative title: 74 people driven to terrorism by Gitmo.

The OP assumes that they were terrorists prior to ending up in Gitmo despite the lack of a trial or conviction, or are we ditching the whole innocent until proven guilty thing?
Once again you assume that there wasn't any evidence that they were terrorists.

Once again you attempt to apply non-applicable laws to the situation.
“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein

Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
Dilbert_X
The X stands for
+1,810|6099|eXtreme to the maX
If there had been any 'evidence' no doubt it would have been put before a court and they would have been tried.
Intel and evidence are two different things, and we know the state of US govt 'intel' under Bush/Cheney.
Русский военный корабль, иди на хуй!
FEOS
Bellicose Yankee Air Pirate
+1,182|6404|'Murka

Dilbert_X wrote:

If there had been any 'evidence' no doubt it would have been put before a court and they would have been tried.
Intel and evidence are two different things, and we know the state of US govt 'intel' under Bush/Cheney.
And you're assuming that there would be some need for a court or a trial.

There isn't.

But you're right...I should've said "intel" instead of "evidence".
“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein

Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
Ajax_the_Great1
Dropped on request
+206|6639

PureFodder wrote:

Alternative title: 74 people driven to terrorism by Gitmo.

The OP assumes that they were terrorists prior to ending up in Gitmo despite the lack of a trial or conviction, or are we ditching the whole innocent until proven guilty thing?
Yes, your normal average citizen turns into a baby bomber because of false imprisonment....

Arguing with terrorist sympathizers is so pointless. Death to America amirite?
imortal
Member
+240|6657|Austin, TX
If they signed the 'I promise to be a good boy' paper and are caught again, execute them on the spot, and leave the body in public.  See if that has any effect on them.  Oh, and we still wouldn't have to worry about 'torturing' them.
PureFodder
Member
+225|6278

FEOS wrote:

PureFodder wrote:

Alternative title: 74 people driven to terrorism by Gitmo.

The OP assumes that they were terrorists prior to ending up in Gitmo despite the lack of a trial or conviction, or are we ditching the whole innocent until proven guilty thing?
Once again you assume that there wasn't any evidence that they were terrorists.

PureFodder wrote:

For all we know they could all heve been innocent or evil terrorists before they got to Gitmo, but as we base our legal system on innocent until proven guilty, the lack of any convictions means we have to assume that they were innocent.

FEOS wrote:

Once again you attempt to apply non-applicable laws to the situation.
I'm applying a general moral basis for our society that we don't condem people for crimes unless we've proved beyond resonable doubt that they committed them. Clearly this is not the case as they were released. The article in the OP is the one that's making the assumption that they were all previously terrorists when they have no basis for that accusation.
Mekstizzle
WALKER
+3,611|6614|London, England
There's a chance their stay in Gitmo made them terrorists, there's the chance that the Gitmo guys just failed on an epic scale on choosing who to release, but it does show that Gitmo doesn't really work. They can't seem to be able to do the job and even if they do because it's so fucked up in the first place it just makes people turn to terrorism. It's a lose-lose situation when it comes to something like Gitmo.

Gitmo is a mixture of a Prisoner of war camp and a terrorist camp, first of all most people fail to identify who's a pow and who's an actual terrorist, secondly (probably should be firstly) they probably for the most part fail to identify who's just some guy caught up in all the action and who should actually be there. The place is just a failure for the most part and all it does is make the WoT harder for everyone.
FEOS
Bellicose Yankee Air Pirate
+1,182|6404|'Murka

PureFodder wrote:

FEOS wrote:

PureFodder wrote:

Alternative title: 74 people driven to terrorism by Gitmo.

The OP assumes that they were terrorists prior to ending up in Gitmo despite the lack of a trial or conviction, or are we ditching the whole innocent until proven guilty thing?
Once again you assume that there wasn't any evidence that they were terrorists.

PureFodder wrote:

For all we know they could all heve been innocent or evil terrorists before they got to Gitmo, but as we base our legal system on innocent until proven guilty, the lack of any convictions means we have to assume that they were innocent.

FEOS wrote:

Once again you attempt to apply non-applicable laws to the situation.
I'm applying a general moral basis for our society that we don't condem people for crimes unless we've proved beyond resonable doubt that they committed them. Clearly this is not the case as they were released. The article in the OP is the one that's making the assumption that they were all previously terrorists when they have no basis for that accusation.
Should I type slower for you?

This isn't about violations of criminal code. The logic fault you (and others) keep applying is that somehow this is tied to civil criminal code. It is not. These people aren't "condemned". They are being held under the auspices of the Geneva Convention as enemy combatants, not as suspected criminals under the auspices of any country's domestic laws.
“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein

Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
PureFodder
Member
+225|6278

FEOS wrote:

PureFodder wrote:

FEOS wrote:

Once again you assume that there wasn't any evidence that they were terrorists.

PureFodder wrote:

For all we know they could all heve been innocent or evil terrorists before they got to Gitmo, but as we base our legal system on innocent until proven guilty, the lack of any convictions means we have to assume that they were innocent.

FEOS wrote:

Once again you attempt to apply non-applicable laws to the situation.
I'm applying a general moral basis for our society that we don't condem people for crimes unless we've proved beyond resonable doubt that they committed them. Clearly this is not the case as they were released. The article in the OP is the one that's making the assumption that they were all previously terrorists when they have no basis for that accusation.
Should I type slower for you?

This isn't about violations of criminal code. The logic fault you (and others) keep applying is that somehow this is tied to civil criminal code. It is not. These people aren't "condemned". They are being held under the auspices of the Geneva Convention as enemy combatants, not as suspected criminals under the auspices of any country's domestic laws.
Do you believe that anyone who is captured and taken to Gitmo must be a terrorist or do you think that it is logically possible for people to end up in Gitmo despite not actually being a terrorist?

The headline makes the assumption that they were in fact terrorists when they were captured despite the clear possibity that they were innocent and only began to get involved in terrorism afterwards. You can only return to terrorism if you were previously a terrorist, which is something that the authors don't know.
lowing
Banned
+1,662|6644|USA
Wow, the terrorists released from Gitmo are terrorists? never saw that coming. But hey, the liberals got them released from the clutches of the evil American empire, that is the most important thing.
NgoDamWei
Member
+7|5656|Western North Carolina
Now they can be all they coulda been had they not been detained or all they already were in the first place.  Before believing "I didn't put my fingers in the cookie jar", check the beard or pockets for crumbs.

Board footer

Privacy Policy - © 2024 Jeff Minard