SPECIAL: for Ace and other ditto heads
dave
"...too much Fox News may be bad news for conservatives. An April 2007
Pew Research Study survey found that viewers of the conservative Fox
News channel had the lowest knowledge of national and international
affairs."
dxAce
dave wrote:
Hey, dumbass, I don't watch the Fox News channel. So, you can shove that dumbass
idea right up your gaping Liberal ass!
dxAce
dxAce wrote:
In fact Rickets, you're just as stupid as those 5 idiots who have the nerve to call
themselves Supreme Court Justices and issued yesterday what has to be the most
idiotic ruling that this country has ever seen.
Treasonous in my book.
dave
that he didn't protect the Constitution. Habeas Corpus cannot be
suspended except maybe during civil war. Your "book" would be written
by "The Family" and "Opus Dei", two subversive movements that have
infected the government from top to bottom. If it was up to me I'd
indict the whole lot of them and have new elections top to bottom. The
USA no longer exists.
dave
dxAce
dave wrote:
If that is so then it only no longer exists in your retarded, mentally ill, drug addled
brain.
cuh...@webtv.net
Mississippi and local Jackson area news.I don't watch those 24/7 talking
heads clowns on the other tv channels.
cuhulin
dave
>
> If that is so then it only no longer exists in your retarded, mentally ill, drug addled
> brain.
>
>
I'm saddened to see that you are incapable of reasoned discourse.
m II
> I'm saddened to see that you are incapable of reasoned discourse.
Please don't be sad. He's had a tough night having 'mutual respect'
encounters with his like minded cohorts. He's merely tired.
mike
--
Due to the insane amount of spam and garbage, this filter
blocks all postings from Gmail, Google Mail and Google Groups.
m II
> In fact Rickets, you're just as stupid as those 5 idiots who have the nerve to call
> themselves Supreme Court Justices and issued yesterday what has to be the most
> idiotic ruling that this country has ever seen.
You seem to have your numbers mixed up. There were FOUR treasonous judges.
cuh...@webtv.net
You won't hear that on Faux news and those other jerk off 24/7
mainstream tv news shows.
FEMA is out somewhere spending all that money on goodies for themselves,
that's where FEMA is.Those fancy high rolling vacations get more
expensive every year.
cuhulin
Brody
LOL .. yet another bogus study 'proving' conservatives are stupid. You
liberals are so GULLIBLE.
Do you realize that this tatic was used by the Nazi to demonize
'undesirible' groups before destroying them?
Billy Burpelson
> Treasonous in my book.
Speaking of treasonous...
*Many* insiders over the years, plus General Powell, Scott McLellan and
a very recent bi-partisan, blue ribbon Congressional committee said Bush
and Cheney lied us into a war. Many might think THAT is treasonous.
Telamon
dxAce <dx...@milestones.com> wrote:
Yeah, that was one whacked outcome. I haven't read the decision yet so I
don't what the reasoning is but it sure must be torturous reading.
--
Telamon
Ventura, California
m II
> Yeah, that was one whacked outcome. I haven't read the decision yet so I
> don't what the reasoning is but it sure must be torturous reading.
Torturous? No. That's what they're trying to stop.
m II
> LOL .. yet another bogus study 'proving' conservatives are stupid. You
> liberals are so GULLIBLE.
>
> Do you realize that this tatic was used by the Nazi to demonize
> 'undesirible' groups before destroying them?
So, you are now demonizing the 'liberals' before you eliminate them?
RHF
> Brody wrote:
> > LOL .. yet another bogus study 'proving' conservatives are stupid. You
> > liberals are so GULLIBLE.
>
> > Do you realize that this tatic was used by the Nazi to demonize
> > 'undesirible' groups before destroying them?
- So, you are now demonizing the 'liberals'
- before you eliminate them?
-
- mike
Mike,
With All the Abortions -by- The Liberals :
They Are In-Fact "Self" Eliminating.
STOP THE ABORTION OF LIBERALCIDE !
Save a Baby Liberal from Being Killed -by- It's Parents.
Adopt a Liberal's Unwanted Baby : Raise the Child
to Love It's Country and Respect Each Human Life.
Blessed are the Meek for They shall Inherit . . .
a World Free of Liberals.
The Liberals in-fact Demonize themselves by their Elitism
toward the 'common folk' they claim to care about.
god save us from the all knowing and all seising
liberal elitist - amen ~ RHF
.
harvey
- yeah? - So what !
harvey
Yep !
heard that Saddam Husseins got them WMD's
George Bush's Gonna Invade
Yessiree Bob . . .
cuh...@webtv.net
Anti America 24/7 talking jerk off tv ''news'' shows.
cuhulin
Telamon
> Telamon wrote:
>
> > Yeah, that was one whacked outcome. I haven't read the decision yet so I
> > don't what the reasoning is but it sure must be torturous reading.
>
>
>
>
> Torturous? No. That's what they're trying to stop.
Yes torturous, mental in exchange for the physical. The supreme court
has seen fit to torture us all in exchange for the lot that has befallen
jailed foreign terrorists who are not US citizens. Military combatants
who would kill you if they had the chance, would deny you your rights if
they had the chance, and have no standing in our courts should get the
rights we posses? I don't think so.
--
Telamon
Ventura, California
Telamon
> Brody wrote:
>
> > LOL .. yet another bogus study 'proving' conservatives are stupid. You
> > liberals are so GULLIBLE.
> >
> > Do you realize that this tatic was used by the Nazi to demonize
> > 'undesirible' groups before destroying them?
>
>
> So, you are now demonizing the 'liberals' before you eliminate them?
There is no need to demonize or eliminate them. The liberals Darwinistic
tendencies will take care of that.
--
Telamon
Ventura, California
Telamon
<c07b80ed-3a39-42b3...@a32g2000prf.googlegroups.com>,
RHF <rhf-new...@pacbell.net> wrote:
> On Jun 13, 3:40 pm, m II <c...@in.the.hat> wrote:
> > Brody wrote:
> > > LOL .. yet another bogus study 'proving' conservatives are stupid. You
> > > liberals are so GULLIBLE.
> >
> > > Do you realize that this tatic was used by the Nazi to demonize
> > > 'undesirible' groups before destroying them?
>
> - So, you are now demonizing the 'liberals'
> - before you eliminate them?
> -
> - mike
>
> Mike,
>
> With All the Abortions -by- The Liberals :
> They Are In-Fact "Self" Eliminating.
>
> STOP THE ABORTION OF LIBERALCIDE !
>
> Save a Baby Liberal from Being Killed -by- It's Parents.
< SNIP >
See how that works Mikey?
--
Telamon
Ventura, California
m II
> Yes torturous, mental in exchange for the physical. The supreme court
> has seen fit to torture us all in exchange for the lot that has befallen
> jailed foreign terrorists who are not US citizens. Military combatants
> who would kill you if they had the chance, would deny you your rights if
> they had the chance, and have no standing in our courts should get the
> rights we posses? I don't think so.
>
Who is denying rights? It's already happened. Washington did it.
Whatever became of innocent until proven guilty? When did the US convert
to Napoleanic law?
Nowadays, the US assumes guilt and then denies the right of a trial.
That is hell. Wake up.
Look up Napoleanic Law. You might as well learn it, now that it's
replaced the Constitution.
m II
> See how that works Mikey?
I'm not sure. The changing of topic and overstuffed reply by RHF or the
timely 'snip'?
Telamon
> Telamon wrote:
>
> > Yes torturous, mental in exchange for the physical. The supreme court
> > has seen fit to torture us all in exchange for the lot that has befallen
> > jailed foreign terrorists who are not US citizens. Military combatants
> > who would kill you if they had the chance, would deny you your rights if
> > they had the chance, and have no standing in our courts should get the
> > rights we posses? I don't think so.
> >
>
>
> Who is denying rights? It's already happened. Washington did it.
> Whatever became of innocent until proven guilty? When did the US
> convert to Napoleanic law? Nowadays, the US assumes guilt and then
> denies the right of a trial. That is hell. Wake up.
>
> Look up Napoleanic Law. You might as well learn it, now that it's
> replaced the Constitution.
You don't seem to understand the Constitution applies to US citizens not
foreign military combatants.
--
Telamon
Ventura, California
Telamon
> Telamon wrote:
>
> > See how that works Mikey?
>
> I'm not sure. The changing of topic and overstuffed reply by RHF or the
> timely 'snip'?
The example of abortion.
m II
>> Look up Napoleanic Law. You might as well learn it, now that it's
>> replaced the Constitution.
>
> You don't seem to understand the Constitution applies to US citizens not
> foreign military combatants.
>
Some human beings are more equal than others in the eyes of God?
m II
Wait a minute. My response was meant to show a bit of the hypocrisy
going on.
One person starts 'demonizing' someone who he had just finished accusing
of 'demonizing'. He most likely didn't even realize he was doing it.
The word 'demonize' is wearing pretty thin with me right about now, what
with the exorcism of Ayn Rand's ghost and all. She didn't see the profit
in leaving.
RHF
> Telamon wrote:
> >> Look up Napoleanic Law. You might as well learn it, now that it's
> >> replaced the Constitution.
>
> > You don't seem to understand the Constitution applies to US citizens not
> > foreign military combatants.
- Some human beings are more equal than others in the eyes of God?
-
- mike
Mike - It's Called Koranic Justice and when Dealing with
Islam-O-Facists : It Is a Fact of the War on Terrorism. ~ RHF
.
Brody
> Telamon wrote:
>
>
>>Yes torturous, mental in exchange for the physical. The supreme court
>>has seen fit to torture us all in exchange for the lot that has befallen
>>jailed foreign terrorists who are not US citizens. Military combatants
>>who would kill you if they had the chance, would deny you your rights if
>>they had the chance, and have no standing in our courts should get the
>>rights we posses? I don't think so.
>>
>
>
>
> Who is denying rights? It's already happened. Washington did it.
> Whatever became of innocent until proven guilty?
beyond bizzare.. by this logic, every Jap and German POW should have had
a US lawyer and his day in a US court, and presumably release on bond
until his court date
Brody
> Telamon wrote:
>
>>In article <LBJ4k.1365$L03.275@edtnps92>, m II <c...@in.the.hat> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Telamon wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>See how that works Mikey?
>>>
>>>I'm not sure. The changing of topic and overstuffed reply by RHF or the
>>>timely 'snip'?
>>
>>The example of abortion.
>>
>>"There is no need to demonize or eliminate them. The liberals
>>Darwinistic tendencies will take care of that."
>>
>
>
> Wait a minute. My response was meant to show a bit of the hypocrisy
> going on.
>
> One person starts 'demonizing' someone
calling someone gullible is not demonizing for gawd's sake.
RHF
Mike,
Guess we will have to revert to Time Honored Tradition
of Battle-Field Justice in the Combat Zone per the
Geneva Convention 1949.
http://www.yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/lawofwar/geneva03.htm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geneva_Convention
Any Combatant Found in the Area of Combat : Who is
an Un-Lawful Military Combatant will be Interrogated,
Summarily Judged and Executed within 72 Hours. -eod-
http://writ.news.findlaw.com/dorf/20020123.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unlawful_military_combatant
GITMO - Guantanamo Bay Detention Camp
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guantanamo_Bay_detention_camp
The Failure of the US Congress to Protect the USA and
US Citizens from Terrorist Attacks by Islam-O-Facists.
Don't Blame the US Military and the DOD.
Don't Blame the US Justice Department
Don't Blame the US Supreme Court and the Courts
Don't Blame the US President and Administration
Clearly the Blame Belongs to the US Congress*
both Democrats and Republicans; House and
Senate alike.
* The US Congress Makes the Laws; and Lack of Good
Laws; and Failing to Act ARE The US Congresses Fault.
as an american citizen - yes i say that ~ RHF
.
RHF
<telamon_spamshi...@pacbell.net.is.invalid> wrote:
> In article <8yJ4k.1364$L03.1142@edtnps92>, m II <c...@in.the.hat> wrote:
> > Telamon wrote:
>
> > > Yes torturous, mental in exchange for the physical. The supreme court
> > > has seen fit to torture us all in exchange for the lot that has befallen
> > > jailed foreign terrorists who are not US citizens. Military combatants
> > > who would kill you if they had the chance, would deny you your rights if
> > > they had the chance, and have no standing in our courts should get the
> > > rights we posses? I don't think so.
>
> > Who is denying rights? It's already happened. Washington did it.
> > Whatever became of innocent until proven guilty? When did the US
> > convert to Napoleanic law? Nowadays, the US assumes guilt and then
> > denies the right of a trial. That is hell. Wake up.
>
> > Look up Napoleanic Law. You might as well learn it, now that it's
> > replaced the Constitution.
- You don't seem to understand the Constitution applies
- to US citizens not foreign military combatants.
-
- --
- Telamon
- Ventura, California
Telamon - Ditto That !
Point-of-Fact - These 'people' down in Gitmo are
Un-Lawful Military Combatants* : Who are Clearly
Outside the Geneva Convention 1949.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unlawful_military_combatant
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geneva_Convention
* They are in-fact Islam-O-Facist Terrorists.
GITMO - Guantanamo Bay Detention Camp
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guantanamo_Bay_detention_camp
The Failure of the US Congress to Protect the USA and
US Citizens from Terrorist Attacks by Islam-O-Facists.
Don't Blame the US Military and the DOD.
Don't Blame the US Justice Department
Don't Blame the US Supreme Court and the Courts
Don't Blame the US President and Administration
Clearly the Blame Belongs to the US Congress*
both Democrats and Republicans alike; and the
US House of representatives and the USSenate alike.
* The US Congress Makes the Laws
* The US Congress Failed to Make Good Laws to deal
effectively with these Un-Lawful Military Combatants
who are Islam-O-Facist Terrorists.
* The US Congress has Failing to Act : This Situation
is the Fault of the US Congress.
as an american citizen and a voter - yes i say that ~ RHF
.
RHF
<telamon_spamshi...@pacbell.net.is.invalid> wrote:
> In article <LBJ4k.1365$L03.275@edtnps92>, m II <c...@in.the.hat> wrote:
> > Telamon wrote:
>
> > > See how that works Mikey?
>
> > I'm not sure. The changing of topic and overstuffed reply by RHF or the
> > timely 'snip'?
>
> The example of abortion.
- "There is no need to demonize or eliminate them.
- The liberals Darwinistic tendencies will take care of that."
-
- --
- Telamon
- Ventura, California
The Children of Charles Darwin and his Wife Emma :
http://www.aboutdarwin.com/darwin/Children.html
They had Ten (10) Children : Seven (7) of which had No Children.
.
dxAce
Brody wrote:
> m II wrote:
> > Telamon wrote:
> >
> >
> >>Yes torturous, mental in exchange for the physical. The supreme court
> >>has seen fit to torture us all in exchange for the lot that has befallen
> >>jailed foreign terrorists who are not US citizens. Military combatants
> >>who would kill you if they had the chance, would deny you your rights if
> >>they had the chance, and have no standing in our courts should get the
> >>rights we posses? I don't think so.
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> > Who is denying rights? It's already happened. Washington did it.
> > Whatever became of innocent until proven guilty?
>
> beyond bizzare.. by this logic, every Jap and German POW should have had
> a US lawyer and his day in a US court, and presumably release on bond
> until his court date
Yep, most idiotic decision the Supreme's have ever made.
John Barnard
And what about those people who have been wrongfully imprisoned?
You deserve to live in a police state!
JB
John Barnard
Does that include those who had been wrongfully imprisoned?
JB
dave
> Where is FEMA? www.rense.com/general82/where.htm
>
> You won't hear that on Faux news and those other jerk off 24/7
> mainstream tv news shows.
>
>
Apparently you only believe conspiracy websites.
dave
Fascist love them some stupid.
dave
We are a nation of pussies.
dxAce
dave wrote:
"We", boy?
dave
> Telamon wrote:
>
>>> Look up Napoleanic Law. You might as well learn it, now that it's
>>> replaced the Constitution.
>> You don't seem to understand the Constitution applies to US citizens not
>> foreign military combatants.
>>
>
> Some human beings are more equal than others in the eyes of God?
>
> mike
>
citzens. The Bush Crime Family knew this, and claim Gitmo is on foreign
soil. The base is actually as American as John McCain's birthplace.
dave
> beyond bizzare.. by this logic, every Jap and German POW should have had
> a US lawyer and his day in a US court, and presumably release on bond
> until his court date
>
Most of the people at Guantanamo were turned-in for bounty or otherwise
the result of something other than capture on the battlefield. If they
are POWs, this ruling doesn't apply. They are to be held under the
Geneva Conventions, which do not allow torture.
There is no Declaration of War in effect right now, unlike the Japs and
the Gerrys.
cuh...@webtv.net
cuhulin
dave
Liberty is a coward and doesn't deserve to live in a Free Country.
m II
>> Who is denying rights? It's already happened. Washington did it.
>> Whatever became of innocent until proven guilty?
>
> beyond bizzare.. by this logic, every Jap and German POW should have had
> a US lawyer and his day in a US court, and presumably release on bond
> until his court date
Those people were not picked up on the street or dragged out of their
beds at three in morning or turned in to the occupiers as a means of
revenge or as a political move by the competition.
An example of how things have been twisted around:
After WWII, Japanese soldiers who had water boarded US prisoners were
branded as having committed war crimes. In Texas, 1983, a Sheriff and
three deputies got 10 years for torturing with the technique. Today,
there must be a kinder, gentler version of this torture, as it's
accepted US practice. Hell, they even changed the definition of
'torture' to cover their illegal as hell backsides.
Please, do some research. Find out what monsters have taken over your
country:
http://www.searchmash.com/search/japanese+water+boarding+prison
m II
> Any Combatant Found in the Area of Combat : Who is
> an Un-Lawful Military Combatant will be Interrogated,
> Summarily Judged and Executed within 72 Hours. -eod-
> http://writ.news.findlaw.com/dorf/20020123.html
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unlawful_military_combatant
Good thing the English didn't invent the term 'Un-Lawful Military
Combatant' during the US war of independence. There were LOTS of
un-uniformed people shooting at them from behind trees, bushes and houses.
m II
> calling someone gullible is not demonizing for gawd's sake.
Well, we differ on that. 'Gullible' has a connotation of an
unsophisticated and less than smart person. A gullible person is easily
tricked or suckered. They are pawns in the hands of their 'users'.
The term is sometimes used to described someone who, because of their
own experiences, thinks differently than we do. Gullible, in the sense
you used it, means 'wrong'.
Thinking differently doesn't automatically mean thinking incorrectly.
Brody
> Brody wrote:
>
>> beyond bizzare.. by this logic, every Jap and German POW should have
>> had a US lawyer and his day in a US court, and presumably release on
>> bond until his court date
>>
>
> Most of the people at Guantanamo were turned-in for bounty or otherwise
> the result of something other than capture on the battlefield
source ?
Brody
> Brody wrote:
>
>
>>>Who is denying rights? It's already happened. Washington did it.
>>>Whatever became of innocent until proven guilty?
>>
>>beyond bizzare.. by this logic, every Jap and German POW should have had
>>a US lawyer and his day in a US court, and presumably release on bond
>>until his court date
>
>
>
> Those people were not picked up on the street or dragged out of their
> beds at three in morning or turned in to the occupiers as a means of
> revenge or as a political move by the competition.
>
>
> An example of how things have been twisted around:
>
> After WWII, Japanese soldiers who had water boarded US prisoners were
> branded as having committed war crimes.
Japs and Nazi were convicted of a lot worse than waterboarding.
> In Texas, 1983, a Sheriff and
> three deputies got 10 years for torturing with the technique.
and deserved it.. whats your point ?
> Today,
> there must be a kinder, gentler version of this torture, as it's
> accepted US practice. Hell, they even changed the definition of
> 'torture' to cover their illegal as hell backsides.
pfft... you lefties claim playing loud music is torture.
>
> Please, do some research. Find out what monsters have taken over your
> country:
>
Want to know what real torture is ?? Read up on the torture rooms found
in Iraq, and the techniques and tools the terrorists (some held in
Gitmo) used .
US troops are subjected to waterboarding wbile training how to resist
interrogation. Unfortunately there is no way to resist having ones head
sawed off with a dull knife.
> http://www.searchmash.com/search/japanese+water+boarding+prison
>
> mike
>
>
Brody
> Brody wrote:
>
>
>>calling someone gullible is not demonizing for gawd's sake.
>
>
> Well, we differ on that. 'Gullible' has a connotation of an
> unsophisticated and less than smart person.
no... plenty of REALLY smart are gullible.
> A gullible person is easily
> tricked or suckered. They are pawns in the hands of their 'users'.
>
which is why i used the word... it applies.
> The term is sometimes used to described someone who, because of their
> own experiences, thinks differently than we do. Gullible, in the sense
> you used it, means 'wrong'.
>
> Thinking differently doesn't automatically mean thinking incorrectly.
Then why the 'studies' to 'prove' conservatives are not as smart as liberals
>
> mike
>
>
Seems your are to lazy to read site linked to in the original post, or
the hate messages the article generated
RHF
> m II wrote:
> > Telamon wrote:
>
> >>> Look up Napoleanic Law. You might as well learn it, now that it's
> >>> replaced the Constitution.
> >> You don't seem to understand the Constitution applies to US citizens not
> >> foreign military combatants.
>
> > Some human beings are more equal than others in the eyes of God?
>
> > mike
- I'm pretty sure all persons on American soil
- have rights, not just citzens.
Yes Illegal Alien Invaders -have- The Right to be Deported.
- The Bush Crime Family knew this,
Classic Liberal Demonization of the Right Speak :
da bush crime family,
Da Bush Crime Family.
DA BUSH CRIME FAMILY !
- and claim Gitmo is on foreign soil.
- The base is actually as American as John McCain's birthplace.
Actually a Good Valid Point.
.
RHF
> >http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guantanamo_Bay_detention_camp
>
> > The Failure of the US Congress to Protect the USA and
> > US Citizens from Terrorist Attacks by Islam-O-Facists.
>
> > Don't Blame the US Military and the DOD.
>
> > Don't Blame the US Justice Department
>
> > Don't Blame the US Supreme Court and the Courts
>
> > Don't Blame the US President and Administration
>
> > Clearly the Blame Belongs to the US Congress*
> > both Democrats and Republicans alike; and the
> > US House of representatives and the USSenate alike.
> > * The US Congress Makes the Laws
> > * The US Congress Failed to Make Good Laws to deal
> > effectively with these Un-Lawful Military Combatants
> > who are Islam-O-Facist Terrorists.
> > * The US Congress has Failing to Act : This Situation
> > is the Fault of the US Congress.
>
> > as an american citizen and a voter - yes i say that ~ RHF
- Does that include those who had been wrongfully imprisoned?
-
- JB
JB - Give us your Name and Address : We will send all
the ones who 'claim' that they were 'wrongfully imprisoned"
over to stay with you so that you can help them to get
over their "wrongfully imprisonment".
GITMO - Guantanamo Bay Detention Camp
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guantanamo_Bay_detention_camp
Since the beginning of the current war in Afghanistan,
* 775 detainees have been brought to Guantanamo,
* Approximately 420 of which have been released without charge.
* As of May 2008, approximately 270 detainees remain.
* More than a Fifth (1/5) are Cleared for Release but may have
to wait Months or Years because U.S. Officials are finding it
increasingly difficult to persuade Countries to accept them,
* According to Officials and Defense Lawyers.
* Of the Roughly 355 still Incarcerated,
* U.S. Officials said they intend to eventually put 60 to 80 on trial
* and Free the Rest.
OH CANADA - OPEN UP YOUR DOORS TO SET THE
WRONGFULLY IMPRISONED FREE: GIVE THE GITMO
DETAINEES A HOME TO PLAN THEIR NEXT JIHAD .
[ Jihad -aka- Islam-O-Facist Act of Terrorism. ]
Note - The US Pentagon claimed that 36 former Guantanamo
Inmates were "Confirmed or Suspected of having returned to
Terrorism".
oh the silence - no name - no address - just so much
liberal rhetoric from canada~ RHF
.
dave
> dave wrote:
>> Brody wrote:
>>
>>> beyond bizzare.. by this logic, every Jap and German POW should have
>>> had a US lawyer and his day in a US court, and presumably release on
>>> bond until his court date
>>>
>>
>> Most of the people at Guantanamo were turned-in for bounty or
>> otherwise the result of something other than capture on the battlefield
>
> source ?
>
Guantanamo and why has been
fueled in large measure by the refusal of the Government, on the grounds
of national security, to
provide much information about the individuals and the charges against
them. The information
available to date has been anecdotal and erratic, drawn largely from
interviews with the few
detainees who have been released or from statements or court filings by
their attorneys in the
pending habeas corpus proceedings that the Government has not declared
“classified.”
This Report is the first effort to provide a more detailed
picture of who the Guantanamo
detainees are, how they ended up there, and the purported bases for
their enemy combatant
designation. The data in this Report is based entirely upon the United
States Government’s own
documents.1 This Report provides a window into the Government’s success
detaining only those
that the President has called “the worst of the worst.”
Among the data revealed by this Report:
1. Fifty-five percent (55%) of the detainees are not
determined to have committed any
hostile acts against the United States or its coalition allies.
Only 8% of the detainees were characterized as al
Qaeda fighters. Of the remaining
2.
detainees, 40% have no definitive connection with al Qaeda at all and
18% are have no definitive
affiliation with either al Qaeda or the Taliban.
The Government has detained numerous persons based on
mere affiliations with a
3.
large number of groups that in fact, are not on the Department of
Homeland Security terrorist
watchlist. Moreover, the nexus between such a detainee and such
organizations varies considerably.
Eight percent are detained because they are deemed “fighters for;” 30%
considered “members of;” a
large majority – 60% -- are detained merely because they are “associated
with” a group or groups the
Government asserts are terrorist organizations. For 2% of the prisoners
their nexus to any terrorist
group is unidentified.
4. Only 5% of the detainees were captured by United
States forces. 86% of the
detainees were arrested by either Pakistan or the Northern Alliance and
turned over to United States
custody.
This 86% of the detainees captured by Pakistan or the Northern Alliance
were handed over to the
United States at a time in which the United States offered large
bounties for capture of suspected
enemies.
* The authors are counsel for two detainees in Guantanamo.
RHF
> Telamon wrote:
> > In article <8yJ4k.1364$L03.1142@edtnps92>, m II <c...@in.the.hat> wrote:
>
> >> Telamon wrote:
>
> >>> Yes torturous, mental in exchange for the physical. The supreme court
> >>> has seen fit to torture us all in exchange for the lot that has befallen
> >>> jailed foreign terrorists who are not US citizens. Military combatants
> >>> who would kill you if they had the chance, would deny you your rights if
> >>> they had the chance, and have no standing in our courts should get the
> >>> rights we posses? I don't think so.
>
> >> Who is denying rights? It's already happened. Washington did it.
> >> Whatever became of innocent until proven guilty? When did the US
> >> convert to Napoleanic law? Nowadays, the US assumes guilt and then
> >> denies the right of a trial. That is hell. Wake up.
>
> >> Look up Napoleanic Law. You might as well learn it, now that it's
> >> replaced the Constitution.
- - You don't seem to understand the Constitution
- - applies to US citizens not foreign military combatants.
- Moron!
-
- And what about those people who have been wrongfully imprisoned?
-
- You deserve to live in a police state!
-
- JB
JB - You deserve to Live in a Canada Occupied by your
'wrongfully imprisoned' Islam-O-Facist friends. ~ RHF
RHF
> m II wrote:
> > Telamon wrote:
>
> >>Yes torturous, mental in exchange for the physical. The supreme court
> >>has seen fit to torture us all in exchange for the lot that has befallen
> >>jailed foreign terrorists who are not US citizens. Military combatants
> >>who would kill you if they had the chance, would deny you your rights if
> >>they had the chance, and have no standing in our courts should get the
> >>rights we posses? I don't think so.
>
> > Who is denying rights? It's already happened. Washington did it.
> > Whatever became of innocent until proven guilty?
- beyond bizzare.. by this logic, every Jap and German POW
- should have had a US lawyer and his day in a US court,
- and presumably release on bond until his court date
BRODY - You Got It - War-by-Lawyer ~ RHF
-ps- and the US Taxpayers Paying the Bill.
>
>
> > When did the US convert
> > to Napoleanic law?
> > Nowadays, the US assumes guilt and then denies the right of a trial.
> > That is hell. Wake up.
>
> > Look up Napoleanic Law. You might as well learn it, now that it's
> > replaced the Constitution.
>
> > mike- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
RHF
> Brody wrote:
> > beyond bizzare.. by this logic, every Jap and German POW should have had
> > a US lawyer and his day in a US court, and presumably release on bond
> > until his court date
>
> Most of the people at Guantanamo were turned-in for bounty or otherwise
> the result of something other than capture on the battlefield. If they
> are POWs, this ruling doesn't apply. They are to be held under the
> Geneva Conventions, which do not allow torture.
- There is no Declaration of War in effect right now,
Dave,
Pointing out the US Congress' Failure to Act to
Protect the USA and American Citizens.
~ RHF
RHF
> RHF wrote:
> > Any Combatant Found in the Area of Combat : Who is
> > an Un-Lawful Military Combatant will be Interrogated,
> > Summarily Judged and Executed within 72 Hours. -eod-
> >http://writ.news.findlaw.com/dorf/20020123.html
> >http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unlawful_military_combatant
- Good thing the English didn't invent the term
- 'Un-Lawful Military Combatant' during the US
- war of independence. There were LOTS of
- un-uniformed people shooting at them from
- behind trees, bushes and houses.
-
- mike
Most of which were Shot-on-the-Spot by the RedCoats.
.
RHF
> dxAce wrote:
>
> > dave wrote:
>
> >> harvey wrote:
> >>> On Jun 13, 9:16 am, dave <noth...@nowhere.com> wrote:
> >>>>http://www.alternet.org/blogs/peek/83758/
>
> >>>> "...too much Fox News may be bad news for conservatives. An April 2007
> >>>> Pew Research Study survey found that viewers of the conservative Fox
> >>>> News channel had the lowest knowledge of national and international
> >>>> affairs."
> >>> Yep !
>
> >>> heard that Saddam Husseins got them WMD's
>
> >>> George Bush's Gonna Invade
>
> >>> Yessiree Bob . . .
> >> We are a nation of pussies.
>
> > "We", boy?
>
- of throwing away their Liberty is a coward and
- doesn't deserve to live in a Free Country.
Dave,
I am for Locking Up the Islam-O-Facist Terrorist
who want to Practice Jihad on America and
Throwing Away the Key.
-ps- Dve -if- you are not basically afraid of some one
who is trying to Kill You - you need help.
america - the freedom to live free ~ RHF
.
Brody
Your source is the terrorists lawyers
here is my source
http://www.defenselink.mil/home/features/gitmo/
http://www.defenselink.mil/news/newsarticle.aspx?id=14844
"Bellinger said most of the detainees were captured on the battlefield,
but are not categorized as prisoners of war because al Qaeda is not a
signatory to the Geneva Conventions, and "neither the Taliban nor al
Qaeda met any of the definitions of the term 'prisoner of war'" outlined
in the conventions.
Due to security threats, "the Geneva Conventions themselves make very
clear ... that there would be certain categories of individuals -- spies
or 'saboteurs,' ... who should be considered to have forfeited their
rights of communication with the outside world," he said
Bellinger commented on a forthcoming U.N. report regarding the detainees
at Guantanamo.
"The U.S. government has seen an advance draft of it," he said. "We
think that the report is fundamentally flawed in its procedures and is
riddled with inaccuracies and really was done in a way, frankly, that
discredits the report overall and the work of the rapporteurs in this
effort."
Bellinger criticized the U.N. for writing the report without visiting
Guantanamo, even though they had been invited to do so. "
>
> http://law.shu.edu/news/guantanamo_reports.htm
>
> http://law.shu.edu/aaafinal.pdf
Brody
> Brody wrote:
>
>> dave wrote:
>>
>>> Brody wrote:
>>>
>>>> beyond bizzare.. by this logic, every Jap and German POW should have
>>>> had a US lawyer and his day in a US court, and presumably release on
>>>> bond until his court date
>>>>
>>>
>>> Most of the people at Guantanamo were turned-in for bounty or
>>> otherwise the result of something other than capture on the battlefield
>>
>>
>> source ?
>>
> The media and public fascination with who is detained at
> Guantanamo and why has been
> fueled in large measure by the refusal of the Government, on the grounds
> of national security, to
> provide much information about the individuals and the charges against
> them. The information
> available to date has been anecdotal and erratic, drawn largely from
> interviews with the few
> detainees who have been released or from statements or court filings by
> their attorneys in the
> pending habeas corpus proceedings that the Government has not declared
> “classified.”
>
http://www.defenselink.mil/news/newsarticle.aspx?id=16270
Al Qaeda Manual Drives Detainee Behavior at Guantanamo Bay
By Donna Miles
American Forces Press Service
WASHINGTON, June 29, 2005 – If you're a Muslim extremist captured while
fighting your holy war against "infidels," avoid revealing information
at all costs, don't give your real name and claim that you were
mistreated or tortured during your detention.
This instruction comes straight from the pages of an official al Qaeda
training manual, and officials at the detention facility at Naval
Station Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, say they see clear evidence that detainees
are well-versed in its contents.
Police in Manchester, England, discovered the manual, which has come to
be known as the "Manchester document," in 2000 while searching computer
files found in the home of a known al Qaeda member. The contents were
introduced as evidence into the 2001 trial of terrorists who bombed the
U.S. embassies in Tanzania and Kenya in 1998.
The FBI translated the document into English, and it is posted on the
Justice Department's Web site.
The 18-chapter manual provides a detailed window into al Qaeda's network
and its procedures for waging jihad - from conducting surveillance
operations to carrying out assassinations to working with forged documents.
The closing chapter teaches al Qaeda operatives how to operate in a
prison or detention center. It directs detainees to "insist on proving
that torture was inflicted" and to "complain of mistreatment while in
prison."
Chapter 17 instructs them to "be careful not to give the enemy any vital
information" during interrogations.
Another section of the manual directs commanders to teach their
operatives what to say if they're captured, and to explain it "more than
once to ensure that they have assimilated it." To reinforce the message,
it tells commanders to have operatives "explain it back to the commander."
And at the Guantanamo Bay detention center, detainees take this
instruction to heart. Many of the more than 500 detainees are
"uncooperative" in providing intelligence, Army Brig. Gen. Jay Hood,
commander of Joint Task Force Guantanamo, told military analysts who
traveled to the facility June 24 and reiterated today during a hearing
before the House Armed Services Committee.
Some detainees have never uttered a single word during more than three
years of interrogation. Others give false names or refuse to offer their
real names.
This can prove challenging for interrogators at the facility, because
many detainees "follow the al Qaeda SOP (standard operating procedures)
to the T," according to Army Col. John Hadjis, chief of staff for Joint
Task Force Guantanamo.
Officials say they see evidence of the al Qaeda-directed misinformation
campaign in allegations of detainee abuse and mishandling of the Koran
at Guantanamo Bay.
Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld expressed frustration over this
effort during a June 21 interview on the "Tony Snow Show."
"These detainees are trained to lie, they're trained to say they were
tortured, and the minute we release them or the minute they get a
lawyer, very frequently they'll go out and they will announce that
they've been tortured," Rumsfeld said.
The media jumps on these claims, reporting them as "another example of
torture," the secretary said, "when in fact, (terrorists have) been
trained to do that, and their training manual says so."
During a February 2004 Pentagon news conference, a DoD official said new
information provided by detainees during questioning is analyzed to
determine its reliability.
"Unfortunately, many detainees are deceptive and prefer to conceal their
identifies and their actions," said Paul Butler, principal deputy
assistant secretary for special operations and low-intensity conflict.
Butler said the Manchester document includes "a large section which
teaches al Qaeda operatives counterinterrogation techniques: how to lie,
how to minimize your role."
The document, he said, has surfaced in various locations, including
Afghanistan.
The manual's preface offers a chilling reminder of the mentality that
drives al Qaeda disciples and the lengths they will go to for their cause.
"The confrontation that we are calling for ... does not know Socratic
debates, ... Platonic ideals ... nor Aristotelian diplomacy," its
opening pages read. "But it knows the dialogue of bullets, the ideals of
assassination, bombing and destruction, and the diplomacy of the cannon
and machine gun."
Related Sites:
Joint Task Force Guantanamo
The Manchester Document
Telamon
> Telamon wrote:
>
> >> Look up Napoleanic Law. You might as well learn it, now that it's
> >> replaced the Constitution.
> >
> > You don't seem to understand the Constitution applies to US citizens not
> > foreign military combatants.
> >
>
> Some human beings are more equal than others in the eyes of God?
>
Of course not. Are you saying God follows or wrote the US Constitution?
--
Telamon
Ventura, California
Telamon
dave <not...@nowhere.com> wrote:
Actually being born here is not enough. You have to declare in one or
more ways that you are subject to US law. You can get a birth
certificate, a social security number, get a bank account, start paying
taxes. In this and other ways you have agreed to accept the court
systems decisions.
Immigrants have to go through a process to become citizens and at the
end declare to uphold the constitution of the US and be subjects to its
laws.
In order to petition the court you have to have standing in that court
or they will not hear you. This is at any level of the court system
state or federal. Foreign military combatants have no standing in US
courts.
For a court to hear a complaint it must have jurisdiction over the law
in question. You must show that you will abide by the courts decision
or in other words agree that you are subject to that courts authority.
You must have standing before the court if you are bring the action or
complaint. If you don't have standing before the court you need to hire
a lawyer that does.
Jurisdiction is why the administration is keeping the foreign military
combatants at GITMO where there is no presiding US judge.
******
Foreign military combatants are being jailed in the territory of Cuba
leased to the US military with no presiding US judge.
Foreign military combatants are not citizens of the USA and not subject
to US law.
Foreign military combatants do not have standing before any US court.
Foreign military combatants rights are controlled by the rules of past
Geneva conventions that the USA has agreed to follow. The law over
these foreigners captured by US military forces during armed conflicts
is subject to those rules and are to be adjudicated by military
tribunal.
Foreign military combatants rights and their very lives are subject to
our military forces only and not any US court.
--
Telamon
Ventura, California
Telamon
> RHF wrote:
>
> > Any Combatant Found in the Area of Combat : Who is
> > an Un-Lawful Military Combatant will be Interrogated,
> > Summarily Judged and Executed within 72 Hours. -eod-
> > http://writ.news.findlaw.com/dorf/20020123.html
> > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unlawful_military_combatant
>
>
> Good thing the English didn't invent the term 'Un-Lawful Military
> Combatant' during the US war of independence. There were LOTS of
> un-uniformed people shooting at them from behind trees, bushes and houses.
>
The English at the time executed anyone that gave them a problem on the
spot. The English military were judge, jury, and executioner. They
killed anyone they felt like killing at the time. If they came across
someone's farm house they wanted to stay at and the people didn't move
out fast enough they were shot.
--
Telamon
Ventura, California
Telamon
dxAce <dx...@milestones.com> wrote:
>
>
> Brody wrote:
>
> > m II wrote:
> > > Telamon wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > >>Yes torturous, mental in exchange for the physical. The supreme court
> > >>has seen fit to torture us all in exchange for the lot that has befallen
> > >>jailed foreign terrorists who are not US citizens. Military combatants
> > >>who would kill you if they had the chance, would deny you your rights if
> > >>they had the chance, and have no standing in our courts should get the
> > >>rights we posses? I don't think so.
> > >>
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Who is denying rights? It's already happened. Washington did it.
> > > Whatever became of innocent until proven guilty?
> >
> > beyond bizzare.. by this logic, every Jap and German POW should have had
> > a US lawyer and his day in a US court, and presumably release on bond
> > until his court date
>
> Yep, most idiotic decision the Supreme's have ever made.
The top court is going to have to reverse itself on this one.
--
Telamon
Ventura, California
Brenda Ann
"Telamon" <telamon_s...@pacbell.net.is.invalid> wrote in message
news:telamon_spamshield-2...@newsclstr02.news.prodigy.com...
> In article <4853cf21$0$26240$bd46...@news.dslextreme.com>,
> dave <not...@nowhere.com> wrote:
>
>> m II wrote:
>> > Telamon wrote:
>> >
>> >>> Look up Napoleanic Law. You might as well learn it, now that it's
>> >>> replaced the Constitution.
>> >> You don't seem to understand the Constitution applies to US citizens
>> >> not
>> >> foreign military combatants.
>> >>
>> >
>> > Some human beings are more equal than others in the eyes of God?
>> >
>> > mike
>> >
>> I'm pretty sure all persons on American soil have rights, not just
>> citzens. The Bush Crime Family knew this, and claim Gitmo is on foreign
>> soil. The base is actually as American as John McCain's birthplace.
>
> or they will not hear you. This is at any level of the court system
> state or federal. Foreign military combatants have no standing in US
> courts.
>
> For a court to hear a complaint it must have jurisdiction over the law
> in question. You must show that you will abide by the courts decision
> or in other words agree that you are subject to that courts authority.
> You must have standing before the court if you are bring the action or
> complaint. If you don't have standing before the court you need to hire
> a lawyer that does.
>
> Jurisdiction is why the administration is keeping the foreign military
> combatants at GITMO where there is no presiding US judge.
All US military bases are US soil, just as are all US embassies. As such,
the US Supreme Court and lower Federal courts have jurisdiction over anyone
being detained on any US military base.
There is no presiding US court judge at any US military base in a foreign
country, but all JAG court decisions are appealable and addressable to US
Federal courts, including the Supreme Court.
Telamon
"Brenda Ann" <bre...@shinbiro.com> wrote:
GITMO is not US soil. It is Cuban soil leased to the US military and it
is not an embassy.
Yeah sure thing. Name the courts then.
> There is no presiding US court judge at any US military base in a foreign
> country, but all JAG court decisions are appealable and addressable to US
> Federal courts, including the Supreme Court.
In theory for issues related to people in the US military service not
any foreigners. US law does not pertain to foreigners brought to GITMO
by the US military. These foreigner do not have visas or other
documentation.
--
Telamon
Ventura, California
dave
some DOD flack for the Bush Crime Family.
Brody
no.. I mean the terrorists lawyers..
> I'll believe them before I'll believe
> some DOD flack for the Bush Crime Family.
Of course you would... and in WWII you and your liberal friends would
take the word of Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan's propagandists before
the word of the Allies.
m II
>> Some human beings are more equal than others in the eyes of God?
>>
> Of course not. Are you saying God follows or wrote the US Constitution?
It wouldn't have mattered anyway. The Patriot Act overrules God.
m II
> Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld expressed frustration over this
> effort during a June 21 interview on the "Tony Snow Show."
Is he the same guy that said prisoner suicide was actually 'Asymmetrical
warfare' against the US? No, wait..that was war criminal Harris, who,
coincidentally, was only following orders.
m II
> The English at the time executed anyone that gave them a problem on the
> spot. The English military were judge, jury, and executioner. They
> killed anyone they felt like killing at the time. If they came across
> someone's farm house they wanted to stay at and the people didn't move
> out fast enough they were shot.
>
Very much like Iraq? Were there premeditated rapes of fourteen year olds
and the subsequent murder of her family?
History seems to repeat itself.
The US fought the English and now, the Iraqis are fighting you.
m II
> Seems your are to lazy to read site linked to in the original post, or
> the hate messages the article generated
Why would I read a site that classifies a group of people as stupid?
The poster quoted:
=======================================
An April 2007 Pew Research Study survey found that viewers of the
conservative Fox News channel had the lowest knowledge of national and
international affairs."
=======================================
This says 'viewers'. That could be anybody. I'm sure both political
wings watch each other's propaganda.
I'd rather watch factual NEWS. Editorial comment belongs in the opinion
section.
Telamon
> Telamon wrote:
>
> > The English at the time executed anyone that gave them a problem on the
> > spot. The English military were judge, jury, and executioner. They
> > killed anyone they felt like killing at the time. If they came across
> > someone's farm house they wanted to stay at and the people didn't move
> > out fast enough they were shot.
> >
>
> Very much like Iraq? Were there premeditated rapes of fourteen year olds
> and the subsequent murder of her family?
You were there to see this?
> History seems to repeat itself.
Most days.
> The US fought the English and now, the Iraqis are fighting you.
They are not fighting me or the US troops. There are some insurgents
trained and supplied in Iran trying to create mayhem in Iraq though.
--
Telamon
Ventura, California
m II
> Stop the Abortion of Liberalcide !
I've been meaning to ask....what does the above line mean? I've looked
at it from all angles and still can't figure it out.
dave
You really need to get out more. That's a terrible analogy. Again I
remind you, there is no Declaration of War.
The USA is not in any great danger. When the Soviets were within 15
minutes of wasting both coasts we didn't trample the Constitution this
bad. (My "grow a pair" analogy...)
dxAce
dave wrote:
Rickets, as long as there are folks out there like you, we are always in great
danger.
dxAce
Michigan
USA
dave
>>
>> The USA is not in any great danger.
>
> Rickets, as long as there are folks out there like you, we are always in great
> danger.
>
> dxAce
> Michigan
> USA
>
>
So's your old man!
m II
That's really hurtful. They've never met.
dxAce
m II wrote:
> dave wrote:
>
> > dxAce wrote:
> >
> >>>
> >>> The USA is not in any great danger.
> >>
> >> Rickets, as long as there are folks out there like you, we are always
> >> in great
> >> danger.
> >>
> >> dxAce
> >> Michigan
> >> USA
> >>
> >>
> > So's your old man!
>
> That's really hurtful. They've never met.
Projecting again?
cuh...@webtv.net
cuhulin
John Barnard
> On Jun 14, 5:16 am, John Barnard <j...@shaw.ca> wrote:
>> RHF wrote:
>>> On Jun 13, 11:44 pm, Telamon
>>> <telamon_spamshi...@pacbell.net.is.invalid> wrote:
>>>> In article <8yJ4k.1364$L03.1142@edtnps92>, m II <c...@in.the.hat> wrote:
>>>>> Telamon wrote:
>>>>>> has seen fit to torture us all in exchange for the lot that has befallen
>>>>>> jailed foreign terrorists who are not US citizens. Military combatants
>>>>>> who would kill you if they had the chance, would deny you your rights if
>>>>>> they had the chance, and have no standing in our courts should get the
>>>>>> rights we posses? I don't think so.
>>>>> Who is denying rights? It's already happened. Washington did it.
>>>>> convert to Napoleanic law? Nowadays, the US assumes guilt and then
>>>>> denies the right of a trial. That is hell. Wake up.
>>>>> Look up Napoleanic Law. You might as well learn it, now that it's
>>>>> replaced the Constitution.
>>> - to US citizens not foreign military combatants.
>>> -
>>> - --
>>> - Telamon
>>> - Ventura, California
>>> Telamon - Ditto That !
>>> Point-of-Fact - These 'people' down in Gitmo are
>>> Un-Lawful Military Combatants* : Who are Clearly
>>> Outside the Geneva Convention 1949.
>>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unlawful_military_combatant
>>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geneva_Convention
>>> * They are in-fact Islam-O-Facist Terrorists.
>>> GITMO - Guantanamo Bay Detention Camp
>>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guantanamo_Bay_detention_camp
>>> The Failure of the US Congress to Protect the USA and
>>> US Citizens from Terrorist Attacks by Islam-O-Facists.
>>> Don't Blame the US Military and the DOD.
>>> Don't Blame the US Justice Department
>>> Don't Blame the US Supreme Court and the Courts
>>> Don't Blame the US President and Administration
>>> Clearly the Blame Belongs to the US Congress*
>>> both Democrats and Republicans alike; and the
>>> US House of representatives and the USSenate alike.
>>> * The US Congress Makes the Laws
>>> * The US Congress Failed to Make Good Laws to deal
>>> effectively with these Un-Lawful Military Combatants
>>> who are Islam-O-Facist Terrorists.
>>> * The US Congress has Failing to Act : This Situation
>>> is the Fault of the US Congress.
>>> as an american citizen and a voter - yes i say that ~ RHF
>>> .- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Does that include those who had been wrongfully imprisoned?
> -
> - JB
>
> JB - Give us your Name and Address : We will send all
> the ones who 'claim' that they were 'wrongfully imprisoned"
> over to stay with you so that you can help them to get
> over their "wrongfully imprisonment".
>
> GITMO - Guantanamo Bay Detention Camp
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guantanamo_Bay_detention_camp
> Since the beginning of the current war in Afghanistan,
> * 775 detainees have been brought to Guantanamo,
> * Approximately 420 of which have been released without charge.
> * As of May 2008, approximately 270 detainees remain.
> * More than a Fifth (1/5) are Cleared for Release but may have
> to wait Months or Years because U.S. Officials are finding it
> increasingly difficult to persuade Countries to accept them,
> * According to Officials and Defense Lawyers.
> * Of the Roughly 355 still Incarcerated,
> * U.S. Officials said they intend to eventually put 60 to 80 on trial
> * and Free the Rest.
>
> OH CANADA - OPEN UP YOUR DOORS TO SET THE
> WRONGFULLY IMPRISONED FREE: GIVE THE GITMO
> DETAINEES A HOME TO PLAN THEIR NEXT JIHAD .
> [ Jihad -aka- Islam-O-Facist Act of Terrorism. ]
>
> Note - The US Pentagon claimed that 36 former Guantanamo
> Inmates were "Confirmed or Suspected of having returned to
> Terrorism".
>
> oh the silence - no name - no address - just so much
> liberal rhetoric from canada~ RHF
> .
>
Nature abhors a vacuum and your last name is Hoover.
JB
John Barnard
> On Jun 14, 5:12 am, John Barnard <j...@shaw.ca> wrote:
>> Telamon wrote:
>>> In article <8yJ4k.1364$L03.1142@edtnps92>, m II <c...@in.the.hat> wrote:
>>>> Telamon wrote:
>>>>> Yes torturous, mental in exchange for the physical. The supreme court
>>>>> has seen fit to torture us all in exchange for the lot that has befallen
>>>>> jailed foreign terrorists who are not US citizens. Military combatants
>>>>> who would kill you if they had the chance, would deny you your rights if
>>>>> they had the chance, and have no standing in our courts should get the
>>>>> rights we posses? I don't think so.
>>>> Who is denying rights? It's already happened. Washington did it.
>>>> Whatever became of innocent until proven guilty? When did the US
>>>> convert to Napoleanic law? Nowadays, the US assumes guilt and then
>>>> denies the right of a trial. That is hell. Wake up.
>>>> Look up Napoleanic Law. You might as well learn it, now that it's
>>>> replaced the Constitution.
>
> - - applies to US citizens not foreign military combatants.
>
> - Moron!
> -
> - And what about those people who have been wrongfully imprisoned?
> -
> - You deserve to live in a police state!
> -
> - JB
>
> JB - You deserve to Live in a Canada Occupied by your
> 'wrongfully imprisoned' Islam-O-Facist friends. ~ RHF
RHF
> >> In article <8yJ4k.1364$L03.1142@edtnps92>, m II <c...@in.the.hat> wrote:
> >>> Telamon wrote:
> >>>> Yes torturous, mental in exchange for the physical. The supreme court
> >>>> has seen fit to torture us all in exchange for the lot that has befallen
> >>>> jailed foreign terrorists who are not US citizens. Military combatants
> >>>> who would kill you if they had the chance, would deny you your rights if
> >>>> they had the chance, and have no standing in our courts should get the
> >>>> rights we posses? I don't think so.
> >>> Who is denying rights? It's already happened. Washington did it.
> >>> Whatever became of innocent until proven guilty? When did the US
> >>> convert to Napoleanic law? Nowadays, the US assumes guilt and then
> >>> denies the right of a trial. That is hell. Wake up.
> >>> Look up Napoleanic Law. You might as well learn it, now that it's
> >>> replaced the Constitution.
>
> > - to US citizens not foreign military combatants.
> > -
> > - --
> > - Telamon
> > - Ventura, California
>
> > Telamon - Ditto That !
>
> > Point-of-Fact - These 'people' down in Gitmo are
> > Un-Lawful Military Combatants* : Who are Clearly
> > Outside the Geneva Convention 1949.
> >http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unlawful_military_combatant
> >http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geneva_Convention
> > * They are in-fact Islam-O-Facist Terrorists.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > GITMO - Guantanamo Bay Detention Camp
> >http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guantanamo_Bay_detention_camp
>
> > US Citizens from Terrorist Attacks by Islam-O-Facists.
>
> > Don't Blame the US Military and the DOD.
>
> > Don't Blame the US Justice Department
>
> > Don't Blame the US Supreme Court and the Courts
>
> > Don't Blame the US President and Administration
>
> > Clearly the Blame Belongs to the US Congress*
> > both Democrats and Republicans alike; and the
> > US House of representatives and the USSenate alike.
> > * The US Congress Makes the Laws
> > * The US Congress Failed to Make Good Laws to deal
> > effectively with these Un-Lawful Military Combatants
> > who are Islam-O-Facist Terrorists.
> > * The US Congress has Failing to Act : This Situation
> > is the Fault of the US Congress.
>
> > as an american citizen and a voter - yes i say that ~ RHF
> > .- Hide quoted text -
>
>
> - Show quoted text -
JB - It's a Package Deal ~ RHF
-aka- The Gift That Just Keeps On Killing
.
RHF
- Nature abhors a vacuum and your last name is Hoover.
-
- JB
JB - Boy Howdy are you oso wrong
D'Oh ! with the Initials R. H. F.
Dah -The last name ain't Hoover.
HOOVER is my middle name ;-}
it sucks to be me ~ RHF
.
Brody
Why ? because you declare it so ??
During the period the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact was in effect, US "peace
groups" opposed war with Hitler. Of course that all changed when Hitler
invaded Soviet Russia.
> Again I
> remind you, there is no Declaration of War.
So ?? The Vietnam war and Korean war were not declared wars... whats
your point...
>
> The USA is not in any great danger.
Thanks to President Bush's actions.
> When the Soviets were within 15
> minutes of wasting both coasts we didn't trample the Constitution this
> bad. (My "grow a pair" analogy...)
The Constitution is not being trampled simply because you and your waco
socialist friends declare it to be so.
m II
>> The USA is not in any great danger.
>
> Thanks to President Bush's actions.
Place banana in your ear.
Observe that there is no alligators around.
Conclude banana placed in ear keeps alligators away.
dxAce
m II wrote:
> Brody wrote:
>
> >> The USA is not in any great danger.
> >
> > Thanks to President Bush's actions.
>
> Place banana in your ear.
> Observe that there is no alligators around.
> Conclude banana placed in ear keeps alligators away.
Wow, something else you dumbass Canucks do to pass the time.
RHF
> Brody wrote:
> >> The USA is not in any great danger.
>
> > Thanks to President Bush's actions.
- Place banana in your ear.
- Observe that there is no alligators around.
- Conclude banana placed in ear keeps alligators away.
-
- mike
Place Banana in your Keyboard.
Observe that there is a Mike [M II] Poston the PC Monitor.
Conclude Mike [M II] is Full of Bananas.
~ RHF
.
Eat a Really Big Meal and Wait 8~12 Hours
[ -or- Take an Exlax for Quick Relief ]
Observe that there is a Mike [M II] Post on the PC Monitor.
Conclusion : Shit Happens !
~ RHF
.
Dave Holford
>
> All US military bases are US soil, just as are all US embassies. As such,
> the US Supreme Court and lower Federal courts have jurisdiction over
> anyone being detained on any US military base.
>
> There is no presiding US court judge at any US military base in a foreign
> country, but all JAG court decisions are appealable and addressable to US
> Federal courts, including the Supreme Court.
>
I always wondered why the US airbases in the UK were called RAF Stations,
not USAF Bases - now I know why.
Thanks for the info.
Telamon
"Dave Holford" <hol...@cogeco.ca> wrote:
That's right. Foreign US military bases are not US soil. Usually they
are some kind of lease agreement where they US has use of the land for
some period of time but the country they are in is not giving up all
rights to the land during the lease. US law does not recognize these
agreements as "US soil" to my knowledge.
--
Telamon
Ventura, California
Brenda Ann
"Telamon" <telamon_s...@pacbell.net.is.invalid> wrote in message
SOFA agreements (like the one Bush is trying to force on the Iraqi
government ATM), cover this. Anyone that the US holds, the US has
jurisdiction over. If, on the other hand, someone under the SOFA is busted
doing something outside the base (which IS sovereign US territory, just as
an embassy is, regardless of any contractural agreement that cedes the land
to the US during whatever period is negotiated), then they may or may not be
under jurisdiction of the host country.
Dave Holford
"Brenda Ann" <bre...@shinbiro.com> wrote in message
news:ofSdnTWvA7kdE8rV...@giganews.com...
do with shortwave radio and obviously belongs elsewhere; but the only
jurisdictional statements relating to individuals I can find in SOFA
agreements is that the US has jurisdiction over offences by Americans
against Americans, and offences by Americans in the performance of official
duties. All other situations are subject to the jurisdiction of the host
state. It appears to be the activity, not the location which determines who
has jurisdiction. - bearing in mind that these are generalities since all
SOFAs are unique.
dave
RHF
> "Brenda Ann" <bren...@shinbiro.com> wrote in message
>
> news:ofSdnTWvA7kdE8rV...@giganews.com...
>
>
>
>
>
> > "Telamon" <telamon_spamshi...@pacbell.net.is.invalid> wrote in message
> >news:telamon_spamshield-2...@newsclstr03.news.prodigy.net...
> >> In article <xxF5k.5227$Mc.4...@read1.cgocable.net>,
>
> - Show quoted text -
Ergo Third Party Nationals are in Limbo - Oops Gitmo.
.
RHF
>
> >>> All US military bases are US soil, just as are all US embassies. As such,
> >>> the US Supreme Court and lower Federal courts have jurisdiction over
> >>> anyone being detained on any US military base.
>
> >>> There is no presiding US court judge at any US military base in a foreign
> >>> country, but all JAG court decisions are appealable and addressable to US
> >>> Federal courts, including the Supreme Court.
>
> >> I always wondered why the US airbases in the UK were called RAF Stations,
> >> not USAF Bases - now I know why.
>
> >> Thanks for the info.
- - That's right. Foreign US military bases are not US soil.
- - Usually they are some kind of lease agreement where
- - they US has use of the land for some period of time but
- - the country they are in is not giving up all rights to the
- - land during the lease. US law does not recognize these
- - agreements as "US soil" to my knowledge.
Dave -wrote-
- Then John McCain is a furriner.
John 'Smiley" McCain is many things . . .
D'Oh ! - Born to a US Citizen Father and US Mititary Officer.
Admiral John Sidney McCain Jr. - US Navy
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_S._McCain%2C_Jr.
D'Oh ! - Born to a US Citizen Mother.
Roberta Wright McCain
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roberta_McCain
D'Oh ! - Born on a US Military Base.
Coco Solo Naval Air Station
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coco_Solo
D'Oh ! - Born in a US Treaty Panama Canal Zone.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panama_Canal_Zone
D'Oh ! - Maybe the First {Technically} Hispanic US President.
Republic of Panama {Panama}
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panama
Panama Canal
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panama_Canal
dang - sure sounds like a us citizen to me - amigo ~ RHF
.
dave
>
>
> dang - sure sounds like a us citizen to me - amigo ~ RHF
> .
Then Gitmo is also US soil.
RHF
> RHF wrote:
- - dang - sure sounds like a us citizen to me - amigo ~ RHF
- Then Gitmo is also US soil.
D'Oh ! - How many of the Islam-O-Facist Terrorist at Gitmo
are Americans ? {Born in the USofA}
D'Oh ! - How many of the Islam-O-Facist Terrorist at Gitmo
had an American Father ?
D'Oh ! - How many of the Islam-O-Facist Terrorist at Gitmo
had an American Mother ?
D'Oh ! - How many of the Islam-O-Facist Terrorist at Gitmo
were even Born on a US Military Base.
hey - may be the islam-o-terrorist are cubans - listen everyone . . .
anybody hear fidel castro saying - let my people free ~ RHF
.
Telamon
"Dave Holford" <hol...@cogeco.ca> wrote:
That sounds reasonable and yes the agreements between the USA and other
countries are negotiated instruments.
--
Telamon
Ventura, California