Pages

Thursday, June 16, 2005

Richard Durbin Must Go

In a speech on the Senate earlier this week, Democrat Richard J. Durbin of Illinois made absurd and intolerable charges against the American military's actions at the Guantanamo Bay.

Sen. Durbin has compared the U.S. military's treatment of a suspected al Qaeda terrorist at the U.S. prison at Guantanamo with the regimes of Adolf Hitler, Josef Stalin and Pol Pot, three of history's most brutal dictators, whose regimes killed millions of people.

Hitler's death camps murdered 9 million persons, including 6 million Jews, 2.7 million persons were slaughtered in Stalin's gulags and Pol Pot executed 1.7 million Cambodians.

In sharp contrast to those real situations of mistreatment and criminal conduct by real murderers and torturers, consider that no prisoners have died at Guantanamo, and the cases of abuse involve what can only accurately be described as inconveniences and moderate discomfort to the captives, or irreverent handling of the Koran, the holy book of Muslims.

Reading an e-mail from an FBI agent, the agent complained to higher-ups that one al Qaeda suspect was chained to the floor, kept in an extremely cold air-conditioned cell and forced to hear loud rap music.

After reading the e-mail, Mr. Durbin said, "If I read this to you and did not tell you that it was an FBI agent describing what Americans had done to prisoners in their control, you would most certainly believe this must have been done by Nazis, Soviets in their gulags, or some mad regime – Pol Pot or others – that had no concern for human beings. Sadly, that is not the case. This was the action of Americans in the treatment of their prisoners."

Forcing captives to endure rap at any volume is torture, to be sure, and forcing people to listen to rap at loud levels would tempt one to beg to be executed by a firing squad. But Sen. Durbin’s claim that making captives cold or chaining them to the floor is torture at the level of the Nazis, Soviets or Pol Pot is so plainly stupid, irresponsible, reckless exaggerated, hysterical and harmful as to warrant Durbin’s removal from office.

Even if a few isolated cases of abuse have occurred – and we would be indulging in fantasy to think that some abuse would not occur in any such situation by any nation on Earth – to equate those minor problems with the horrors caused by the Nazis, Soviets or Pol Pot is preposterous, deliberately deceitful, fraudulent and just plain insulting to the brave men and women who wear our uniform and defend our country with their lives.

The Washington Times quoted White House spokesman Trent Duffy: "It's reprehensible, as Defense Secretary [Donald H.] Rumsfeld said, to suggest that the Guantanamo Bay facility is anything like a gulag or a mad regime or Pol Pot,"

"It is reprehensible, has no place in the current debate, and as we've seen over several years, the detainees in Guantanamo Bay are being treated humanely," Mr. Duffy said. "What this is is a disservice to any man and woman serving in the U.S. military who's putting their life on the line each day, because they're trying to paint all military with a broad brush because of the actions of perhaps a few bad apples, who are being punished severely."

Critics of the Bush administration and the Iraq war charge that our presence in Iraq increases the fervor among Muslim fanatics to retaliate against the U.S. and Americans, and that it has increased the number of these murderers who are willing to take up arms against the U.S. However, when people in positions of influence within the U.S., like for example the second most powerful Democrat in the U.S. Senate, make such fallacious charges, their behavior is at least as harmful, and perhaps more so. It is not unreasonable to believe that Mr. Durbin’s impulsive, imprudent and thoughtless comments will give aid and comfort to the enemy and further incite Muslim fanatics.

Sen. Durbin and his kind are indulging in seditious behavior, and should be removed from office, and tried for treason.

22 comments:

Bulldog said...

And while we're at it, let's get rid of Santorum. He compared the Democrats to Hitler b/c of their use of the filibuster- and this after he said politicians should not be using Nazi comparisons.

Santorum then:
"Senator Byrd's inappropriate remarks comparing his Republican colleagues with Nazis are inexcusable," Santorum said in a statement yesterday. "These comments lessen the credibility of the senator and the decorum of the Senate. He should retract his statement and ask for pardon."



Santorum a few weeks ago:

What the Democrats are doing is "the equivalent of Adolf Hitler in 1942 saying, 'I'm in Paris. How dare you invade me. How dare you bomb my city? It's mine.' This is no more the rule of the senate than it was the rule of the senate before not to filibuster."

JL Pagano said...

Seems to me the best way to shut these Democrats up would be to let them into Guantanamo Bay and have a look for themselves, seeing as how there is no wrong-doing going on and all. That would make them look kinda silly, wouldn't it? I wonder if that will ever happen.

Bulldog said...

Shott said "Sen. Durbin and his kind are indulging in seditious behavior, and should be removed from office, and tried for treason."

Like it or not, it protected free speach. He's not calling on people to attack the US, not giving away secrets.
You'd have a better case against the POTUS for treason than Durbin

James Howard Shott said...

Bulldog #1: I don't condone such language by anyone. Having said that, there is a vast difference in the seditious remarks of Sen. Durbin and the dumb language of Sen. Santorum.

I wouldn't be surprized to find Santorum finally decided to meet the Democrats on their own ground, they being experts at this tactic.

JL Pagano: If I remember correctly, some of them have already been there. Regardless, it just amazes me how easily these bozos can be persuaded to condemn their own country for all manner of wrongdoing on the say-so of (in this case) people who are where they are because they were caught trying to kill Americans. One of Durbin's chief sources is the 20th 9/11 hijacker, who would be dead now, having taken hundreds of innocent people with him, except for some stroke of luck that got him arrested. Why would any sane person believe that Muslim bastard?

Bulldog #2: Article 3, Section 3 of the U.S. Constitution reads: "Treason against the United States, shall consist ... in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort.(my emphasis)

Fanning the flames of radical Islamic barbarism is not protected speech. Public statements that encourage the enemy is not protected speech.

Or, I could defend my statement by saying that if exageration and deliberate deceit are good enough for Durbin, it's good enough for me. If he can fallaciously equate the U.S. with Hitler, Stalin and Pol Pot, I can call him a traitor who is guilty of sedition and treason.

Bulldog said...

Mr. Shott,
He's not equating the US to Nazi/Pol Pot/etc. That's what the right wing echo chamber says he's doing. He's saying that the inhumane treatment of these prisoners is more akin to those regimes- and has no place in the US.

It frightens me that you consider criticism of our countries policies giving comfort to the enemy. Thankfully, we don't live in China or indeed Sen Durbin would be tried.

Of course we've all heard that giving comfort to the enemy is treason, but I'm curious how declaring mistreatment of prisoners abhorrent gives comfort to the enemy...

And let's not forget that a significant number (less than half) of the prisoners at Gitmo have been released b/c they had no connection to terrorsim- just the wrong place at the wrong time. Of course, on being released, if they were trreated as Durbin said, I could seeing them having a change of heart.

James Howard Shott said...

"He's saying that the inhumane treatment of these prisoners is more akin to those regimes- and has no place in the US." Think for just a few seconds about what you have said. "[T]he inhumane treatment of these prisoners is more akin to those regimes." The "inhumane treatment" Durbin is so upset about consists of subjecting his source to cold air, warm air, and rap. God, the horror of it!

That is child's play compared to Hitler, et al, who routinely killed people.

Don't be afraid that I am willing to call what Durbin is doing exactly what it is. Be afraid that he is able to do it with the tacet approval of so many others. Be afraid that so many on the Left in this country find this hyperbole and exageration a perfectly legitimate tactic.

His charges are not only absurdly exagerated, but serve to foster enmity with Muslims who don't know that he is playing fast and lose with the truth. In my book, that amounts to seditious behavior.

Re: GB prisoners who have been released, it is a fact that some of those who were released under pressure from the Left and others have been captured again in the act of trying to kill Americans.

I'll grant you that there may be some who were "in the wrong place at the wrong time," but the reality of that situation is often that while they may not have been caught with guns or dynamite, they share the sentiments of those who were.

JL Pagano said...

Interesting how you accuse Durbin of "fanning the flames" when you use phrases such as "Muslim bastard"???

Was this man of which you speak tried in a public court and proven beyond reasonable doubt to be "the 20th 9/11 attacker"? I don't think he was. Even Saddam Hussein hasn't been tried yet for crying out loud!!!

This is what courts comparisons to Hitler, who did a lot more than just kill people. He interred people of one race with no proof of wrong-doing, he expected his countrymen to accept this without question, and anyone who did object would undoubtedly be tried for treason.

I'm sorry if you can't see the analogy, but IMHO, it's a valid one, and if you'll recall, I used it myself on your blog a while ago.

If America is the harbinger of justice for all it goes around the world claiming to be, she will try these men in open court NOW for all to see and for all to join her in her revulsion for the crimes they are alleged to have committed - anything remotely resembling a delay does nothing but suggest she has something to hide.

Bulldog said...

Here here Pagano.
Mr. Shott, two things-
1) OK, so saying things that anger muslims amounts to treason. I guess we can rouind up Limbaugh, Coulter, O'Reilly, and Hannity while we're at it.

2) "Durbin is so upset about consists of subjecting his source to cold air, warm air, and rap. God, the horror of it!"
Now who's exaggerating. Don't be afraid that it's not just subjecting them to cold air. It's subjecting them to near freezing temperatures, naked, chained in an immobile position for DAYS!.
Don't be afraid tonight to turn your A/C as low as it goes, strip down, and sleep on your bathroom floor (since I imagine you don't have carpeting there). Tell me how many hours you last.

And for the record, a number of prisoners have died in our custody. Just not at GB

James Howard Shott said...

JLP:

Interesting how you accuse Durbin of "fanning the flames" when you use phrases such as "Muslim bastard"???

What do you call Muslims who hijack airplanes and crash them into buildings and kills thousands of innocent people? Muslim angels? (See comment to Bulldog below.)

Was this man of which you speak tried in a public court and proven beyond reasonable doubt to be "the 20th 9/11 attacker"?

He’s the guy, JL.

This is what courts comparisons to Hitler, who did a lot more than just kill people. He interred people of one race with no proof of wrong-doing, he expected his countrymen to accept this without question, and anyone who did object would undoubtedly be tried for treason.

And that compares to GB how? Remember Hitler did that to his own people. The people in U.S. custody are enemies captured on the battlefield.

If America is the harbinger of justice for all it goes around the world claiming to be, she will try these men in open court NOW for all to see and for all to join her in her revulsion for the crimes they are alleged to have committed - anything remotely resembling a delay does nothing but suggest she has something to hide.

At some point you’ve got to open your mind to the difference between prisoners of war/enemy combatants and criminals. Criminals, especially U.S. citizens, are subject to a specific body of law, and a specific legal process that is designed to determine their guilt. This system does not apply to people like those in GB and Iraq. They are not criminals, they are not citizens, and are not subject to, nor deserving of, the benefits of the American justice system. That’s just the way it is.

You can argue until you’re blue in the face about justice and trials and such, but it simply does not apply to these people. They are outside our legal/justice system. They could as easily have been put to death when they were captured, and no one would have been the wiser. But that’s not the way the U.S. does things. We have a more humane approach to prisoners of war/enemy combatants than many/most nations.

Instead we keep them in relatively comfortable quarters with pretty good food, we allow them to worship their God, and every once in a while one of them suffers mistreatment. I have seen accounts where the prisoners at GB have better living conditions than the troops that guard them, food and living quarters. To equate the treatment of these creatures with the treatment of the prisoners of Nazi Germany, Russia and Pol Pot is stupid in the extreme. There is no, I repeat NO, comparison, and anyone who attempt to draw a parallel is either insane, has no idea what they are talking about, or has some narrow political purpose, like Durbin.

-----

Bulldog:

OK, so saying things that anger muslims amounts to treason. I guess we can rouind up Limbaugh, Coulter, O'Reilly, and Hannity while we're at it.

No comparison, Bulldog. No comparison. Durbin spreads lies and exaggerations about the way these lowlifes are being treated, and that has a far more serious effect than my calling them "Muslim bastards," or anything Limbaugh, Coulter, et al, have said. He is falsely accusing his own country of improper behavior, of torture and other abuses. That’s wrong. That’s criminal, and that’s treasonous.

Now who's exaggerating. Don't be afraid that it's not just subjecting them to cold air. It's subjecting them to near freezing temperatures, naked, chained in an immobile position for DAYS!.

Apparently you, like Durbin, choose to believe the words of America's enemies, of people who have sworn to kill Americans, who have been involved in conspiracy to kill Americans, and some of whom have actually killed Americans. I find these people to be unworthy of being believed. I choose to believe my government, not my government’s enemies. I regret that you take their side.

And for the record, a number of prisoners have died in our custody. Just not at GB

What is that number? What proportion of the total do they comprise? What did they die of? How many, if any, died as the result of actual mistreatment? Got any answers, or facts? Or, like Durbin and the others, just accusations?

Bulldog said...

"Apparently you, like Durbin, choose to believe the words of America's enemies, of people who have sworn to kill Americans, who have been involved in conspiracy to kill Americans, and some of whom have actually killed Americans. I find these people to be unworthy of being believed. I choose to believe my government, not my government’s enemies. I regret that you take their side."

Actually, no. Those are the claims of the FBI agent, who was an eye-witness, whom Durbin cited. Don't be afraid to try it- I'm sure you'll have the best sleep of your life.

And I'd have a much easier time believeing my government if they had a good track record.

1) Drug benefit for seniors- purposefully misunderestimate the cost by a third to get it passed.

2) Social Security- When projecting the current system's shortfalls, they use a sluggish 1-2% annual economic growth. When projecting the benefits of private accounts they use a robust 4-5% annual growth. If you use the same growth rate in both equations, the current system equals or wins over private accounts.
And Bush won't talk to anyone who disagrees with him- only synchophantic supporters dying for their turn at the kool-aid bowl

3) Environment- has an oil lobbyist, with NO scientific training, editing global warming reports . That lobbyist, Cooney, has since quit and gone back to work for Exxon.

And it's not just their blatant dishonesty I don't trust. It's their judgement. Before all the war, all of the experts (people like Powell and Shinseki with real combat experience) said we need nearly twice the amount of troops. Bush and his chickenhawks, who avoided combat at all costs when it was their chance to serve, decided to do it on the cheap. And here we are...

James Howard Shott said...

"Actually, no. Those are the claims of the FBI agent, who was an eye-witness, whom Durbin cited. Don't be afraid to try it- I'm sure you'll have the best sleep of your life."

Fox News Channel reports "One knowledgeable official familiar with the memo cited by Durbin as well as other memos said the FBI agent made no such allegation and that the memo described only someone chained to the floor. Anything beyond that is simply an interpretation, the official said.

Apparently Durbin himself isn't so sure about the FBI man's comments. He told FNC the following: "If this indeed occurred, it does not represent American values. It does not represent what our country stands for, it is not the sort of conduct we would ever condone ... and that is the point I was making." Funny how people backtrack when someone calls them on their outrageous statements, isn't it. Before, the U.S. was as bad as Hitler and Pol Pot. Now, "if this occurred ... it is not the sort of conduct we would ever condone."

He's right about one thing, the U.S. neither practices routine abuse or torture and doesn't condone it.

FNC also reported, "questioned by Sen. John Warner, R-Va., Durbin said that he does not know if the interrogators cited in the FBI report were Americans or not."

The point I keep making about these sorts of comments from both individuals and the media is, if you don't know that exactly what you are saying is going on, KEEP YOUR STUPID MOUTH SHUT!!!!

Dopes like Durbin think they can say anything they please in criticism of the governement of which they are a part and it will have no consequences. They are wrong to make these irresponsible comments, and they are wrong about the consequences, too.

Bulldog said...

Mr. Shott,
Touche.
I look forward to your next blog.

Buffalo said...

Stirred up the fires, my friend.

Both sides are guilty of making all manner of statements that have little resemblence to truth, accuracy, good manners and good sense.

No amount of explanation will ever convince the protestors that the prisoners at Gitmo do not come under the same protections guaranteed to soldiers and American civilians. Why they don't understand, I don't have a clue.

Poor Adolph. If he hadn't lived someone would have had to invent him.

As far as the inhumane treatment of the prisoners at Gitmo. Being forced to listen to rap music is far beyond the realm of inhumane treatment. It is too cruel to contemplate.

JL Pagano said...

At some point you’ve got to open your mind to the difference between prisoners of war/enemy combatants and criminals.

On the contrary, Mr Shott, I think you have to open your mind to the possibility that just because someone is named Mohammed Al Whatever that does not make him a terrorist.

Prisoners of war generally had uniforms AND they would surrender with their name rank and serial number.

I am not even necessarily suggesting these people be tried. Just show us what makes you believe they are terrorists. They way it is set up now, as I have said before, for all we know they could have rounded up a few dozen muslims and shipped them to G Bay to show they were dealing with the situation.

If there is nothing untoward going on, why not? Shut the do-gooders up!

I'm afraid "He's the guy" just doesn't cut it. I'm sorry if my request for something more concrete than three words makes me appear to be insane, has no idea what they are talking about, or has some narrow political purpose. If I knew for sure these were the men the Pentagon says they were I'd be right there with you berating them.

James Howard Shott said...

Buffalo:

Total agreement on the rap issue. RE: both sides making rash statements, I'd suggest that the Left wins this one hands down.

JL Pagano:

On the contrary, Mr Shott, I think you have to open your mind to the possibility that just because someone is named Mohammed Al Whatever that does not make him a terrorist.

The people being held at GB were captured in war/battle situations. That makes them, at the very least, suspicious characters. As the Muslims have declared war on the U.S., every Muslim is potentially an enemy, especially those in Muslim countries like Iraq, and when they are captured during fighting with Muslims, that'a a pretty good clue that they are enemy combatants. And just in case you have forgotten, or never knew, those captured in war times often don't get a trial at all, and when they do get one it is after the fighting is over.

Prisoners of war generally had uniforms AND they would surrender with their name rank and serial number.

Clearly, those at GB are not prisoners of war in the conventional (Geneva Conventions) sense, which is why I most often refer to them as enemy combatants, and why the provisions of the Geneva Conventions do not apply to them.

If I knew for sure these were the men the Pentagon says they were I'd be right there with you berating them.

I guess the difference is that I believe that the 20 men identified as the 9/11 hijackers are indeed the 9/11 hijackers. I do not question every piece of information put out by my government, as so many who are looking for any shred to grab onto in order to criticize their own country do.

The guy at GB that I'm talking about is the one identified as the 20th hijacker, who was prevented from participating in the wholsale murder of thousands of innocent people because he got himself arrested.

I don't believe that you change what you are doing just because a group of malcontents criticizes everything that the administration does. You remember the boy who cried "wolf." We have in this country, and elsewhere, people who cry "wolf" repeatedly, hoping against hope that something, anything, will bear fruit. But just because people like Durbin think GB is a bad place doesn't make it one, it doesn't mean that GB should be shut down, and it doesn't mean that people who are enemy combatants get a trial while the conflict is still raging.

Kenna Amos said...

Jim,

Yes, Durbin must go and, yes, I do think he's crossed the line into seditious behavior.

If the Congressional Democrats and the DNC don't force him to walk the plank, then they send this signal: We're the party of lunatics and anti-Americans and Dick Durbin represents them and us.

As I fellow in Boston with whom I just communicated said, the Demcrats are just getting ready to declare their core values: socialism and hatred for anything American.

Durbin, Dean, Kerry, Teddy bin Kennedy, Jim McCormack, Edwards, Conyers, Cynthia McKinney, Hillary Clinton, Patty "Osama bin Laden is popular in poor countries because he helped pay for schools, roads and even day care centers" Murray--it's a long, stinky and ignoble list.

BTW: Here's a suggestion for Durbin: Take a trip to the nearest former, major Nazi concentration/death camp. I figure that to be the main camp of the Dachau system, near Munich, Germany.

It's now a very desolate place, this evil place called Dachau.

Go there and let them lock you in the gas chamber for a day or two. Just you and your thoughts.

Then, take you and bind your hands and feet and load you into one of crematorium ovens and then shut the door and repeat the process.

Then, go outside and walk over the the wall and turn right, go about 20 or 30 meters, to the pistol range and blood ditch. That was right in front of the wall that shut Dachau in from the world outside--and where they lined up mostly Jews, but political prisoners, homosexuals, some Catholics, as well, and used them for pistol practice. Lay in that lay in that ditch for a couple of days. BTW: It's called the Blood Ditch because it was used to drain the blood from the murdered prisoners.

Then, go over to the Jewish Memorial and go down inside it. It's a crematorium. Let them lock the door on you and stay, oh, let's say, about a week without light, food, water, toilet. And let's do that in the worst part of winter in Bavaria.

Then, before taking Durbin to Gitmo to subject him to those subject to those "horrors" of which he spoke, take him to the U.S. Holocaust Museum.

Put him in at railroad car in which the Nazis used to transport people to the death camps. Find about 70 or 80 prisoners from a local jail and jam them in there. Too, find about three or four fresh cadavers and put them in the car. Close the doors, lock them and let them all stay shoulder-to-shoulder, groin-to-groin or groin-to-rear-end for a few days.

Then, take Dick down to the two-story gallery that shows a photo of every man, woman and child in a Polish village who were killed by the Nazis. Make him look at them constantly for two, three days without sleeep.

Then, take him on to Gitmo.

IMHO, people like Durbin at least deserve prayer that their souls be saved and their senses be restored.

But they also deserve all the opprobrium that can be heaped on them. With sincerest apologies to the animal kingdom, they are animals.

And, like it or not, he does represent the Democrat Party in all it's innate ugliness.

It will not suprise me if he fails to even get unofficial censure from this fellow Dem Congressional types, much less the rest of the party.

But wait until 2006, and most definitely 2008, and they and he will see what censure by the electorate means.

Keep pouring it on them all, Jim. They asked for it.

JL Pagano said...

My final words on the matter...

As the Muslims have declared war on the U.S.
is the key to our difference in opinion. This, combined with some radical Muslim clerics similarly tarring all Americans with the same brush, is what lies behind this conflict.

To say someone is your enemy precisely because of their religion is the kind of talk that courted the comparisons to Hitler which first inspired your piece.

Do you actually believe there are no people of Muslim faith out there who are against the actions of Al Qaeda?

And finally, I was well aware of how the prisoner of war system worked, thank you very much. My point was that at least they identified themselves as enemy soldiers so holding them captive for whatever length of time was somehow justified.

James Howard Shott said...

You want to toss off the Muslim connection in this conflict. But you can’t ignore it. The Muslim faith/political philosophy allows for no other faith/philosophy. It is intolerant of ideas other than the narrow view of Islam. If you pay attention to the words of the Muslim fanatics, they use the tenets of Islam to justify their murderous acts. “We must kill the infidels.”

And you then turn the argument upside down to suggest that I am the one that makes enemies of Muslims because of their religion, when in fact it is the Muslim fanatics that have declared the holy war.

And, yes, Mr. Pagano, I am well aware that some Muslims do not adhere to the fanatics’ views. But they are not very vocal in their opposition, and by being quiet they give tacit support to the fanatics. If there are truly Muslims of good will who don’t believe in killing those who don’t believe in Islam, then they need to take a drink of courage and actively oppose and confront the fanatics who have hijacked their religion, just as they hijacked those airliners on September 11. Talk is cheap. Action takes guts. So far, I’ve seen no courage from the “mainstream” Muslims.

As to the issue of enemies identifying themselves as enemies, and by doing so justifying their long-term captivity, that strikes me as a magnificently naïve point of view. Do you really expect these murderers to throw up their hands, confess to being a Muslim fanatic who wants to and likely has tried to kill Americans, and ask to be imprisoned? I don’t think that’s going to happen. It would, after all, be precisely the opposite of everything they stand for, wouldn’t it? These terrorists attack and kill their own Muslim brothers in Iraq who are fighting for freedom because their "religion" abhors the very idea of freedom. Yet, before we can imprison them, they have to admit who they are?

Please.

Are you certain you want those words to be your last?

Those who oppose this war will grasp at any straw that presents itself. Among their many failures are that they deny the reality of pre-Iraq-war suspicions of Saddam Hussein, and they attempt to equate the comparatively minor problems in Abu Grhaib and Guantanamo Bay with real acts of abuse, torture and murder a la the Nazis and Pol Pot. That smacks either of an abysmal misunderstanding of reality, or of a political zeal that willingly tramples on the truth.

JL Pagano said...

*SIGH*

You completely missed my point re: prisoners of war.

YOU were the one that claimed that the G Bay prisoners were PoWs.

I said that in the past PoWs at least identified themselves.

The issue here is that we have a rake of Muslims in captivity for years and for all we know, they could be innocent, and when we ask for proof of their guilt, we are told to shut up, almost to the point of being accused of treason.

Of course the terrorists won't put up their hands and admit it. That does not justify interring a hundred Muslims just on account of their faith [and for the umpteenth time, THIS is what courts comparisons to despots - NOT mass murder, NOT anything else, INTERNMENT ON GROUNDS OF FAITH] in the hope that you may catch a few Al Qaeda terrorists.

My true final word is, if they have nothing to hide, let's see the proof. That will shut us up for sure, unless they want to throw us into G Bay with them instead. They'd certainly need a much bigger camp to do that, though.

Mr. Middle America said...

*hunkers down and eases through... quietly*

James Howard Shott said...

There are prisoners of war, and there are prisoners of war. I never made any suggestion that the POWs/enemy combatants had even the vaguest resemblance to prisoners in wars like WWI or WWII, because there is no similarity, other than that they were trying to kill Americans.

The issue here is that we have a rake of Muslims in captivity for years and for all we know, they could be innocent, and when we ask for proof of their guilt, we are told to shut up, almost to the point of being accused of treason.

If you are so well versed on the procedure of how POWs/enemy combatants are handled, you should know that hardly anything happens to them during the conflict. In every war it is possible that some held captive may be innocent. Not very likely, but possible. This war is no different.

Of course the terrorists won't put up their hands and admit it. That does not justify interring a hundred Muslims just on account of their faith.

Here's yet another distortion from you, Mr. Pagano. Please provide incontrovertible proof, or even strong evidence that those held at GB are there because of their faith.

If they have nothing to hide, let's see the proof.

You have nothing but baseless accusations, and yet you expect the U.S. to do what normally would not be done to prove you wrong. I suggest the burden is on the shoulders of those who cast allegations. What is it that they say? Put up or shut up?

Just because some group of people chooses to suspect something may have happened does not mean that it actually occurred, and it certainly does indicate a change in protocol to satisfy those misguided souls.

Paul Adams said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.