[rob666]

Originally Posted by Illusion ↗

I would like all Americans and Canadians who were involved in the illegal capture and torture of this kid to stand trial in open court. Who the fuck are the war criminals here?

It seems to be that only the slung side of any conflict winds up charged for war crimes
My opinion is that if he was given a trial, a lot of things that our governments don't want to be made public knowledge would come to light.

[rob666]

Losing side..... This Mfing auto correct......

[bob351]

Id say this guy is a security risk to the united states more than anything...

I mean, they locked the guy up for 8 years in gitmo... id be fucking pissed.

[TheVrist]

That is why we employ contract armies. It relieves us of any wrong doing.

[rob666]

Originally Posted by TheVrist ↗

That is why we employ contract armies. It relieves us of any wrong doing.

It creates a whole new set of problems though.

[TheVrist]

Originally Posted by rob666 ↗

It creates a whole new set of problems though.

It does, and causes shit like this to happen to seemingly innocent people.

But alas! as long as there are loopholes, there is room for error.

This same shit is why I will vote NO, to private contract police.

[Honeypot]

I wonder if Justice Bielby will invite him to stay at her house.

[niknik]

Originally Posted by rob666 ↗

The only reason he admitted anything is because the military commission that overseas the process is stacked completely for the prosecution.
The defendant has extremely limited rights, including no choice in the lawyer that represents you, no right to even see the evidence against you, and the prosecution even has the right to use evidence obtained during " coercive interrogation ", and we all know what that means.

Acquittal is no guarantee of release either.

So basically, you can go through the trial that is completely stacked against you, and even if your found not guilty they can still hold you indefinitely......... Or you can take the plea bargain, and be guaranteed out in 10 years.

Seems like a no brainer to me.

Lol. Wtf

[niknik]

Originally Posted by rob666 ↗

Then you're deciding based on what? Whatever fox news told you to believe?

Terrorism has flourished because of attitudes like yours, that think you can invade countries on the pretext of spreading democracy when it is in fact for securing resources, then changing the narrative when you feel like it.

"I'm deciding he's a terrorist because that's my view"
Yeah, intelligent.

Due process, who needs that?

Evidence? Nah, that's for liberal pussies.

You're a complete and utterly foolish moron. Your stupid above statement proves you are a idiot. As if terrorism was created by America

You are the dipshit who has a serious problem believing ridiculous narratives from the news.

Terrorism has flourished because if attitudes

Unfreakingbelievable

Terrorism has not flourished first and foremost. You could say it's spreading, but you can thank the tuck and run Obama for that.

I'm sure you have seen the miles long convoy pulling into practically every captured city. Obama allows that to happen.

It's not flourishing, it's being given everything it needs.

How fucking stupid is it to say Iraq was proof we can't be successful.. Since Obama sabotaged Iraq, he or you can't now say it failed

It didn't fail. Our president aided the enemy, he left a country completely unprepared.

[niknik]

Originally Posted by rob666 ↗

It seems to be that only the slung side of any conflict winds up charged for war crimes
My opinion is that if he was given a trial, a lot of things that our governments don't want to be made public knowledge would come to light.

There won't be a trial. Canada will cut him loose on bail, and he'll won't be seen again.