Gitmo Detainees: Soldiers or Weapons?

Hey, remember a few weeks ago, when we were all outraged at the Obama administration’s decision to try Gitmo detainees in New York courts, rather than holding military trials for the self-confessed 9/11 mastermind and his minions? Whatever happened to that? Why has it died out of the news?

In fact, why aren’t we seeing blog posts and articles and, well, videos like this one?

“The people held at Guantanamo Bay are not crewing the weapons in this war; they are the weapons in this war. They are independently operating, constantly evolving, high-level weapons systems that understand our weaknesses — like our civilian air traffic system — and they have dedicated their lives to killing as many of us as they possibly can.

“We have an obligation to understand everything we can about these weapons: where they come from; how they were made; who put them together; where they were aimed; how they were triggered; and most importantly, what are their weaknesses and blind spots, so that we can most effectively defend against them in the future.”

Thanks, Bill, I couldn’t have said it better myself.



4 Responses to Gitmo Detainees: Soldiers or Weapons?

  1. Hitmouse says:

    I suppose it is OK to ignore “innocent until proven …” when you don’t like the people.
    Who found these “people held at Guantanamo Bay” guilty?
    What about those released from Gitmo without charge or trial?
    This is the best argument for American Freedom and the Rule of Law yet. Not.

    • Stoutcat says:

      Hitmouse: What part of “these are terrorists, not enemy combatants subject to military rules and regulations and things like the Geneva Convention” didn’t you understand?

  2. Birdseed Anarchist says:

    Hey Hitmouse
    With all due respect ,your head is buried in the sand. These people WANT YOU DEAD TOO! They are counting on people like you to help them spread their 13th century ideas worldwide. How barbaric do they have to be for you to wake up?

  3. Gerry Ashley says:

    In case you forgot (or in case you never understood) “innocent until proven guilty” is a concept that applies to civilians charged with civil crimes. It does not apply to terrorists nor does it apply to war combatants. Even our own soldiers have no right to the presumption of innocense in the military courts. Why, therefore, would enemy combatants or terrorists?

    It’s amazing how “living room righteousness” is assumed to be synonymous with intelligent thinking. In the theater known as the real world, such logic simply doesn’t work.

    The fact that the Obama administration wants these terrorists tried in our civilian courts is proof positive that Obama is a weak leader and he has demonstrated that quite clearly to the enemy.

    Let me guess: You have a Che Guevera poster or T-shirt?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s