1. Advertising
    y u no do it?

    Advertising (learn more)

    Advertise virtually anything here, with CPM banner ads, CPM email ads and CPC contextual links. You can target relevant areas of the site and show ads based on geographical location of the user if you wish.

    Starts at just $1 per CPM or $0.10 per CPC.

Guantanamo Detainee Found Innocent, Set Free

Discussion in 'Politics & Religion' started by lorien1973, Oct 22, 2007.

  1. GTech

    GTech Rob Jones for President!

    Messages:
    15,836
    Likes Received:
    571
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #41
    We already know whose side you are on. You and briant are the only members I recall that have actually created a thread seeking sympathy and support for an al qaida terrorist, who was found guilty.

    Careful with the names. Just a friendly warning ;)
     
    GTech, Oct 24, 2007 IP
  2. GRIM

    GRIM Prominent Member

    Messages:
    12,638
    Likes Received:
    733
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    360
    #42
    Gtech I quoted links to the US supreme court ruling, if you failed to read it or chose not to it's not my fault. It shows just how little you pay attention.

    :rolleyes:

    Try looking back in the thread, I'm not about to hold your hand.

    But I see you don't have any logic,

    It's easy to see.

    Supreme court rules on current treaties and military law, if new law is put into place and new treaties the supreme court decision stands until a new ruling is in place. At which time new treaties are taken into consideration. Such as the ruling I quoted in this very thread, the one you chose to go back and find an out of date ruling.

    Go figure.
     
    GRIM, Oct 24, 2007 IP
  3. GTech

    GTech Rob Jones for President!

    Messages:
    15,836
    Likes Received:
    571
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #43
    A ruling is a ruling. A good thing. It means a point of contention was ruled upon and settled.

    You claim that laws are being broken and that we are not abiding by treaties.

    What laws do you believe are being broken, what treaties do you believe are being broken?

    If you cannot source of list these (don't even try to suggest you've done so, by pointing to previous cases...we're talking today, now) then I can only conclude that you are simply taking on assumptions for the benefit of a group of people.

    You do make a good point IF (there's that word, IF!) "Supreme court rules on current treaties and military law, if new law is put into place and new treaties the supreme court decision stands until a new ruling is in place."

    In such case, you need to present the new laws you believe are being broken, the new treaties you believe are being broken. You can't just claim it, and not source it.

    There is no out of date ruling. You simply linked to the Geneva Convention. You spent zero effort showing where anything had been superseded by it. Nothing. Not one thing.

    Look, pretend you are in court and that the people you are defending...their lives actually depend on you. It's touching to defend them in a thread, but pretend you are in court. Make your case on their behalf. What law(s) and what treaties are being broken in regards to the enemy combatants in Gitmo?

    Let me know what you find, if you can. I'll check back in later.
     
    GTech, Oct 24, 2007 IP
  4. GRIM

    GRIM Prominent Member

    Messages:
    12,638
    Likes Received:
    733
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    360
    #44
    Keep making things up there Gtech, I guess it's what you're good at.

    I am not stating nor have I been that anything is being broken at the moment.

    The point behind these threads, your owns previous posts I have read is that you and others believe the original Guantanamo Bay situation was totally fine. You and others then bitched when things were changed, when people questioned the legality.

    So back to the point, do you want it put back to how it originally was? That appeared to be the point of these threads and the point behind many of your posts in the past, you thought it was AOK from the beginning. You have shown over and over you believe they are offered no Geneva Protections, which our own Supreme Court disagrees with.

    Are you following yet? Do you need your little bitty hand held any tighter?

    Do you want it back the way it was? Back before the US Supreme Court ruled that yes in fact they do have Geneva Convention protections, at least to a degree. I did quote this, you continue to be in denial and claim I didn't. I have many times including

    http://forums.digitalpoint.com/showpost.php?p=4936639&postcount=7
    and
    http://forums.digitalpoint.com/showpost.php?p=4946675&postcount=20

    The supreme court again ruled
    http://www.cdi.org/program/document.cfm?DocumentID=3579&from_page=../index.cfm

    Further info
    http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/06/29/AR2006062900928.html another source for you ;)

    There are so many articles Gtech that show the Supreme Court using modern laws, treaties of war into their decision that you have to be blind not to see it. Of course the ruling you posted uses the rules and laws of it's day, new rules and laws have emerged that were used in this decision. The ruling you posted is in fact out of date, new modern rules and treaties were put into this ruling, how can you not see that?

    Lets end this right here right now. I do not support terrorists, I never have. Your mention of me doing so really makes me want to, well I wont post that here ;)

    I simply wish for the rules of the land, international rules that we obide be to be followed, for it is what makes this country great.

    Can you simply answer, do you feel it should go back to the way it was?

    Questioning the president, especially when it turns out he was wrong is not tearing down the country, it is protecting the country, funny how you don't see that.
     
    GRIM, Oct 24, 2007 IP
  5. PHPGator

    PHPGator Banned

    Messages:
    4,437
    Likes Received:
    133
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    260
    #45
    So let me get this straight, this guy was fighting US soldiers by joining the battle lines of the Taliban and he is wondering why he was arrested? I'm confused as to why he is confused. :D
     
    PHPGator, Oct 24, 2007 IP
  6. GTech

    GTech Rob Jones for President!

    Messages:
    15,836
    Likes Received:
    571
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #46
    You have got to be kidding me? Please tell me you just didn't say that, after all this?

    This whole time, you've been arguing on behalf of a group of people, for the sake of arguing? You've made statements leading myself, and I'm sure others, to believe that laws are being broken, that these "special" people are being unjustly treated. Even go so far as to simply quote the Geneva Convention of 1949, without even sourcing anything from it, to assert such.

    And *now* you are flip flopping to suggest "I am not stating nor have I been that anything is being broken at the moment."

    Simply amazing! OMG! John Kerry has nothing on you!

    Just when I thought I had seen it all :rolleyes:
     
    GTech, Oct 24, 2007 IP
  7. GRIM

    GRIM Prominent Member

    Messages:
    12,638
    Likes Received:
    733
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    360
    #47
    Can you not read?

    Read my entire post, don't take a spot to twist, read the entire post and answer the question.

    The entire argument here is that you and others appear to want things 'back to the way it was' not how it is now.

    Do you want it back to the way it was?

    I have sourced supreme court articles showing them bringing up the geneva convention in their ruling, but nice try.

    Do you want it back to how it was originally, originally it was unlawful that is my entire point. Are you trully this stupid or are you just playing it as you have no argument?

    I am not flip flopping, you seriously need to reread the entire thead including what I have posted. If you still think I stated laws are being broken now you are simply delusional.

    BTW nice avoidance of my entire post, instead of answering anything latch onto one thing to weakly attempt to twist. The rest of the post makes your point totally false as I explained my position, as such from the beginning. Jesus you are dense, seriously to the extreme.
     
    GRIM, Oct 24, 2007 IP
  8. Toopac

    Toopac Peon

    Messages:
    4,451
    Likes Received:
    166
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #48
    They should be treated exactly how we treat theirs fairly. The GC doesn't even cover these infidels!
     
    Toopac, Oct 25, 2007 IP
  9. GRIM

    GRIM Prominent Member

    Messages:
    12,638
    Likes Received:
    733
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    360
    #49
    Making us no better than them.
    Plus I guess you glossed over the multiple quotes of the supreme court bringing the GC into their decision and never read any of the experts view that yes it does apply?

    So if it doesn't apply to them according to you, and since we did not treat them according to the GC in the first place you're actually saying our troops do not deserve the GC protections? Wow just when I thought I heard it all.

    Not to mention I am not talking just about now I am talking about our troops being captured in any war, not simply now.

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/07/11/AR2006071100094.html

    I guess our supreme court is wrong, glad to know that you and Gtech know more about the law of the land.
    Still so sure it doesn't cover it? That was what the Bush administration chanted in the beginning, yet most legal experts disagreed, appears even our own supreme court disagrees, our administration is also following this ruling, surely they are not all wrong?

    I also suggest you both read the ruling, it goes through the arguments and brings up Gtechs quoted decision, bringing up why new treaties need to be looked at ;) I wont do all the work for you, you've both been proven incorrect enough.
     
    GRIM, Oct 25, 2007 IP
  10. Toopac

    Toopac Peon

    Messages:
    4,451
    Likes Received:
    166
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #50
    See this is why GTech says you bad mouth your own country, i agree with him too.

    Your trying to say the US are no better that them because the US locks them up, in case you didn't know the other side don't subscribe to such humane methods, they quite have a fancy for real torture & death, yet your so quick to claim the US as just as bad if not worse.


    Are you under the illusion that our troops are treated well?


    me too.

    GC are not in place so that one side can legally get fucked, whilst the other can do whatever they want, the GC is in place to uphold standards of decency & treatment of prisoners for countries that have signed up to it.
     
    Toopac, Oct 25, 2007 IP
  11. GRIM

    GRIM Prominent Member

    Messages:
    12,638
    Likes Received:
    733
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    360
    #51
    Seriously, the best you can do when proven wrong is to try to claim such rubbish. I do not bad mouth the country I love one bit, the administration is not the country, the administration chose to not follow the laws of this land in the beginning. That is not the country, I thought you were better than Gtech, but I see you're no better. When proven wrong instead of admitting it you put bullshit out there, seriously a weak attempt.

    I love my country, I love what it stands for, I will not sell it out in the name of 'terror'.
    Nope not at all, #1 I hope the US locks them up, #2 the other side is not humane at all and should be punished severely within the rules and laws we have available to us.

    My point was against your point, not the US, nice failed attempt again. Is it trully so hard to admit you're wrong? You appear to have a hard time at that, I'd think someone being wrong such as you for years could finally admit to it once in awhile.

    You stated.
    It has been proven you were wrong and the GC does in fact apply, your assertion was it didn't. If we did not apply it this makes us lawless, in my eyes no better than them. This is against your point, NOT against the USA!



    Not one bit, never did I say there were. Again it is not just this war, there will be other wars as well when we will demand our troops are treated under the GC.

    Wow nice avoidance of you saying our troops do not deserve the GC, I guess you trully meant it.
    I suggest you read it again and the US supreme courts decision. I see you'd rather us be on the same level as them, causing us to be lawless and lose what few allies we have left. Sounds like a sound strategy to me :rolleyes:
     
    GRIM, Oct 25, 2007 IP
  12. iul

    iul Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,263
    Likes Received:
    46
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    115
    #52
    why aren't you answering to what he posted in his post?
     
    iul, Oct 25, 2007 IP
  13. GTech

    GTech Rob Jones for President!

    Messages:
    15,836
    Likes Received:
    571
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #53
    He suffers from the liberal disease of moral relativism. What's sad is, he's not even aware of it. He doesn't realize what he just sold his country out by effectively declaring that our troops are no better than the terrorists they fight. It's at about this point, that he'll probably invoke having an ex-Marine buddy. What a shame.

    It just goes to prove a consistent point I raise. Some people are just not intelligent enough to know the difference between Bush and their country. To get a dishonest jab at Bush, they would sell their country (and our troops) out by accusing it of something untrue. Bush Derangement Syndrome at it's finest.

    I did. Why are you pretending I didn't? Work on your strategy and get back with me when you have something solid.
     
    GTech, Oct 25, 2007 IP
  14. gworld

    gworld Prominent Member

    Messages:
    11,324
    Likes Received:
    615
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    310
    #54
    He didn't mean your usual nonsense and blah, blah about pro-terrorist, anti-American, he meant actual answer but it is obvious that you have none since I showed once again that you lack the knowledge to discuss such subjects.
    If you think you are fooling anyone with your nonsense, you are mistaken and everybody can see you as who you are. :)
     
    gworld, Oct 25, 2007 IP
  15. GTech

    GTech Rob Jones for President!

    Messages:
    15,836
    Likes Received:
    571
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #55
    I can't answer why you created a thread seeking sympathy and compassion for an al qaida terrorist and why your posts are always in support of these types of people. Nor can I answer why you never have a bad word for terrorists.

    Honestly, gworld, I have no idea why you support these types of people. You are free to answer that if you want (hiding behind my Country's Constitution, if you want), but I can't pretend to know what goes on in that melon of yours!
     
    GTech, Oct 25, 2007 IP
  16. GRIM

    GRIM Prominent Member

    Messages:
    12,638
    Likes Received:
    733
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    360
    #56
    Care to show me where I state anything negative about our troops?

    BTW practice what you preach Gtech, I can seperate the Administration who didn't wish to follow the law of the land, unlike you ;)

    It was not the USA who did this as a whole, it was our temporary president. Yet you bitch and complain about those 'not intelligent' enough to know the difference, yet you are the prime candidate for such an award!

    I am also far from liberal, not buying into the war build up and reason for war 'all of which I was correct and you were not' ;) does not equate to being a liberal. It equates to being smarter than you ;)

    ---edit

    BTW Gtech why is it so difficult for you to read? I was clearly arguing against Toopacs post and point, not against our brave men and women in uniform but about his post, yet you someone twist that to mean something it does not. Are you ever going to come into reality? Seriously, I keep hoping you'll stop this crap yet you continue to get further and further out of touch from reality. How very sad.
     
    GRIM, Oct 25, 2007 IP
  17. GTech

    GTech Rob Jones for President!

    Messages:
    15,836
    Likes Received:
    571
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #57
    Right here. "them" are terrorists. "us" are our country, specifically, our troops, who are fighting "them."

    You've dug yourself into a whole that you AND john kerry couldn't dig out of.
     
    GTech, Oct 25, 2007 IP
  18. GRIM

    GRIM Prominent Member

    Messages:
    12,638
    Likes Received:
    733
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    360
    #58
    Nice failure again and outright lie Gtech. Can you do nothing more than lie? :rolleyes: You are seriously simply getting childish with your distortions.

    Ghee look I am arguing Toopacs point, not our brave men and women. I would believe it is you who is attacking our men and women by lying in such a way for your own sorry ass and invoking them in such a lie, I would hope that a former military member would have higher standards than this. It trully is a shame.

    So since you were proven wrong yet again you decide your same old game of change the subject and try to find 2 words out of a huge post to twist, wow you are simply not even worth my time.

    Care to finally admit you were wrong?

    Care to finally answer do you want Guantanamo to go back to before the Supreme court ruled, how it was in the beginning?

    Nope that would be to difficult, it's so much easier to lie like you do. I could do that to you, take 2 or 3 words and twist them, I however am not a deceitful person unlike you.

    Care to also show me where I state laws are being broken at this time? The entire argument is do you want it back to how it was. Jesus man get a grip, you are proving yourself to be mentally ill, childish, or simply a lying xxxxxx to be honest.
     
    GRIM, Oct 25, 2007 IP
  19. GTech

    GTech Rob Jones for President!

    Messages:
    15,836
    Likes Received:
    571
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #59
    The failure is yours, Grim. That was about the lowest point I've seen you yet, and I've seen a lot of lows.

    Keep working on the nuance. Selling our troops out by comparing them to terrorists was about as low on the moral relativism scale that one could go.

    Keep trying to twist your comments. People see.
     
    GTech, Oct 25, 2007 IP
  20. GRIM

    GRIM Prominent Member

    Messages:
    12,638
    Likes Received:
    733
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    360
    #60
    I never compared Gtech, you are showing the world how simply delusional and what a liar you trully are.

    Toopac claims the Geneva Convention is not afforded to those at Guantanamo Bay, our supreme court ruled otherwise. If our troops chose to not listen to the Supreme court it would equate to us 'our troops' being lawless. This is not happening now is it Gtech? I am not saying anything against our fine men and women, I am showing Toopac where he is wrong and why our brave men and women can not do such a thing.

    You however 'as a new low' lied and used our brave men and women in your lie.

    You have been proven to be wrong, proven to be deceitful and proven to be a liar. Plain and simple, nice try though.
     
    GRIM, Oct 25, 2007 IP