WaPo: GOP Will Release Terrorists

Discussion in 'Politics' started by bugscoe, Oct 16, 2010.

  1. WaPo Defines It As 'Public Awareness' to Say GOP Will Release Terrorists and Pollute Rivers If They Win
    October 15, 2010

    Reporter Ed O'Keefe concluded that "the union aired a similar public awareness campaign last summer." But is it "public awareness" to associate ideas in the GOP Pledge to America -- a federal hiring freeze and spending restraint -- with releasing terrorists, ending food inspection, and polluting rivers? O'Keefe relayed the script:
    and turning to other news today...

    Obama Administration May Set Gitmo Killer Free Who Murdered US Soldier in Grenade Attack
    October 15, 2010

    Instead, of facing death, Khadr may be set free.
    Khadr’s lawyers are working on a plea deal.
    The AP reported:
  2. cstfx


    Please post links. Sometimes it is hard to decifer the actual article from your editorializing. Jesus, if you are copying and pasting from the article, copy and past the weblink. I assume you are not that stupid, right?
  3. The Democrats are the ones who wanted Gitmo closed.
    Obama might do that ... eventually. [​IMG]
  4. I get more stupid by the day. But now I understand now why Google's stock is so high as it took me (and Jesus) longer to create this post than it did to find them on Google via my Command-C trick.


  5. Well, not to point out a fact but perhaps the ad is correct. The GOP and Bush released dozens if not hundreds of people from Guantanamo Bay -- one of which went on to help commit the Northwest airlines attack.

    Bush himself claimed that at least 30 people released under his watch returned to the battlefield. Which doesn't give me confidence in the GOP's ability to protect anyone from a harsh insult from a teenage girl, let alone a terrorist.

  6. Don't worry. No one will confuse anything you post with a fact.

    Even for an obama talking point, claiming that Bush recklessly released terrorists is beyond silly. It was your leftwing crowd who were so upset about gitmo and the fact that we actually detained terrorists and interrogated them. Every leftwing lawyer in America tried to get in on defending them and filing scores of harrassing lawsuits.
  7. So they were released because of civilian lawsuits? Because they had military tribunals. The first Supreme Court decision that the detainees could even GO to civilian court was in 2004, and the Habeus trial was in 2010. So your timeline doesn't really add up -- unless Bush caved to pressure of a few lawsuits (but that doesn't make sense because his administration defended each and every case to the Supreme Court).

    Plus I stand corrected as the defense department Bush administration claimed that they released 61 terrorists who went on to join the enemy. "Sixty-one is the most recent statistic from the Bush Defense Department, which coughed up this hairball at a Jan. 13, 2009, press conference. While the DoD spokeswoman would not at the time clarify how that statistic had jumped from the previous number of 37, elaborate on the identities of these 61 men, explain where they had been identified as battlefield returnees, or even indicate how many were still alive, she was confident that "there clearly are people who are being held at Guantanamo who are still bent on doing harm to America, Americans, and our allies. … So there will have to be some solution for the likes of them." -- http://www.slate.com/id/2209404/

    It seems like many of those they keep there are innocent people that they can't return to their countries (such as the Uighers). But they did a bang up job of releasing dangerous ones. (Personally I think they just released people without knowing much of anything -- many of the people were only turned in in the first place for the $5000 reward. Truly an embarrassing period for the nation.)
  8. Ricter


    Sounds like spin to me, just like the "death panels" nonsense, lol.
  9. cstfx


    couldn't agree with you more.
    #10     Oct 16, 2010