Another man needing his reputation trashed
Meet Lt Commander Charles Smith from the US navy. Give it a couple of days and he'll be a 'self publicist' or an 'activist with connections to Kerry' or something. He's one of five serving officers defending the 100% guilty, very bad people in Guantánamo. Trouble is, he thinks the whole thing stinks and just went public.
I won't say again why subverting international justice is a bad idea, and why it could bite all of us on the arse, because we seem polarised here. Some of us know it's a bad idea, some people think that the current US administration can do no wrong.
Link to the Guardian
Feel free to slag off the source and ignore the content.
Quote:
Smith, a military defence attorney for more than seven years, went to Guantánamo expecting his client to be a hardened terrorist. Instead, he met a Yemeni migrant who had got a job driving agricultural workers on Osama bin Laden's farm near Kandahar and had ended up as one of several drivers who chauffered the man himself. Appalled by September 11 and by Bin Laden's reaction to it, he left his job as soon as he safely could, then, as war was imminent, took his wife to safety in Pakistan. He had returned to Afghanistan to try to sell his car and pack up when he was detained and handed over to US forces.
Smith, a military defence attorney for more than seven years, went to Guantánamo expecting his client to be a hardened terrorist. Instead, he met a Yemeni migrant who had got a job driving agricultural workers on Osama bin Laden's farm near Kandahar and had ended up as one of several drivers who chauffered the man himself. Appalled by September 11 and by Bin Laden's reaction to it, he left his job as soon as he safely could, then, as war was imminent, took his wife to safety in Pakistan. He had returned to Afghanistan to try to sell his car and pack up when he was detained and handed over to US forces.
I won't say again why subverting international justice is a bad idea, and why it could bite all of us on the arse, because we seem polarised here. Some of us know it's a bad idea, some people think that the current US administration can do no wrong.
Quote:
"Would you charge Al Capone's chauffeur with Al Capone's crimes? I had to ask myself, after I'd met him, is this really the best they've got? Are there no real terrorists in Guantánamo Bay?"
"I agree with the president," he said. "Al-Qaida can't alter America. Only we can alter America. I have met the enemy, and he is us."
"Would you charge Al Capone's chauffeur with Al Capone's crimes? I had to ask myself, after I'd met him, is this really the best they've got? Are there no real terrorists in Guantánamo Bay?"
"I agree with the president," he said. "Al-Qaida can't alter America. Only we can alter America. I have met the enemy, and he is us."
Link to the Guardian
Feel free to slag off the source and ignore the content.
Comments
Bush said this?
Originally posted by Harald
No, the POTUS said the first bit (the bit with which yer navy guy agrees), and the navy guy said the second bit.
Actually Pogo said the second bit.
Originally posted by Harald
Some of us know it's a bad idea, some people think that the current US administration can do no wrong.
And most of us are somewhere in the middle, quietly laughing at the other two groups.
Originally posted by Kickaha
And most of us are somewhere in the middle, quietly laughing at the other two groups.
Or softly weeping.
You all need to get on message.
That article is 99% bias opinion and 1% information. Most AO members here fly to bad journalism like moths to a flame.
"Would you charge Al Capone's chauffeur with Al Capone's crimes?
If you rob a bank and I drive the getaway car, am I not actually in part guilty for the bank robbery?
I understand what he was trying to get across, but it failed.
Originally posted by Scott
That article is 99% bias opinion and 1% information. Most AO members here fly to bad journalism like moths to a flame.
Scott, I want to see links to your enlightened sources of journalistic information. Show us the way. I mean it... you have very clearly a sense of what is "bias" and what is "real information", so I want to learn from you.
Show us some sources of really good information, with minimal bias. Perhaps I could learn something from them. You wouldn't deny me that chance, would you?
Originally posted by Scott
So all the Bush hating cry babies are up in arms that some Saudis were allowed to leave the country after being cleared by the FBI, yet holding bin Laden's driver is unfair?
You all need to get on message.
That article is 99% bias opinion and 1% information. Most AO members here fly to bad journalism like moths to a flame.
Cool! You managed to do EXACTLY what I said you would. I get a point (well, half a point, as it's so easy with some).
Sidestepping your derailment attempt, the point here is that you have a man engaged by the US Army to 'defend' a Gitmo internee saying:
"Is this really the best they've got? Are there no real terrorists in Guantánamo Bay [ ... ] I agree with the president, Al-Qaida can't alter America. Only we can alter America. I have met the enemy, and he is us."
But the real problem is the Bush-haters. I think that if Bush just came out and said, "You know what? There never were any WMDs. Sorry!" or if ... dunno ... an bunch of ex-administration and Pentagon officials said "Iraq. Really bad idea (unless you're OBL)," you _STILL_ wouldn't think he was capable of any wrong.
Originally posted by Harald
Cool! You managed to do EXACTLY what I said you would. I get a point (well, half a point, as it's so easy with some).
Sidestepping your derailment attempt, the point here is that you have a man engaged by the US Army to 'defend' a Gitmo internee saying:
"Is this really the best they've got? Are there no real terrorists in Guantánamo Bay [ ... ] I agree with the president, Al-Qaida can't alter America. Only we can alter America. I have met the enemy, and he is us."
But the real problem is the Bush-haters. I think that if Bush just came out and said, "You know what? There never were any WMDs. Sorry!" or if ... dunno ... an bunch of ex-administration and Pentagon officials said "Iraq. Really bad idea (unless you're OBL)," you _STILL_ wouldn't think he was capable of any wrong.
No, then they'll just pass the blame/responsibility to someone else.
or so I'm told
Originally posted by Scott
So all the Bush hating cry babies are up in arms that some Saudis were allowed to leave the country after being cleared by the FBI, yet holding bin Laden's driver is unfair?
You all need to get on message.
From the article:
It makes sense to Smith that his client should have been detained as a potentially valuable intelligence source and a useful witness. But, he says: "Would you charge Al Capone's chauffeur with Al Capone's crimes? I had to ask myself, after I'd met him, is this really the best they've got? Are there no real terrorists in Guantánamo Bay?
Not that any of the Bush Loving Zombie straw man arguments deserve a direct answer, but here ya go. Now please get back on topic and start trashing this military man's reputation!!
I'd also like to point out...there is a vast difference between allowing Saudi potential witnesses to break the ban on air travel and to leave without even being questioned, and holding a man for months or years on terrorism charges with NO constitutional rights.
Originally posted by Scott
Most AO members here fly to bad journalism like moths to a flame.
You being one of the best examples of that.