LaoPo - yes many countries do this sort of thing. Unfortunately the public never knows about it.

Curious to learn which countries; any fact links ?

LaoPo

China/NK come to mind.

Any rate its pretty laffable especially when lot of the countries where these lads were snatched, were directly involved with the snatching. Yanks couldnt have done it without their help I'm afraid. So in the end they have to look at themselves in the mirror before judging anyone else. Standard Black OPS - you'd be surprised how murky it gets.

Who are the Chinese kidnapping? Who would the Chinese want to kidnap? Or is this just throw out the name of the country that the west doesn't like solution?

China/NK come to mind.

How far does the former leader of the free world have to fall to be at the point where it uses North Korea as it's moral compass?

I would think they'd want to aim higher.

China/NK come to mind.

How far does the former leader of the free world have to fall to be at the point where it uses North Korea as it's moral compass?

I would think they'd want to aim higher.

Good point, cdnvic, very good point.

China/NK come to mind.

How far does the former leader of the free world have to fall to be at the point where it uses North Korea as it's moral compass?

I would think they'd want to aim higher.

Russia/Germany/Israel/France/England - you name most of major players in the world and I'm quite positive they have performed black ops - snatch/grabs. It would be naive to think anything different.

China/NK come to mind.

How far does the former leader of the free world have to fall to be at the point where it uses North Korea as it's moral compass?

I would think they'd want to aim higher.

Russia/Germany/Israel/France/England - you name most of major players in the world and I'm quite positive they have performed black ops - snatch/grabs. It would be naive to think anything different.

It would also be naive to think that this makes it okay.

Never said it was ok, but it happens and part of most govt(s) inner workings.

Never said it was ok, but it happens and part of most govt(s) inner workings.

Ah, but you say the gitmo decision is a good one. How can you then support two opposing sides of an issue?

Never said it was ok, but it happens and part of most govt(s) inner workings.

Ah, but you say the gitmo decision is a good one. How can you then support two opposing sides of an issue?

The 'boys' in Gitmo wouldn't be there if they were not 'bad boys'...

That's good to hear, because if they're so confident that they're guilty then habeas corpus should be no threat.

Never said it was ok, but it happens and part of most govt(s) inner workings.

Ah, but you say the gitmo decision is a good one. How can you then support two opposing sides of an issue?

The 'boys' in Gitmo wouldn't be there if they were not 'bad boys'...

Most are there for a reason... if I recall a former GITMO detainee was released and he was once again found on the battlefield, this time I believe he was eliminated.

Any rate - prob better if they would have eliminated them rather than brought them to Cuba. However I suppose intelligence does have its purposes, mind you don't see the advantage now since its been quite a few years they have been sitting there.

That's good to hear, because if they're so confident that they're guilty then habeas corpus should be no threat.

Let the military tribunals begin...

That's good to hear, because if they're so confident that they're guilty then habeas corpus should be no threat.

Let the military tribunals begin...

Worked well in Nurenberg - so I'm quite positive it will work well here.

I worked at WT7. I had many friends who died in WT1&2, and I take real big offence at anyone who even infers that it was a deserved act.

There are those on here who not only believe it was a deserved act but also believe in their minds that it was a plot by the Bush administration. Leftoids, this stuff is precisely why we sarcastically label you the "reality based" community...

And there are those who believe it was a dispicable criminal act perpatrated by terrorists, but was then hijacked by the Bush administration who went on to sacrifice another 3000 plus Americans in an unessasary war.

As for the prisioners at gitmo, I'm fine with them facing a tribunal. But not if it's some secret process where nobody has the right to see the evidence against them or face their accusers. Something that's been the foundation of our rights since the magna carta.

You can't just wave the flag and chant freedom when you're about to bomb someone. You have to stick to those principals even when it's difficult or the whole notion of a free society is worthless.

Others don't hate America's freedom. For so many years it was looked up to as a beacon of freedom when more than half the world lived under some form of dictatorship. Now that all but the most fervent idealogues have seen through the stories of the current US leadership, they're angered by it's hypocracy.

Well, as we finish the last two years of Bush's Presidency, we are witnessing "end stage" Bush Derangement Syndrome, which manifests itself by the histrionic and blind hatred of anything the President does or does not do.

This "end stage" BDS--like terminal syphilis--has culminated in blindness combined with an insanity so profound, the consequences to those who suffer it--as well as to our country--will likely be quite profound, if not lethal, since they hinder and undermine this country's ability to deal with real threats.

BDS: The acute onset of paranoia in otherwise normal people in reaction to the policies, the presidency -- nay -- the very existence of George W. Bush."

Nobody was undermining him when he let bin laden get away. That's what really tells the story here. If they were really interested in fighting terrorism they would have gone after him with avengence, not fogotten about it while they withdrew the forces to participate in that silly adventure in Iraq.

So tell me how not going after the mastermind and financier of 9/11 is doing a good job?

And to clarify things, I don't hate Bush, I just believe him to be incompetant.

Well, as we finish the last two years of Bush's Presidency, we are witnessing "end stage" Bush Derangement Syndrome, which manifests itself by the histrionic and blind hatred of anything the President does or does not do.

This "end stage" BDS--like terminal syphilis--has culminated in blindness combined with an insanity so profound, the consequences to those who suffer it--as well as to our country--will likely be quite profound, if not lethal, since they hinder and undermine this country's ability to deal with real threats.

BDS: The acute onset of paranoia in otherwise normal people in reaction to the policies, the presidency -- nay -- the very existence of George W. Bush."

Black vs. White, Boon, Black vs. White. Why is it that you and people like you think everything he does is good? I thought we were trying to fight fundamentalism?

In the absence of being able to think for themselves many just regurgitate what others tell them to.

In the absence of being able to think for themselves many just regurgitate what others tell them to.

Yes, sheep barf, I have heard of this problem.

In the absence of being able to think for themselves many just regurgitate what others tell them to.

As opposed to the so-called "free-thinkers"? :

From last night's Special Report with Brit Hume

Court of Appeals decision reached today . . . found that enemy combatants detained at Guantanamo Bay, and perhaps elsewhere, no longer have the ability to sue, as Americans can . . . in U.S. courts to challenge their detention.

FRED BARNES: I mean, this isn't threatening anybody's liberties in the United States or constitutional rights, at all. It applies only to these people captured in wartime who are at Guantanamo, who have never lived in the United States or own property here and so they don't have a right. . . . [T]hey're not American citizens and they're not on American property. This was a very, I think, a very simple ruling were habeas corpus didn't apply. . . .

[T]hose seized in warfare have never had the opportunity to appeal anything . . . Japanese soldiers who are captured and held here were not, Germans were not, even when they were held on American soil. I mean, there were a lot of prisons here during World War II, they weren't allowed to appeal. So, it would be utterly unprecedented for these detainees to be able to use habeas corpus. I think they're getting a heck of a break just being able to appeal these military commissions.

If you can't do the time, don't do the crime?

In the absence of being able to think for themselves many just regurgitate what others tell them to.

As opposed to the so-called "free-thinkers"? :

From last night's Special Report with Brit Hume

Court of Appeals decision reached today . . . found that enemy combatants detained at Guantanamo Bay, and perhaps elsewhere, no longer have the ability to sue, as Americans can . . . in U.S. courts to challenge their detention.

FRED BARNES: I mean, this isn't threatening anybody's liberties in the United States or constitutional rights, at all. It applies only to these people captured in wartime who are at Guantanamo, who have never lived in the United States or own property here and so they don't have a right. . . . [T]hey're not American citizens and they're not on American property. This was a very, I think, a very simple ruling were habeas corpus didn't apply. . . .

[T]hose seized in warfare have never had the opportunity to appeal anything . . . Japanese soldiers who are captured and held here were not, Germans were not, even when they were held on American soil. I mean, there were a lot of prisons here during World War II, they weren't allowed to appeal. So, it would be utterly unprecedented for these detainees to be able to use habeas corpus. I think they're getting a heck of a break just being able to appeal these military commissions.

If you can't do the time, don't do the crime?

These guys aren't POWs, and our gov has said as much. So, what then?

Boon if you ever come up with a way to articulate your own thoughts it would be interesting to see, but if all you ever do is post other people's writing and let off tired insults it just gets boring. Others have tried writing their theories and thoughts out in topics here but whenever you're faced with questions you can't cut/paste a reply to or answer with a glib "bleeding heart liberal...blah blah blah", you runaway and paste something somewhere else about some other topic, until you are faced with having to rebut the replies so once again you cut and run.

When you are ready and able to form an opion of your own and articulate it it might make a good debate. But if I wanted to debate the articles you keep pasting into here I'd write their authors, not their errand boy.

These guys aren't POWs, and our gov has said as much. So, what then?

That's right, they're enemy combatants who fall into a totally different catagory...

These guys aren't POWs, and our gov has said as much. So, what then?

That's right, they're enemy combatants who fall into a totally different catagory...

Boon, that's part of the issue since day one. They have not been labeled and POW which is why people have said they need to have legal representation, which is why this whole gitmo decision is important. Honestly, I thought you to be a least that politically astute.

Boon if you ever come up with a way to articulate your own thoughts it would be interesting to see, but if all you ever do is post other people's writing and let off tired insults it just gets boring. Others have tried writing their theories and thoughts out in topics here but whenever you're faced with questions you can't cut/paste a reply to or answer with a glib "bleeding heart liberal...blah blah blah", you runaway and paste something somewhere else about some other topic, until you are faced with having to rebut the replies so once again you cut and run.

When you are ready and able to form an opion of your own and articulate it it might make a good debate. But if I wanted to debate the articles you keep pasting into here I'd write their authors, not their errand boy.

Well, I link to individuals who have more knowledge and resources.

Those 'others who have tried writing their throries and thoughts' here are to be commended for their efforts but the end results are half-baked conspiracy theories and downright pathetic naiveté - including your denial of earlier posts re. radical Islam...

Oh...couldn't help but note your lack of response to this

Well, I'll debate anyone word for word but if all they can do is paste other people's thoughts into the debate then why waste time with a lightweight who can't articulate their own opinion? I have no doubt I've been wrong in the past as is the case with everyone, but at least I'm able to form my own opinions rather than just attach myself to the dogma of others. In my opinion, that's only for the weak minded who are not strong enough to stand on their own ideas and need to hide behind the words of others... and that doesn't matter if it's Rush Limbaugh or Jennine Garafalo. A parrot beings nothing new to the debate, and therefore serves no purpose.

Well, I'll debate anyone word for word but if all they can do is paste other people's thoughts into the debate then why waste time with a lightweight who can't articulate their own opinion?

Tell you what - if you are interested, go back thru my posts on any given subject over the >3 + years I've shared my opinion here - whether it's politically related or not, you'll find plenty of personal thoughts.

Again, if you can't appreciate linked material within a post as one submits footnotes in a paper, you're putting up a strawman...

Most of it is just reguritated rhetoric and slogans.

Most of it is just reguritated rhetoric and slogans.

Well, that's your personal opinion and you know what they say about opinions...?

Most of it is just reguritated rhetoric and slogans.

Well, that's your personal opinion and you know what they say about opinions...?

Mine are my own, and yours are approved by the Whitehouse?