It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Guantanamo Bay Taliban Detainees To Be Released: Report

page: 1
1

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 4 2012 @ 02:29 AM
link   
From: www.huffingtonpost.com...


The Guardian is reporting that the United States has agreed "in principle" to release several Taliban figures from Guantanamo Bay following the Taliban's preliminary deal with Qatar to open a political office in Doha.

Several high-ranking officials are included among the detainees who would be released, The Guardian notes. Fox News reported last week that Mullah Mohammed Fazl, who was suspected of killing Shiite Muslims in Afghanistan, is among those being considered for release.

According to the Associated Press, the only U.S. soldier held by the Taliban is 25-year-old Bowe Bergdahl of Idaho, who was taken prisoner in 2009.


Read more at the link above...

So... "In principle" the US has agreed to release some of the People it has been holding with no rights, no trials, and probably has been torturing. Why now?

I would love to hear ATS's take.




posted on Jan, 4 2012 @ 02:35 AM
link   
election year, obama will do anything to look good



posted on Jan, 4 2012 @ 03:08 AM
link   

Originally posted by jazzguy
election year, obama will do anything to look good


LOL! Yes. My thoughts exactly.

How weird that this comes out when the georgia courts are causing Him a stink, eh?



posted on Jan, 4 2012 @ 03:12 AM
link   

Originally posted by jazzguy
election year, obama will do anything to look good


Has nothing to do with Obama "looking good", it has everything to do with the Obama administration's revisionist history that "the Taliban are not enemies of the US." A man with half a wit of common sense would leave them in Gitmo to rot... somehow I'm not surprised to see that some of them may be released by the current leadership...



posted on Jan, 4 2012 @ 03:29 AM
link   

Originally posted by burdman30ott6

Originally posted by jazzguy
election year, obama will do anything to look good


Has nothing to do with Obama "looking good", it has everything to do with the Obama administration's revisionist history that "the Taliban are not enemies of the US." A man with half a wit of common sense would leave them in Gitmo to rot... somehow I'm not surprised to see that some of them may be released by the current leadership...


And why are they our enemy? Because we illegally invaded their country and they fought back? You know we didn't have to invade at all we could have taken Bin laden when they offered him. But that wouldn't have gotten the opium turned back on would it.



posted on Jan, 4 2012 @ 03:46 AM
link   
reply to post by buster2010
 


The following is my opinion as a member participating in this discussion.

No, they offered to try bin Laden under Sharia Islamic Law, not turn him over to the US.
It would have made a whole world of sense to allow a guy accused of directing a jihad that killed 3,000+ infidels to be judged by a bunch of zealots who also espoused the same breed of radicalism that spawned the accused in the first place.

The Taliban should have been eradicated 5 years before they ultimately were driven out of power by NATO. When they started genocide against the Afghan civillians in the mid 90's, the problem should have been corrected... not that it matters a whole lot in this conversation, as those acts didn't per se make them enemies of the US... but they certainly made them completely unworthy of even a single ounce of damn being given over any of them who are locked in Git mo.

As an ATS Staff Member, I will not moderate in threads such as this where I have participated as a member.



posted on Jan, 4 2012 @ 04:07 AM
link   

Originally posted by burdman30ott6
reply to post by buster2010
 


The following is my opinion as a member participating in this discussion.

No, they offered to try bin Laden under Sharia Islamic Law, not turn him over to the US.
It would have made a whole world of sense to allow a guy accused of directing a jihad that killed 3,000+ infidels to be judged by a bunch of zealots who also espoused the same breed of radicalism that spawned the accused in the first place.

The Taliban should have been eradicated 5 years before they ultimately were driven out of power by NATO. When they started genocide against the Afghan civillians in the mid 90's, the problem should have been corrected... not that it matters a whole lot in this conversation, as those acts didn't per se make them enemies of the US... but they certainly made them completely unworthy of even a single ounce of damn being given over any of them who are locked in Git mo.

As an ATS Staff Member, I will not moderate in threads such as this where I have participated as a member.


Really? You still believe the OS? Osama was CIA. Or am I grossly misreading that?



posted on Jan, 4 2012 @ 04:50 AM
link   

Originally posted by burdman30ott6
reply to post by buster2010
 


The following is my opinion as a member participating in this discussion.

No, they offered to try bin Laden under Sharia Islamic Law, not turn him over to the US.
It would have made a whole world of sense to allow a guy accused of directing a jihad that killed 3,000+ infidels to be judged by a bunch of zealots who also espoused the same breed of radicalism that spawned the accused in the first place.

The Taliban should have been eradicated 5 years before they ultimately were driven out of power by NATO. When they started genocide against the Afghan civillians in the mid 90's, the problem should have been corrected... not that it matters a whole lot in this conversation, as those acts didn't per se make them enemies of the US... but they certainly made them completely unworthy of even a single ounce of damn being given over any of them who are locked in Git mo.

As an ATS Staff Member, I will not moderate in threads such as this where I have participated as a member.


The punishment he would have received under Sharia law would have been the same as our law or even worst. Putting your obvious racism against Muslims aside stop to think who created him Islam or American money and training.



posted on Jan, 4 2012 @ 08:59 AM
link   
May I offer another explanation? You might recall that in the last couple of days the Taliban offered to return to peace talks, we had a few threads on it. Releasing Taliban prisoners was part of the deal. We have, in effect, negotiated with terrorists.



posted on Jan, 4 2012 @ 12:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by buster2010
Putting your obvious racism against Muslims aside stop to think who created him Islam or American money and training.


The following is my opinion as a member participating in this discussion.

1. Racism, really?
Radical Islam isn't a race, it's a distastefull ethos.

2. Both created bin Laden. Neither excuse his actions.

As an ATS Staff Member, I will not moderate in threads such as this where I have participated as a member.



posted on Jan, 5 2012 @ 11:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by burdman30ott6

Originally posted by buster2010
Putting your obvious racism against Muslims aside stop to think who created him Islam or American money and training.


The following is my opinion as a member participating in this discussion.

1. Racism, really?
Radical Islam isn't a race, it's a distastefull ethos.

2. Both created bin Laden. Neither excuse his actions.

As an ATS Staff Member, I will not moderate in threads such as this where I have participated as a member.


Neither excuse His actions of being the patsy in the 9/11 deception? It was not He who orchestrated 9/11. It was a cabal of evil wanting to incite war (to Their profit) who used Him as the scapegoat.

But You may believe as You wish.




top topics



 
1

log in

join