Skip to comments.
CIA secretly holds 11 of bin Laden's lieutenants
Times On Line ^
| October 13, 2004
| Daniel McGrory
Posted on 10/13/2004 6:57:59 AM PDT by dead
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-78 next last
To: hchutch
Yob tvoyu maht! Russian curse dittos!!
To: dead
Human Rights Watch, which named the 11, said that the Red Cross had not been allowed to see them and their families Since 9/11, the 3000 victims of these Koranimals will never get to see their families again either.
22
posted on
10/13/2004 7:15:58 AM PDT
by
USF
To: dead
23
posted on
10/13/2004 7:16:10 AM PDT
by
lp boonie
(Been there, done that.)
To: dead
Where is the Kleenex for these do gooding cry babies. They would be the first to scream if they were caught in a terrost trap and blame the President.
24
posted on
10/13/2004 7:17:24 AM PDT
by
hgro
(<i>)
To: atomicpossum
Exactly, the Geneva Convention doesn't apply to terrorists and non-state actors.
25
posted on
10/13/2004 7:17:58 AM PDT
by
kabar
To: dead
held in secret ???
That's some secret, considering that the story has been in the MSM for several days.
Isn't it interesting that the human rights orgs are more concerned about the rights and treatment of 11 of bin Laden's lieutenants than they were about the situations that lead to 2700 murdered on 9-11-01.
Wonder how much funding for these 'human rights orgs' come directly or indirectly from terrorist orgs and those funding terrorist orgs?
We found out recently that Saddam was paying off UN members. Is it so far fetched to think terrorist funders would do the same or 'human rights orgs'?
26
posted on
10/13/2004 7:18:44 AM PDT
by
TomGuy
(His VN crumbling, he says 'move on'. So now, John Kerry is running on Bob KerrEy's Senate record.)
To: dead
Sorry, Human Rights Watch, but these guys are not prisoners of war.
Under the Geneva Convention they are technically spies and we can hang them whenever we want without trial.
If we feel like keeping them around for a while on our terms, not only are we entitled to do so but they should be grateful.
27
posted on
10/13/2004 7:19:34 AM PDT
by
wideawake
(God bless our brave soldiers and their Commander in Chief)
To: adam_az
Isn't it curious that Dan and Times both wrote an article in support of terrorists?
28
posted on
10/13/2004 7:19:54 AM PDT
by
TheDon
(The Democratic Party is the party of TREASON)
To: dead
To be "shot while escaping" as soon as the interrogations are concluded?
29
posted on
10/13/2004 7:20:23 AM PDT
by
Little Ray
(John Ffing sKerry: Just a gigolo!)
To: TomGuy
Isn't it interesting that the human rights orgs are more concerned about the rights and treatment of 11 of bin Laden's lieutenants than they were about the situations that lead to 2700 murdered on 9-11-01.Or the hundreds of thousands of men, women, children and babies that Saddamn slaughtered.
30
posted on
10/13/2004 7:20:37 AM PDT
by
mewzilla
To: dead
"Article 71: Prisoners of war shall be allowed to send and receive letters and cards."
That's if you are a prisoner of war with a represented country. What country are these prisoners from and is that country at war with us.
These "captives" should be classified as spies and as such, interrogated and shot.
31
posted on
10/13/2004 7:21:03 AM PDT
by
EQAndyBuzz
(Control the information given to society and you control society.)
To: TomGuy
I too think we ought to let these guys go.
And while they are running away we should shoot them in the back, just as the did the children in Beslan.
To: dead
>CIA secretly
holds 11 of bin Laden's lieutenants
|
It's okay with me if they let them go [wink wink]. Maybe they can fly . . .
|
To: dead
Geneva convention only applies to war crimes, NOT terrorism!!
34
posted on
10/13/2004 7:22:11 AM PDT
by
unixfox
(Close the borders, problems solved!)
To: dead
I'd like to think they used so much sodium amitol to get secrets they fried their brains.
To: dead
I hope they aren't in 'our' custody. 'Our' legal system and methods are far too humane & civilized. Its best to leave this to the Afghanis, Russians & Turks.
36
posted on
10/13/2004 7:22:29 AM PDT
by
FreeInWV
To: dead
Loose lips sink ships, BLAST IT GUYS STOP POSTING THIS KIND OF INFORMATION! I ASK THAT THE MODERATOR PULL THIS THREAD ON GROUNDS OF NATIONAL SECURITY!!!!!!
37
posted on
10/13/2004 7:23:50 AM PDT
by
pctech
To: adam_az
Exactly.
And al-Qaeda is not a 'nation' nor do they represent a 'nation'. They are no different than pirates on the high seas. A comparable maritime law should apply to them---but the UN is too busy counting the cash from Saddam to bother with outlawing terrorism and terrorists.
38
posted on
10/13/2004 7:23:59 AM PDT
by
TomGuy
(His VN crumbling, he says 'move on'. So now, John Kerry is running on Bob KerrEy's Senate record.)
To: atomicpossum
I believe that they are required to have a canteen available to buy sundrey items like pepsi and shaving cream.
The GC was brought about because the majority of soldiers were draftees! They were just caught in the whirl wind or war.
39
posted on
10/13/2004 7:24:31 AM PDT
by
Holicheese
(Lovey, I hate chicken lobsters, I only eat selects!)
To: dead
After reading the sob story here, I'm having a real hard time to get my "give a Sh&t" meter to move on these poor misunderstood freedom fighters plight.
Oh, I'm sorry, that didn't sound real sincere did it, I hope I didn't upset any of the human rights people
40
posted on
10/13/2004 7:25:03 AM PDT
by
5Madman2
(DemocRATS are Vermin)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-78 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson