And MANY of the detained have been innocents--but that's to be expected when we give out bounties to get suspects and tribesmen can make cash at the same time that they remove rivals by fingering them.
That is pure nonsense. I doubt if more than a handfull if any are innocent. We don't operate that way.
If they were in fact taken while under arms, they are not innocent, period. In the case at hand, involving the Australian Taliban, he was taken under arms, not even the defense argues that he wasn't.
Who??
Name some with a source please.
Please source the bounty info too..haven't heard that one yet, even at DU.
"And MANY of the detained have been innocents--but that's to be expected when we give out bounties to get suspects and tribesmen can make cash at the same time that they remove rivals by fingering them."
Only the worst of the worst with plenty of evidence against them were sent to Gitmo, the rest were left in country, and many released for just the reasons that you stated above.
The military tribunals are not for everyone captured. They are only for Gitmo prisoners and others held at unknown locations.
Like the Jordanian bomber, who's believed to be the same man released by the US military as "not a threat" after capture in Fallujah last year?
I'd say he did a spectacular job of proving his innocence. Fifty-seven lives is such a small price to pay to uphold the civil rights of an enemy combatant, wouldn't you say? /sarc