What is Digg?372 Comments
- purseonality, on 12/10/2008, -7/+577Ashcroft is a douchenozzle. I love how he thinks all the Gitmo detainees are "POWs." Well, if you consider them POWs, why do you not abide by the terms of the Geneva Convention? You can't have it both ways, Mr. Douchenozzle. Either they are POWs, and entitled to those rights laid out under the agreement we signed, or they are prisoners, and entitled to due process. Torture is not acceptable in either case. Neither is permanent incarceration.
- DoktorRob, on 12/10/2008, -9/+280I'm stunned that this ***** has no comprehension of civil rights.
The prison on Guantanamo and other places around the world were put in place to avoid having to treat these "detainees" and "enemy combatants" as prisoners of war under the rules in the Geneva Convention and also under the rules set forth in our constitution and the statutes of this nation. The whole point is Habeas Corpus which Ashcroft and the Bush administration have done their level best to eradicate from our laws.
He sickens me. - kanvas, on 12/11/2008, -5/+262And this is why in Missouri he lost an election to a dead guy.
- inactive, on 12/10/2008, -17/+160If they were not predisposed to hating us, the detention at Gitmo sealed the deal.
If we are getting into the realm of who deserved what, the disarmed Americans aboard those planes didn't deserve to die for the stupidity of our government. - nkleffman, on 12/11/2008, -5/+146Tyrants typically live in bubbles of yes-men so they are often surprised when the slaves revolt.
- CTK14A, on 12/11/2008, -3/+129I don't mind permanent incarceration for the guilty -- we do that already in the form of multiple life sentences for heinous crimes -- but permanent government incarceration without due process is a reversion to pre-Magna Carta medieval times. It's an eight century step backwards.
The only way the terrorists win is if they make us change who we are. - tiology, on 12/11/2008, -1/+107When a former US Attorney General uses the term "so-called due process"; it speaks volumes of the Justice system.
- guntario, on 12/10/2008, -2/+99I agree, giving the detainees a fair trial equates to giving them guns. I mean, why in the world would we have any reason not to trust what our government is telling us?
- johndi, on 12/11/2008, -5/+96I think he'd be surprised to find a lot of people think he deserves a fair trial as well. Now if we could just find a prosecutor with the balls to press charges.
- pintomp3, on 12/11/2008, -2/+80justice and truth are never a waste of time.
- floridiot2, on 12/10/2008, -3/+76I think you missed the point.
- Aguyinachair, on 12/11/2008, -1/+67Yeah...too bad that no one has proved they blew up anything.
We should just keep everyone in prison, that way we are all safe. - wissler, on 12/11/2008, -0/+59He that would make his own liberty secure must guard even his enemy from oppression; for if he violates this duty he establishes a precedent that will reach to himself.
Thomas Paine - Ljay90, on 12/11/2008, -0/+47Once again:
"I learned in Iraq that the No. 1 reason foreign fighters flocked there to fight were the abuses carried out at Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo. Our policy of torture was directly and swiftly recruiting fighters for al-Qaeda in Iraq. … It’s no exaggeration to say that at least half of our losses and casualties in that country have come at the hands of foreigners who joined the fray because of our program of detainee abuse. The number of U.S. soldiers who have died because of our torture policy will never be definitively known, but it is fair to say that it is close to the number of lives lost on Sept. 11, 2001. How anyone can say that torture keeps Americans safe is beyond me — unless you don’t count American soldiers as Americans."
-Matthew Alexander, former Special Operations interrogator who worked in Iraq - floridiot2, on 12/11/2008, -1/+45After he had served for four years in his home state, he lost the election to a dead man. The voters of his state, when faced with that choice in the voting booth, [were] like, 'Do I go with a right-wing, religious fundamentalist nut or the rotting, maggot-infested corpse? Hmm. Yeah, this is truly a lesser of two evils here. I don't know what to do. Got to go with the corpse. I'm sorry John but the dead guy scares me less than you do.'"
- Plasmatica, on 12/11/2008, -1/+45You win! You get a gold medal and an additional bag of money for the most hyperbolic argument of the day.
- youliveinfear, on 12/11/2008, -2/+45I still think you deserve a trial, Johnny boy.
- SteaminTmann, on 12/11/2008, -4/+47Jailers: Hey, you detainees! Guess what, you're free!
Detainees: Aw shucks, thanks alot!
Jailers: Hey, sorry about that torture stuff... No hard feelings, right?
Detainees: Ahhh, of course not! Let's let bygones be bygones! - sunburner, on 12/11/2008, -3/+44Dugg for douchenozzle.
- mfured20, on 12/11/2008, -5/+44perfectly said.
- MelekTawus, on 12/11/2008, -0/+39You know, if every one of the detainees was caught in the act of committing attacks, I'd still disagree with him, but I could at least understand. But a lot of these detainees were picked up on hearsay (there were taxi drivers who were paid $100 American for every "terrorist" they turned in who admitted they were delivering customers they knew nothing about) and other extremely questionable reasons.
- gobbleplex, on 12/11/2008, -1/+37I guess you never got the memo that in fact many of the Gitmo prisoners were not picked up on the battlefield so much as they were turned over for a hefty bounty because the US was paying out the nose for *virtually anyone* no questions asked. Who would you sell down the river for an amount of money equal to about 5 million dollars? I'm sure you can think of someone you don't like very much.
- cptmichael101st, on 12/10/2008, -5/+40i like how he kept talking about hoes.
- Loonacy, on 12/11/2008, -0/+34It's funny how people can say with a certainty that the people in Gitmo deserve to be there.... but then say there's not enough evidence to convict so if we gave them a trial they'd go free.
- cloudberries, on 12/11/2008, -2/+36I think, in some respects, they're already winning.
- Ljay90, on 12/11/2008, -0/+33"I learned in Iraq that the No. 1 reason foreign fighters flocked there to fight were the abuses carried out at Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo. Our policy of torture was directly and swiftly recruiting fighters for al-Qaeda in Iraq. … It’s no exaggeration to say that at least half of our losses and casualties in that country have come at the hands of foreigners who joined the fray because of our program of detainee abuse. The number of U.S. soldiers who have died because of our torture policy will never be definitively known, but it is fair to say that it is close to the number of lives lost on Sept. 11, 2001. How anyone can say that torture keeps Americans safe is beyond me — unless you don’t count American soldiers as Americans."
-Matthew Alexander, former Special Operations interrogator who worked in Iraq - jstohler, on 12/11/2008, -2/+35Remember: Ashcroft is commonly pointed to as the "sane one" among the Bushies. Proof positive that there is no such thing.
- MJDub, on 12/11/2008, -1/+31***** John Ashcroft
- beerhound, on 12/11/2008, -1/+30Exactly!!! That has been my argument all along. If they were combatants, then they should have POW status and the Geneva Convention applies, if they weren't combatants, then the civilian legal system applies. Either let the Red Cross (maybe the Red Crescent applies here?) bring in care packages and verify that they are being humanely treated or let the lawyers get involved and prove your case in court.
- psilly, on 12/11/2008, -3/+32http://www.toadalamode.com/ashcroft.html
Let the eagle soar,
Soar with freedom in her breast
So long as she's appropriately dressed
And not exposing her chest.
As the lands beneath her say
"Yesterday, all my troubles seemed so far away."
But we shall overcome.
We won't let the First Amendment
stand in our way.
O, let the eagle soar,
but the Bill of Rights ignore
'cause we're in a state of war
Yes, let the mighty eagle soar. - inactive, on 12/11/2008, -0/+29Republican here.
I have always thought of Ashcroft as a total douchebag, this just strengthens my opinon - Elsewhere42, on 12/11/2008, -2/+31It is people like Ashcroft that created the need for Habeas Corpus
- sunburner, on 12/11/2008, -0/+28You know how people sometimes think its wrong to question another person's patriotism in this country? Well I disagree in this case. Anyone who could support the principles of not giving one a fair trial, agree with torturing our prisoners, eroding civil liberties for safety and expanding governmental spying powers is by definition the exact opposite of patriot. You are something else. A nationalist? A sheep? Find whatever word you want but you, sir are no patriot at all.
"Dissent is the highest form of patriotism." -Thomas Jefferson
"Those who sacrifice liberty for a little bit of temporary safety deserve and will receive neither." - Benjamin Franklin - spectecjr, on 12/11/2008, -0/+26Because it's in the constitution, dumb-ass.
- Harbinger67, on 12/11/2008, -1/+27America's ***** foreign policy of rampant interventionism that has garnered so much hatred towards our nation was going on well before Bush took office; he just made it that much more obvious.
- pintomp3, on 12/11/2008, -0/+26isn't that what the terrorists do?
- PWoT, on 12/11/2008, -1/+27I supported this guy. But I'm dumbounded here. Is he seriously proposing holding these people forever?
He kept making the comparison to World War 2. That was a war where there was a government who could surrender and end the war, thus signalling it was time to release the POWs. What would be the equivalent here? Al Qaeda surrenders? Then we release everyone in Guantanamo?
Seriously, I'm utterly baffled as to what he thinks the plan is. Everybody in there is imprisoned for life? Really? If not that, then what?
I kept watching the clip waiting for him to address that point, and he just... never did. Do you think he's ever addressed it in his own head?
If not, the man is mentally ill. Ugh. - Triptastic, on 12/11/2008, -0/+24They are putting us all in a prison, we just can't see the bars.
- inactive, on 12/11/2008, -2/+24Some people at Gitmo are completely innocent and this is what's obscene. For example, it's known that there are several prisoners in Gitmo who were simply in the wrong place at the wrong time.
One such group is a group of "tribesmen" from a nomadic Chinese ethnic minority who happened to be wandering in Afghanistan a few miles away from an active warzone. They were picked up and brought to Gitmo where the officials realized they messed up, but don't want to release them because of how embarrassing it would be to have these people talk once they leave.
2 different prisoners essentially ran the Afghanistan version of "The Onion" and satirized the president. Now, he didn't like that so much, so he put out a warrant for their arrest as terror suspects and then handed them over to the US who promptly sent them to Cuba and wouldn't release them until it got major media attention that they were holding comedians who were there because of political vengeance rather than terrorism. - WraTH017, on 12/11/2008, -0/+21Critical thinking. You should give that try.
We have things like habeas corpus, and the Geneva convention not to protect the enemy, but to protect OURSELVES. You should be concerned if government is bypassing habeas corpus for anybody, because there may be a time when you, or someone you care about ends up without any rights whatsoever. This is not a thing of science fiction... It happens all across the world and you definitely don't want the US to go in that direction.
And If you think giving enemy combatants a fair trial is comparative to giving them guns and badges... wow. - sizzzzlerz, on 12/11/2008, -1/+21Torture, indefinite detention without trial, warrentless spying on US citizens.
These are the tenets of today's GOP.
***** 'em. - enki25, on 12/11/2008, -0/+19Just because they're brown doesn't mean we know they are guilty. If we had evidence they would have been convicted.
- vastness, on 12/11/2008, -0/+19"I'm stunned that this ***** has no comprehension of civil rights."
I dugg you up, however... He comprehends them and their importance to a free society just fine, he just wantonly disregards them. There is this idea that all the faux pas committed on the part of the Bushies is a result of ignorance. I respectfully disagree. They're simply douchebags. - akhomestead, on 12/11/2008, -3/+22Actually when the democrats tried to pass something similar but taimer to the patriot act in the 90's when he was in congress he voted against it citing civil rights.
But now he's a pawn of the elites and he knows he's guilty as hell and doesn't want to get caught - cloudberries, on 12/11/2008, -0/+19Hello, and welcome to this brave new world, where you, too, can be innocent until thrown into confinement and assumed guilty! I hope you enjoy your stay. If you feel uncomfortable with the horrendous stereotyping which will now be applied to you, please don't speak to anyone about it. We won't listen!
- hikaruzero, on 12/11/2008, -4/+23What a MOOK! Hey Ashcroft why don't we suspect you and Bush of war crimes, and detain you, and see whether or not you get a trial! If we had caught Hitler, do you think we'd have given him a trial? Or been put down? Or whisked away for torture? Out of those 3 options what do you think is most likely?
This fatman is just covering his ascii for the press. What a mook. This is disgusting. - Plasmatica, on 12/11/2008, -0/+18He's arguing that the process would be easier if POW's aren't granted rights to a fair trial because they're probably guilty.
I don't know about you, but that kind of thinking doesn't sound right at all. - thedsack, on 12/11/2008, -0/+18The question is, do we allow anyone (including ourselves) to detain someone indefinitely without proving they should be detained.
In this statement Mr. Ashcroft is talking about a traditional war (Army vs Army). The war we are fighting today is with a nameless, faceless enemy (so called terrorists). Thus, you could detain anyone you wish in the name of said conflict. - Adamlite, on 12/11/2008, -0/+17I almost wish he'd won that race so he was never Attorney General.
- absentmindedjwc, on 12/11/2008, -1/+18I think you meant "Kill them all. God will know his own." It is a common misconception, but this is the correct quote.
Anyway, your an idiot. Some of the people there were never even in iraq, they were pulled from the streets of America for some reason known only to the military and higher ups in government, and thrown in gitmo. Not to mention, if we were to go over there and kill everyone that we came across, how would we be any worse than the people that pulled the WTC building attacks? -
Show 51 - 100 of 378 discussions
Check out the new & improved 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is