What is Digg?53 Comments
- marmotjmarmot, on 07/20/2009, -2/+22We don' need no stinkin' evidence.
- NorthMass, on 07/20/2009, -3/+17I wish Barack Obama would at least attempt to try to CHANGE Ibrahim Jassam's unfair detention.
- dreamache, on 07/21/2009, -0/+12Perhaps, just perhaps, he's being held on legitimate intelligence, but it can't be publicly revealed due to ongoing operations? Just a thought. Digg me down if this seems like a preposterous notion. ;)
- BotchaMcCoola, on 07/20/2009, -1/+12He was likely wearing dangerous shoes.
- einmuslim, on 07/21/2009, -0/+8With all that has happened in Iraq (soldiers covering up the rape and murder of a 14 year-old girl and her family, throwing journalists in jail, and Abu Ghraib) you're asking us to ASSUME they have evidence to rightfully detain this man? Right. Ok then, how silly of us to ask for evidence.
- suckmywake, on 07/21/2009, -1/+9When the US pulls ***** like this, it just shows they aren't much if any, better than North Korea or Iran. US needs to justify actions like this or else they are operating on the same level as any other dictatorship.
Democracy demands a level of transparency and accountability... What ever happened to that? - einmuslim, on 07/21/2009, -1/+9If he was a terrorist, then try him on solid evidence. Throw the book at him if you want. But, TRY him.
- dty2010, on 07/20/2009, -4/+11Habeas corpus applies because Americans are supposed to believe in "freedom" and "rights" and all kinds of crazy things like that.
- Ninh, on 07/20/2009, -1/+7Well he could testify about habeas corpus abuse, that IS a risk to the security of those who committed it.
- mrids, on 07/20/2009, -2/+8i recently watched a movie(Newyork) which highlighted a similar concept. Its too bad to see such things in a civilized society like ours....
- einmuslim, on 07/21/2009, -1/+7Right, detaining people on "classified" evidence. Whatever could go wrong with that?
- einmuslim, on 07/21/2009, -1/+7Man...what are you supposed to feel like when you read stories like this? I feel angry, bitter, and sadly enough: resigned. There are people out there who can do this to anyone of us (even living in the US) and reading stories like this just brings that fact to the surface. These people, who have accumulated dangerous levels of power, can tap our phones, detain us, take away our right to habeas corpus, and torture us; and we are led to believe that all of this alright because it's being done for our "protection." For example, why hasn't there been an uproar in the media about Dick Cheyney's "executive assassination ring?" Farrah Fawcett and MJ got more attention than this constitution-killing thug.
We were told we would be greeted as liberators but we're not acting like ones. Locking away journalists?! WTF? And look at the words that that Iraqi soldier used when speaking to the guy's sister:
"Why you are still talking? If you only knew what we are going to do your brother, you would be crying."
Seriously? if this is the mentality of the average soldier in the Iraqi army, what did we liberate? We replaced one group of thugs with another, and now we're shifting our focus to Afghanistan to do some "nation building" there? Man... god damn it. - inactive, on 07/21/2009, -0/+5I agree it's sad to see things like this in our society, but things like this raise the question just how civilized are we really, the answer seems to be "not very"
- einmuslim, on 07/21/2009, -0/+5It says it right in the article that the evidence is classified. It's up to you to decide whether or not you trust NPR:
"'We have to assume that he was detained for the work that he was doing as a journalist. Until we see otherwise, UNTIL THE EVIDENCE IS DECLASSIFIED, he deserves the presumption of innocence,' Christie says."
Furthermore, "an Iraqi court document from November 2008 says that since the Americans provided no evidence or confession, Jassam should be released." American forces have provided no evidence of this man's guilt- not to the media and not even to the courts. You are assuming that they actually have the evidence. This is dangerous considering that this is the same institution whose members are responsible for atrocities like Abu Ghraib and the raping and murdering of a 14-year-old girl and her family (http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,519387,00.html ...
So please, I think it is justified to be skeptical of the military and not take their word as the truth without evidence. - wtrwlkr, on 07/21/2009, -1/+6Thankfully, saying "odds are" before making a blind accusation about someone doesn't count as evidence.
- lolwatermelon, on 07/21/2009, -0/+5With intent to throw?
- ZenMojo, on 07/21/2009, -0/+4Yes? You act like we're always the good guys.
- lolwatermelon, on 07/21/2009, -0/+3"doesn't apply durign a time or war, moron. He is not a civilian prisoner."
But they SHOULD. We have all these laws and rules to protect people here, why can't we follow our own rules when we're elsewhere? - shininia, on 07/21/2009, -2/+5Apparently you have no idea what the Constitution says.
- RiperSnifle, on 07/21/2009, -2/+5OK so maybe habeas corpus doesn't apply, whatever. He's not an American citizen and he was captured by the army in a war zone. Maybe they do have evidence against him that they can't release for secrecy reasons, whatever. So that's all well and good.
But first you have to say that it's OK to imprison a person without a warrant or a charge. Is that ethical? What is the message that the USA wants to relay by doing this, that it's a good thing to lock up someone just because you THINK they have done something wrong? Refusing to offer ANY evidence and then turning around and feeding this guy rat ***** is just totally wrong. - Peko, on 07/21/2009, -2/+5The war was lost before it even began.
Let's see. Why Iraq? It was WMDs! Oh wait, no it wasn't. It was Saddam had links to Al Queda and was a clear and present threat to US security. Oh, wait, that 'links-to-al-queda" is not so much with the truthiness. No! I've got it! It's freedom and democracy! We'll give them personal freedoms and the rule of law... and... habeas corpus.... oh... uh... that's not working either.
The war started without a clear and real cause, intent or goal. It's been a wishy washy moving target from the get go. So, the war was lost before it even began. Sun Tzu disapproves. - LeepII, on 07/21/2009, -0/+2The "Do as we say, not as we do" is wearing a little thin with the rest of the world.
- inactive, on 07/21/2009, -0/+2The same people that voted the 'old *****' in twice?
- stubear, on 07/21/2009, -2/+4...detaining people IN A WAR ZONE on classified evidence...
There, fixed that for you. Now do you see the problem? First of all, you don;t know whether or not the evidence is classified but to automatically assume its trumped up charges is pure ignorance. Second, this is in a war zone, not in your neighborhood. This is not municipal police grabbing U.S. citizens in the night and locking them away. I'm not saying what was done is right or wrong, mostly because I don't have all the facts and neither does anyone else here. Any discussion of this topic is premature art best. - CkMaverick, on 07/21/2009, -3/+5Don't worry. It's cool when we do it, just not when other nations do it to our journalists.
- kaelyiesta, on 07/21/2009, -0/+2http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1uuWVHT1WUY
Unlikely. - FairDinkumMate, on 07/21/2009, -2/+3@stubear - Yeah, the entire Iraqi nation committed 9/11 and performed reprehensible acts on US citizens. Wait, they didn't? Iraqi's didn't have anything to do with 9/11?
If generalizing like this in an internet forum is monumentally stupid, what would you call going to war over it? - Arkyll, on 07/21/2009, -0/+1The military sadly acts independently from the political system...Most likely Obama did agree to this, they probably just did it.
- stubear, on 07/21/2009, -2/+3Yeah, the entire U.S. military raped the 14 year-old girl and performed reprehensible acts on prisoners at Abu Grahib. Wait, they didn't? Wow, you mean generalizing like this is monumentally stupid? Whether you like it or not, what the U.S. military is doing here is legit. HAving served in the U.S. Air Force I have a personal experience with Top Secret classified material and I can say without a doubt you;d be amazed what is considered classified. Just because you might not think it's a big deal for everyone to know doesn't mean it's not useful intel for the enemy to know. I'll trust people who know how to properly classify intel, not people who have no clue whatsoever what the difference between good intel and bad intel is, much less someone who has an obvious bias towards anti-military rhetoric instead of actually researching a story before passing judgement.
- BotchaMcCoola, on 07/21/2009, -0/+1Old uncle Fritz and his Wehrmacht buddies also encountered many "high-security threats" and "terrorists"when they invaded and occupied Poland, France, Belgium, Norway, Russia, .... You just can't help some of these backward countries, can you.
- poidh, on 07/21/2009, -2/+3Wasn't he one of those "reporters" who always managed to be there when "insurgents" launched attacks, therefore demonstrating that he had prior knowledge of the attacks, therefore choosing not to warn the authorities of the attacks and save lives in doing so?
Here's how it works for reporters. If you happen to be there when there is some violence, by all means film it because that is your job. If you arrange to be there when there will be an attack on the troops, then you are one of the terrorists and deserve to be imprisoned or executed or whatever.
It's threads like these which demonstrate how difficult it is for the US or any Western nation to win a war any more. Winning the war militarily is relatively easy if the generals are allowed to do their thing, as the US army has overwhelming firepower. The problem is that the enemy have so many allies within the West who will do whatever they can to help them defeat the US or Western army that rather than the Iraq war taking a year to complete, it is only just winding down 6 years later. - einmuslim, on 07/21/2009, -1/+2Look man, I'm not passing judgement- I'm arguing that it's not right locking someone up without presenting evidence against them. We have habeas corpus for a reason. What our troops do now over there sets the precedent for things to come. If the American military uses classified evidence to lock people up, you can bet that the Iraqi government will do the same in the future; Students learn from their teachers.
You argue that the evidence is classified for a good reason because you trust the people doing it; however, I'm not disputing the military's ability, nor criteria, for classifying things; I'm arguing against taking their word as the truth, without any evidence. I, unlike you, do not have military experience; what I, along with the public, have is knowledge of the military's past deeds in Iraq via news reports from trusted news sources (bbc, cnn, msnbc, etc). I'm not condemning the personal integrity and honesty of the individuals that make-up our military, I argue against the INSTITUTIONS' trustworthiness.
The deeds that some rotten individuals have done have tainted my perception of the overall military (not the individual members, but the institution); therefore, I argue against just taking the military's word alone. If they have evidence against this reporter, they need to show it; otherwise, he's being held in prison unjustly- condemned to rot in jail indefinitely, unable to face his accusers or challenge the evidence against him. This is how a gulag works, not a judicial system inspired by western ideals. - lhbaker, on 07/22/2009, -0/+1He was a journalist. He worked for Rueters. We arrested him for being good at his job.
- inactive, on 07/21/2009, -1/+2He's not really a terrorists.
We just needed another big guy to be an anchorman for nekkid Iraqi pyramid. - lhbaker, on 07/22/2009, -0/+1odds are you have no idea what you are talking about.
- einmuslim, on 07/21/2009, -2/+3Right, so if he's guilty, handover the evidence to the fledgling democracy's courts. Let them decide who is or is not a terrorist in their own country,
- skittlez1, on 07/22/2009, -0/+1Obama doesn't care. He's another political figurehead being used as a front to the people. This whole government thing gets more and more obvious by the month
- Haptick, on 07/21/2009, -0/+1Here is some light on the subject of writs of habeas corpus regarding the military:
http://www.encyclopedia.com/doc/1O63-HabeasCorpusA ...
http://www.jstor.org/pss/1285016
It's still arguable at best whether these apply to him or not, and the constitution allows for suspension of the writ of Habeas Corpus "when in Cases of Rebellion or Invasion the public safety may require it." (Art. 1, Section 9). And it was Mr. Lincoln who asserted that the President and Congress both had the power to suspend it.
Inter arma silent leges - eavesdrop, on 07/21/2009, -2/+2You're off your pills!
- aforsberg, on 07/21/2009, -2/+2They do this all the time. I wish we wouldn't sink to their level.
- No1Dad, on 07/21/2009, -1/+1"But they SHOULD. We have all these laws and rules to protect people here, why can't we follow our own rules when we're elsewhere?"
I'm going to go out on a limb an assume you don't have any loved ones in Iraq being shot at. - einmuslim, on 07/21/2009, -2/+2The link about the rape and murder of the 14-year-old girl and her family:
www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,519387,00.html
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17247852/ - lolwatermelon, on 07/21/2009, -1/+1"I'm going to go out on a limb an assume you don't have any loved ones in Iraq being shot at."
I'm going to go out on a limb and assume that you like to demonize everyone who doesn't agree with you and you don't think they should have basic inalienable human rights. - JustChillin12, on 07/21/2009, -4/+4Obama shows his support for the Military Commissions Act.
Freedom/change fail. - americanoboy, on 07/21/2009, -5/+5this isn't the worst thing us troops have done.
- depro9, on 07/21/2009, -2/+1Tell the truth go to jail & maybe even get tortured to death.
- FauOz, on 07/21/2009, -3/+2If the Chinese can filter their internet we should at least be able to clean out viruses,worms, and male ware at a server level.
Should be possible. -
Show 51 - 58 of 58 discussions
Browsing Digg on your phone just got easier with our enhancements to the 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is