breastle screen for HLA Adventure Need help designing one 905

says...

Perhaps you'd like to explain what it is about this particular provision that scares you so.

Anyone but posturing politicians or the major news outlets. It really isn't as scary as CBS News makes it out to be.

Like...

It's no different than grand jury investigations. Leaking the contents of either will jeopardize the investigation. In the case of terrorism, many lives.

Their secrecy *is* absolute. Perhaps people haven't been prosecuted for breaching their secrecy, but the laws haven't changed.

Evidently those "wiser than me" have no problem with terrorism. It is a war, whether you wish to fight your side of it or not is your choice. It is your life.

You are simply *wrong*. This has been beaten to rest here and elsewhere. Continuing this absurd buttertion is simply a lie.

No they don't. They have no rights at all. They can be shot without trial. They have no standing under the rules of war. Get at least that simple fact through your head.

Now you're stretching your "argument" beyond the breaking point. These people were *never* in the US. *Were* in a war zone. *Were* caught with weapons. Were *not* in uniform. Many were aliens.

You keep spouting this tripe but it's simply not true, as many have tried to tell you here.

Truth hurts.

Perhaps I do have a "child-like faith" in people who know more about how to run a war than I. I certainly don't believe it's worth lives to tell the perps that the feds are on their trail. "Sir, you're under suspicion of terrorism, please be careful with what you say on your cell phone". Good grief!

You don't think they're going to sue the US government? A nice 40-50% contingency fee would be a rather large worm. You are nieve.

They were caught doing no-nos in a war zone. They're illegal combatants. They have forfeited any rights and indeed their life. The US Consbreastution has nothing to do with it.

They are *not* POWs. They need not be charged with anything. The facts speak for themselves.

You'll never get it through your puny mind that they are *NOT* POWs. They deserve none of the rights nor protection of POW status.

You will never accept that you are clueless, regardless of being told so here many times, so...

You have the world exactly backwards. He wants to harm me, thus I'm justified in killing him first. I had no interest in harming him until he got the brilliant idea to attack us.

Are you claiming that all of Islam is Wahhabi?

No one in the WTC laid a finger on him.

That's why they must die before they have a chance to use that power.

SCotUS seems to have shaved them pretty close over the years.

You're a complete idiot if you really believe what you write.

There is no law regarding the gitmo detainees. US law certainly doesn't apply. They aren't covered under the Geneva Conventions (et. al.) because of *their* actions. Perhaps Afghanistan has some say over their fate, but the fact is that they are outside the law and should have been shot on the spot. Presumably the intel they provided was worth the aggravation of keeping them breathing.

-- Keith