[madprophet]

Quote by: rmnunez I think this statement is mistaken on 2 counts; there is no pursuit of people merely accused of being terrorists, and no atribution of less than human characteristics in terrorists.

Don't tell me you've never heard anybody refer to the US prisoners in Gitmo as less than human! Xyzer mildly refered to them as "barbarians" in this very thread. I've heard them called "animals" more times than I can count. And then there's the racial slurs. And there's no end to the number of times they've been called "evil" or some variation on that theme. These are all cases of a concerted effort to de-humanize people accused of terrorism.

Quote by: rmnunez We have this formality with the presumption of innocence, but don't think suspects are rounded up on unsubstantiated allegations and tenuous suspicion.

Yes, they are. Some of them were rounded up by the Pakistani government and the Northern Alliance and turned over to us for money.

Quote by: rmnunez Having held them for some time and often subjected them to degrading treatment or torture, by now I'd expect the united statians know which are not actually terrorists. These should be let go, as some have been already.

Do you even know what the new law does? It takes away the measures used to determine who gets to be let go! Habeas Corpus, the ability to challenge your detention. They don't have to charge you. They can keep you forever without ever giving you a hearing. They can torture a confession out of you and try you in a secret court, using your cohersed confession against you. And as any expert will tell you, cohersed confessions are not truthful information.

Quote by: rmnunez But the genuine article has to stay, they should be prosecuted, and as long as the sentence they get is longer than the time served it seems no harm will result.

There is so much wrong with this sentence... What about the people they hold for years and then let go? No harm done? F*ck, dude. They held three kids for something like two years. Kids. Children.

Quote by: rmnunez I know this is supposed to be done more expeditiously, there are supposed to be defense counsel, evidence, testimony, witnesses, magistrates and complicated procedures to be followed in prosecution. I also realize that all of these could result in some of the accused getting off, despite their guilt. I suppose some of this could result in an innocent bystander getting exonerated too, but don't expect this would often be the case as I anticipate the suspects have been properly identified and are reasonably suspected of.

Dude, you are f*cking crazy! Only a zombie could say stuff like this. "We don't need all those pesky rules and laws and stuff, because the government is a perfect ruler who would never mistakenly accuse someone of being a terrorist. Who even needs evidence, the governments word is good enough for me, and it should be good enough for you silly lefties."

Gee, why do we even need all those defense counsels and witnesses and complicated procedures for regular crimes anyway? The government never makes mistakes, after all. All that constitutional malarky just lets criminals go free, because the government knows all, but can't always prove it.