I'm just trying to understand why he would say something like that, everyone's opinion is important Mr Hogg, even the sabadabas of the world. And if he is baiting, let him say so, or not.
translation: "I don't know anything about the case, I just know I enjoy shooting my mouth off, getting into useless beef, and personally insulting people because I am all hurt that no one on this site can talk with me about music."
sabadildo has to go to class. And in the game of life little Johnny just crapped out, maybe he was in the wrong place at the wrong time, but that's the way it goes. Actions have consequences.
Being at the wrong place at the wrong time does not excuse calling for someone's death. Actions do have consequences, and that is the point of this thread, how much do we know about John's actions (and intentions) that warrant him a terrorist. It seems to me, based on what his father wrote, that the press and army have all gathered around false conclusions of his actions and intentions in a post Sept. 11 environment. Your initial response to this thread follows those reactionary viewpoints. I'm not saying his father's word should be taken as the truth, but I'm asking if anybody else's version should, and if you base your opinions on the general consensus maybe you should look alittle deeper.
It really irks me that sabadaba would say kill the man, when he's not positive about what the man really did. People get emotionally caught up to the point where they can't separate themselves emotionally, and attempt an objective analysis of what really happened. I would say this is one of the main problems in the world today.
People get emotionally caught up to the point where they can't separate themselves emotionally, and attempt an objective analysis of what really happened. I would say this is one of the main problems in the world today.
On this, we can agree.
But I still don't see where Lindh was "calling for someone's death."
The bottom line: this is now "his father" versus "the media." And his father is gonna lose that battle every time.
People get emotionally caught up to the point where they can't separate themselves emotionally, and attempt an objective analysis of what really happened.
Exactly. The liberal posters, if anybody here, need to make note of this. I really don't give a shit either way, but the majority of posts in these threads, i.e. liberal ones, are emotionally centered. It seems to me, anyway.
I wasn't talking about Lindh, I edited my post, sorry for the conclusion. As towards fighting the media, well I guess you have to become those you fight.
I wasn't talking about Lindh, I edited my post, sorry for the conclusion. As towards fighting the media, well I guess you have to become those you fight.
Thanks for clarifying. I'll admit that I was a little confused.
i think its a huge drag that every time I express a viewpoint that doesn't fall to the left of Noam Chomsky I get personally insulted. And if you think I'm going to just sit back and let it happen at the hands of these clowns (or that I should) than that's a drag too.
Sabada you don't state any kind of views in your posts you just talk shit plain and simple.
That's what missb was trying to say.
And I wholeheartedly agree with her.
And as far as the "American Taliban" goes, his dad is trying to get his sentence reduced plain and simple. That's why he's started this public relations campaign to get public support to pressure Bush to get his kid out sooner than the 20 years I think he got. According to the dad, his son was a prisoner of the Taliban and the U.S. forces actually rescued him. Bullshit in my book. The dude traveled to Pakistan, got involved in radical Islamist politics, and should've known what the Taliban were about. If not he's as big a dipshit as Sabada is.
i think its a huge drag that every time I express a viewpoint that doesn't fall to the left of Noam Chomsky I get personally insulted. And if you think I'm going to just sit back and let it happen at the hands of these clowns (or that I should) than that's a drag too.
Sabada you don't state any kind of views in your posts you just talk shit plain and simple.
That's what missb was trying to say.
And I wholeheartedly agree with her.
And as far as the "American Taliban" goes, his dad is trying to get his sentence reduced plain and simple. That's why he's started this public relations campaign to get public support to pressure Bush to get his kid out sooner than the 20 years I think he got. According to the dad, his son was a prisoner of the Taliban and the U.S. forces actually rescued him. Bullshit in my book. The dude traveled to Pakistan, got involved in radical Islamist politics, and should've known what the Taliban were about. If not he's as big a dipshit as Sabada is.
If he did indeed join a movement that was considered to be "At War" with the U.S. one of the crimes he could have been charged with is Treason.
And I also believe one of the penalties that has been implemented for Treason is death by hanging.
So Saba wasn't really far off with the premise of his post.
I don't believe hanging has been an accepted form of execution in the US at any level for a long time now...
At least 60 years....I know the Rosenbergs were sentenced to the Electric Chair in the 50's....not sure how many Treason charges have been handed out since then??
There are people out there who want us all dead....I'm not going to stereotype them but I'm also not going to ignore the fact that they exist. Let's all hope they are not successful!!
Rich
a point often missed in the grand mess that has been the last 5 years of life in the United States
Who are these people who want us all (I'm assuming you mean people in the Western World) dead?
Some more information (wiki). It seems the US fucked up the whole process, and had to make a plea bargain to avoid having the whole confession thrown out (since they tortured it out of him).
On February 5, 2002, Walker was indicted by a federal grand jury on ten charges, including conspiring to support terrorist organizations and conspiring to murder Americans. The charges carried three life terms and 90 additional years in prison. On February 13, 2002, he pleaded "not guilty" to all ten charges.
Complicating the prosecution was the nature of the confession. Photos emerged from Lindh's captivity of him being held naked and bound, wearing an obscenity-covered blindfold. When details of the conditions of his captivity began to emerge, it was discovered that he had initially been wounded and hidden for a week with limited food, water, and minimal sleep in conditions of freezing water before being captured. After being captured and taken to a room with the only window blocked off, Lindh had his clothes cut off him and was duct-taped to a stretcher and placed in a metal shipping container for transportation. Lindh was not even released from the stretcher when he needed to urinate. Instead, guards propped him upright. When interrogated, he was denied a lawyer despite several requests, and was threatened with denial of medical aid if he didn't cooperate. It took more than a week for his wound to be treated and the bullet removed.
The court scheduled an evidence suppression hearing, at which Walker would be able to testify about the details of the torture to which he was subjected. The government faced the problem that a key piece of evidence???Walker's confession???might be excluded from evidence as having been forced under duress. Furthermore, the hearing would turn a spotlight on the way that U.S. soldiers had conducted the interrogation.
To forestall this possibility, Michael Chertoff, the head of the criminal division of the Justice Department, directed the prosecutors to offer Walker a plea bargain: He would plead guilty to two charges ??? serving in the Taliban army and carrying weapons. He would also have to consent to a gag order that would prevent him from making any public statements on the matter for the duration of his twenty-year sentence, and he would have to drop claims that he had been mistreated or tortured by U.S. military personnel in Afghanistan and aboard two military ships during December 2001 and January 2002. In return, all the other charges would be dropped.
Walker accepted this offer. On July 15, 2002, he entered his plea of guilty to the two remaining charges. The judge asked Walker to say, in his own words, what he was admitting to. "I plead guilty," he said. "I provided my services as a soldier to the Taliban last year from about August to December. In the course of doing so, I carried a rifle and two grenades. I did so knowingly and willingly knowing that it was illegal." On October 4, 2002, Judge T.S. Ellis formally imposed the sentence: 20 years without parole.
There are people out there who want us all dead....I'm not going to stereotype them but I'm also not going to ignore the fact that they exist. Let's all hope they are not successful!!
Rich
a point often missed in the grand mess that has been the last 5 years of life in the United States
Who are these people who want us all (I'm assuming you mean people in the Western World) dead?
We can start with Al Quaeda......and it doesn't really matter how many different groups/countries may want us dead....it's just gonna take one....the right one.
I had an argument with a Symphonic Progressive music fan one time who said Bo Diddley was shit.....his argument was that he only played one chord....my argument was that while that may be true, it was the "right one".
Al Quaeda may be the Bo Diddley of Terrorism.....
I shouldn't drink more than 4 beers on a Tuesday night!!
There are people out there who want us all dead....I'm not going to stereotype them but I'm also not going to ignore the fact that they exist. Let's all hope they are not successful!!
Rich
a point often missed in the grand mess that has been the last 5 years of life in the United States
Who are these people who want us all (I'm assuming you mean people in the Western World) dead?
We can start with Al Quaeda......and it doesn't really matter how many different groups/countries may want us dead....it's just gonna take one....the right one.
I had an argument with a Symphonic Progressive music fan one time who said Bo Diddley was shit.....his argument was that he only played one chord....my argument was that while that may be true, it was the "right one".
Al Quaeda may be the Bo Diddley of Terrorism.....
I shouldn't drink more than 4 beers on a Tuesday night!!
To recap, JWL joined the Taliban army at a time when we were not at war with them. Nor were we supporting the Northern Alliance at that time.
JLW was not a member of Al Qaeda.
JWL never (according to his dad) took up arms against American forces. Nor (according to his dad) did he ever fire his weapon.
It was well documented that he was brutally tortured and mistreated. I am sure everyone on this board can agree that his treatment was a human rights violation. It saddens me (and sickens me) that so many of us care so little that our government is torturing people and committing human rights violations.
Rockadelic: (Or who ever was fearing them killing us all.) Our nation is big and strong and mighty. We can contain, weaken and defeat al Qaeda without resorting to hanging JWL and torture, and human rights violations and domestic spying. If we can not, then what is the point of living?
Guzzo: Taliban: The old ruling party of Afghanistan. A inhuman, authoritarian, religious regime that was happy to cut it self off from the rest of the world. Before 9/11 GWB was in the process of reversing Clinton's sanctions on Afghanistan.
al Qaeda: An international terrorist organization that supported the Taliban in exchange for a base of operations.
Guzzo: Taliban: The old ruling party of Afghanistan. A inhuman, authoritarian, religious regime that was happy to cut it self off from the rest of the world. Before 9/11 GWB was in the process of reversing Clinton's sanctions on Afghanistan.
al Qaeda: An international terrorist organization that supported the Taliban in exchange for a base of operations.
This really doesn't show that they are very different it just gives a tagline to the operations and mission of the (two) groups
and having Lindh fight as a member of the taliban, an "inhuman, authoritarian, religious regime" does nothing to better my opinion of Lindh. It feels like the people who are trying to turn him into a cause are not doing so for him but rather to show their opposition to the Bush regime.
Guzzo: Taliban: The old ruling party of Afghanistan. A inhuman, authoritarian, religious regime that was happy to cut it self off from the rest of the world. Before 9/11 GWB was in the process of reversing Clinton's sanctions on Afghanistan.
al Qaeda: An international terrorist organization that supported the Taliban in exchange for a base of operations.
This really doesn't show that they are very different it just gives a tagline to the operations and mission of the (two) groups
You see no difference between a government and a terrorist organization? I'll re-point out one difference; the Taliban was not interested in anything outside Afganistan, al Qaeda was an international organization. Perhaps what you are saying is both are bad, and everything bad is the same to you, Taliban, al Qaeda, Britney Spears, all the same thing.
and having Lindh fight as a member of the Taliban, an "inhuman, authoritarian, religious regime" does nothing to better my opinion of Lindh.
Nor mine, accept that - if you remember 9/11 - al Qaeda attacked us; the Taliban did not.
It feels like the people who are trying to turn him into a cause are not doing so for him but rather to show their opposition to the Bush regime.
I'm guessing you did not read the article. I know of no one who is trying to "turn him into a cause". His dad is trying to get his sentence shortened. I'm sure your dad would do the same for you. He is not trying to do it by attacking Bush, he is making an appeal to Bush to shorten the sentence.
It sounds to me like your hatred or al Qaeda, JWL and the Taliban is so strong that you care nothing about the torture, human rights abuses or the rest of Bush's policies.
So let's return to the original topic then, Lindh. What are people's opinions of him:
As an American does he have the freedom to join groups, whether they be good or bad, and thus joining the Taliban was just an expression of this right?
Was he simply a naive young American dude who ended up in the wrong place at the wrong time?
Was he, as his dad argues, actually a prisoner of the Taliban who was freed by U.S. forces?
Did he join a bad group, the Taliban, and thus should be punished?
Was he with a group allied with terrorists and thus guilty by association?
Other views?
I expressed my opinion in an earlier post. The Taliban ran a pretty fucked up Islamist style of government. Lindh became a Muslim, started traveling throughout Southwest and Southern Asia and got involved in radical Islamist politics which led him to Afghanistan. I'm not for hanging the guy or torturing him, but I'm not willing to give him a free pass either.
I expressed my opinion in an earlier post. The Taliban ran a pretty fucked up Islamist style of government. Lindh became a Muslim, started traveling throughout Southwest and Southern Asia and got involved in radical Islamist politics which led him to Afghanistan. I'm not for hanging the guy or torturing him, but I'm not willing to give him a free pass either.
While we're talking about American terrorists, what's going on with Jose Padilla these days? I heard that the gov't dropped all the bombing related charges because the Supremes were about to look into the legality of detaining American citizens without charging them... anyone know the latest?
Comments
Who does Pilates? Not I.
And please stop saying "San Fran."
Being at the wrong place at the wrong time does not excuse calling for someone's death. Actions do have consequences, and that is the point of this thread, how much do we know about John's actions (and intentions) that warrant him a terrorist. It seems to me, based on what his father wrote, that the press and army have all gathered around false conclusions of his actions and intentions in a post Sept. 11 environment. Your initial response to this thread follows those reactionary viewpoints. I'm not saying his father's word should be taken as the truth, but I'm asking if anybody else's version should, and if you base your opinions on the general consensus maybe you should look alittle deeper.
It really irks me that sabadaba would say kill the man, when he's not positive about what the man really did. People get emotionally caught up to the point where they can't separate themselves emotionally, and attempt an objective analysis of what really happened. I would say this is one of the main problems in the world today.
edit: why be vauge?
On this, we can agree.
But I still don't see where Lindh was "calling for someone's death."
The bottom line: this is now "his father" versus "the media." And his father is gonna lose that battle every time.
Exactly. The liberal posters, if anybody here, need to make note of this. I really don't give a shit either way, but the majority of posts in these threads, i.e. liberal ones, are emotionally centered. It seems to me, anyway.
As towards fighting the media, well I guess you have to become those you fight.
Thanks for clarifying. I'll admit that I was a little confused.
Sabada you don't state any kind of views in your posts you just talk shit plain and simple.
That's what missb was trying to say.
And I wholeheartedly agree with her.
And as far as the "American Taliban" goes, his dad is trying to get his sentence reduced plain and simple. That's why he's started this public relations campaign to get public support to pressure Bush to get his kid out sooner than the 20 years I think he got. According to the dad, his son was a prisoner of the Taliban and the U.S. forces actually rescued him. Bullshit in my book. The dude traveled to Pakistan, got involved in radical Islamist politics, and should've known what the Taliban were about. If not he's as big a dipshit as Sabada is.
If he did indeed join a movement that was considered to be "At War" with the U.S. one of the crimes he could have been charged with is Treason.
And I also believe one of the penalties that has been implemented for Treason is death by hanging.
So Saba wasn't really far off with the premise of his post.
At least 60 years....I know the Rosenbergs were sentenced to the Electric Chair in the 50's....not sure how many Treason charges have been handed out since then??
Who are these people who want us all (I'm assuming you mean people in the Western World) dead?
You're such an infant.
I rest my case.
We can start with Al Quaeda......and it doesn't really matter how many different groups/countries may want us dead....it's just gonna take one....the right one.
I had an argument with a Symphonic Progressive music fan one time who said Bo Diddley was shit.....his argument was that he only played one chord....my argument was that while that may be true, it was the "right one".
Al Quaeda may be the Bo Diddley of Terrorism.....
I shouldn't drink more than 4 beers on a Tuesday night!!
guzzo read the book taliban by ahmed rashid. should be able to get a cheap copy at a used book store or new at any decent b*rnes and n*bles.
Did you just compare Al Quaeda to Bo Diddley?
Did you just compare Al Quaeda to Bo Diddley?
Yep....and it only took 5 Newcastles.
To recap, JWL joined the Taliban army at a time when we were not at war with them. Nor were we supporting the Northern Alliance at that time.
JLW was not a member of Al Qaeda.
JWL never (according to his dad) took up arms against American forces. Nor (according to his dad) did he ever fire his weapon.
It was well documented that he was brutally tortured and mistreated. I am sure everyone on this board can agree that his treatment was a human rights violation. It saddens me (and sickens me) that so many of us care so little that our government is torturing people and committing human rights violations.
Rockadelic: (Or who ever was fearing them killing us all.) Our nation is big and strong and mighty. We can contain, weaken and defeat al Qaeda without resorting to hanging JWL and torture, and human rights violations and domestic spying. If we can not, then what is the point of living?
Guzzo:
Taliban: The old ruling party of Afghanistan. A inhuman, authoritarian, religious regime that was happy to cut it self off from the rest of the world. Before 9/11 GWB was in the process of reversing Clinton's sanctions on Afghanistan.
al Qaeda: An international terrorist organization that supported the Taliban in exchange for a base of operations.
Are we all good now?
Dan
Check it out, the new computer has spell check.
This really doesn't show that they are very different it just gives a tagline to the operations and mission of the (two) groups
and having Lindh fight as a member of the taliban, an "inhuman, authoritarian, religious regime" does nothing to better my opinion of Lindh. It feels like the people who are trying to turn him into a cause are not doing so for him but rather to show their opposition to the Bush regime.
You see no difference between a government and a terrorist organization? I'll re-point out one difference; the Taliban was not interested in anything outside Afganistan, al Qaeda was an international organization. Perhaps what you are saying is both are bad, and everything bad is the same to you, Taliban, al Qaeda, Britney Spears, all the same thing.
Nor mine, accept that - if you remember 9/11 - al Qaeda attacked us; the Taliban did not.
I'm guessing you did not read the article. I know of no one who is trying to "turn him into a cause". His dad is trying to get his sentence shortened. I'm sure your dad would do the same for you. He is not trying to do it by attacking Bush, he is making an appeal to Bush to shorten the sentence.
It sounds to me like your hatred or al Qaeda, JWL and the Taliban is so strong that you care nothing about the torture, human rights abuses or the rest of Bush's policies.
As an American does he have the freedom to join groups, whether they be good or bad, and thus joining the Taliban was just an expression of this right?
Was he simply a naive young American dude who ended up in the wrong place at the wrong time?
Was he, as his dad argues, actually a prisoner of the Taliban who was freed by U.S. forces?
Did he join a bad group, the Taliban, and thus should be punished?
Was he with a group allied with terrorists and thus guilty by association?
Other views?
I expressed my opinion in an earlier post. The Taliban ran a pretty fucked up Islamist style of government. Lindh became a Muslim, started traveling throughout Southwest and Southern Asia and got involved in radical Islamist politics which led him to Afghanistan. I'm not for hanging the guy or torturing him, but I'm not willing to give him a free pass either.
Co-Sign