Warpath  

Home | Forums | Salary Cap Info | Shop | Donate | Stay Connected




Go Back   Warpath > Off-Topic Discussion > Debating with the enemy


White House backed release of Lockerbie bomber

Debating with the enemy


Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 07-25-2010, 05:30 PM   #1
Swearinger
 
GMScud's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Washington, DC
Age: 36
Posts: 12,623
White House backed release of Lockerbie bomber

I find this sickening. Aww, you mean a mass-murderer was going to have to die of cancer in prison? How terrible.

White House backed release of Lockerbie bomber Abdel Baset al-Megrahi | The Australian

__________________
Insert witty signature here
GMScud is offline   Reply With Quote

Advertisements
Old 07-25-2010, 08:05 PM   #2
Gamebreaker
 
tryfuhl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Waldorf, MD
Age: 30
Posts: 12,514
Re: White House backed release of Lockerbie bomber

Well they were fine with him dying in Scottish prison, just not Libyan. For what reason I'm not sure. I'm sure Libyan prison systems are more harsh and also probably more susceptible to bribe-releases. Or maybe it's due to him not receiving decent care in a Libyan prison, which would be less palatable for me to accept. I wouldn't mind seeing the letter because it can sway either way.
tryfuhl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-25-2010, 10:25 PM   #3
Eternally Legendary
 
saden1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Seattle
Age: 35
Posts: 9,926
Re: White House backed release of Lockerbie bomber

Quote:
Originally Posted by tryfuhl View Post
Well they were fine with him dying in Scottish prison, just not Libyan. For what reason I'm not sure. I'm sure Libyan prison systems are more harsh and also probably more susceptible to bribe-releases. Or maybe it's due to him not receiving decent care in a Libyan prison, which would be less palatable for me to accept. I wouldn't mind seeing the letter because it can sway either way.
I'm guessing they want to ship gitmo detainees to libya. Regardless, the Scotts are free to do as they please and the article title is misleading.
__________________
"The Redskins have always suffered from chronic organizational deformities under Snyder."

-Jenkins
saden1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-25-2010, 10:51 PM   #4
Swearinger
 
GMScud's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Washington, DC
Age: 36
Posts: 12,623
Re: White House backed release of Lockerbie bomber

Quote:
Originally Posted by saden1 View Post
I'm guessing they want to ship gitmo detainees to libya. Regardless, the Scotts are free to do as they please and the article title is misleading.
After reading a few articles about this, I agree that the article title is a bit misleading. It's not like Obama and Co said, "hey, let the guy go." It still doesn't sit well with me that they weren't overly opposed to "compassionate release," and it doesn't excuse The Lord's BS about being "surprised, disappointed, and angry" about his release. He knew what was coming. Otherwise he and his ilk wouldn't be trying to keep said correspondence secret.

But hey, BP now gets to drill off of Libya. This whole thing stinks to high heaven.
__________________
Insert witty signature here
GMScud is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-26-2010, 12:02 AM   #5
Registered User
 
GusFrerotte's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Detroit area
Posts: 4,153
Re: White House backed release of Lockerbie bomber

Quote:
Originally Posted by GMScud View Post
I find this sickening. Aww, you mean a mass-murderer was going to have to die of cancer in prison? How terrible.

White House backed release of Lockerbie bomber Abdel Baset al-Megrahi | The Australian
Dude, not saying the guy deserves a break, but our current president and the last 3 presidents could be called mass murderers, and with a much larger body count. They can be brought up on war crimes by international law, but since they are presidents will never get nailed.
GusFrerotte is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-26-2010, 08:21 AM   #6
Playmaker
 
Slingin Sammy 33's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Virginia Beach
Posts: 4,341
Re: White House backed release of Lockerbie bomber

Quote:
Originally Posted by GusFrerotte View Post
Dude, not saying the guy deserves a break, but our current president and the last 3 presidents could be called mass murderers, and with a much larger body count. They can be brought up on war crimes by international law, but since they are presidents will never get nailed.
I call flat out bullshit. Not Bush 1, Clinton, Bush 2, or Obama should be called mass murders or war criminals. If I honestly felt the last four presidents were mass murders, I would resign my citizenship and find another country.
__________________
"I would bet.....(if), an angel fairy came down and said, '[You can have anything] in the world you would like to own,' I wouldn't be surprised if you said a football club and particularly the Washington Redskins.'' Jack Kent Cooke, 1996.
Slingin Sammy 33 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-26-2010, 09:59 AM   #7
Registered User
 
firstdown's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: chesapeake, va
Age: 50
Posts: 15,818
Re: White House backed release of Lockerbie bomber

This is just a good example of how other governments view Obama "the community organizer" as a world leader. I'm guessing if we had a stronger pres in office this guy would still be behind bars. Thats just my gut feeling. Even if I'm wrong about that its just another lie Obama has made. I'm loosing count.
firstdown is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-26-2010, 10:28 AM   #8
MVP
 
12thMan's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: washington, D.C.
Posts: 11,456
Re: White House backed release of Lockerbie bomber

Quote:
Originally Posted by firstdown View Post
This is just a good example of how other governments view Obama "the community organizer" as a world leader. I'm guessing if we had a stronger pres in office this guy would still be behind bars. Thats just my gut feeling. Even if I'm wrong about that its just another lie Obama has made. I'm loosing count.
So did Obama back the release or condemn, First and GMScud? It can't be both. I love how you and GMScud manufacture controversy with these bs Obama threads.

Do you guys watch the news -- at all? Or just scour the internet for sh*t to whine about?

Now here's some actual reporting on what Obama said about the release.

Obama, Cameron blast release of Lockerbie bomber - CNN.com
12thMan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-26-2010, 10:38 AM   #9
Uncle Phil
 
SmootSmack's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 44,678
Re: White House backed release of Lockerbie bomber

I take it you didn't actually read the link in the OP 12th
__________________
You're So Vain...You Probably Think This Sig Is About You
SmootSmack is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-26-2010, 10:45 AM   #10
Eternally Legendary
 
saden1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Seattle
Age: 35
Posts: 9,926
Re: White House backed release of Lockerbie bomber

Quote:
Originally Posted by GMScud View Post
After reading a few articles about this, I agree that the article title is a bit misleading. It's not like Obama and Co said, "hey, let the guy go." It still doesn't sit well with me that they weren't overly opposed to "compassionate release," and it doesn't excuse The Lord's BS about being "surprised, disappointed, and angry" about his release. He knew what was coming. Otherwise he and his ilk wouldn't be trying to keep said correspondence secret.

But hey, BP now gets to drill off of Libya. This whole thing stinks to high heaven.
The Scotts have laws...the administration can voice its concerns to the Scottish Government but their courts and review boards make the decisions. If they're going to just transfer him it's completely worthless because they will free him. Now if you release him you can a) get oil, b) repatriation the some of Libyan gitmo detainees, c) it never hurts to look merciful, and d) it's not a battle worth fighting due to his impending death and lack of control.


You're confusing the being surprised at the decision that was made vs the knowledge of the choices they have in front of them and your own preferences. So yes, you can be surprised. It's all PR though...it really doesn't mean anything.


Would I have let him go? Hell no, especially if the evidence was overwhelming and he really is guilty. I'd put him in a see through box, put a camera outside that box and broadcast his imprisonment and slow death of cancer on the internet. Do I have to give him cancer medication?
__________________
"The Redskins have always suffered from chronic organizational deformities under Snyder."

-Jenkins
saden1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-26-2010, 10:50 AM   #11
Eternally Legendary
 
saden1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Seattle
Age: 35
Posts: 9,926
Re: White House backed release of Lockerbie bomber

Quote:
Originally Posted by 12thMan View Post
So did Obama back the release or condemn, First and GMScud? It can't be both. I love how you and GMScud manufacture controversy with these bs Obama threads.

Do you guys watch the news -- at all? Or just scour the internet for sh*t to whine about?

Now here's some actual reporting on what Obama said about the release.

Obama, Cameron blast release of Lockerbie bomber - CNN.com
You can include SS33 in that list too...it is really getting worse by the day and it's troubling to see their anger take over.
__________________
"The Redskins have always suffered from chronic organizational deformities under Snyder."

-Jenkins
saden1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-26-2010, 10:51 AM   #12
MVP
 
12thMan's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: washington, D.C.
Posts: 11,456
Re: White House backed release of Lockerbie bomber

Quote:
Originally Posted by SmootSmack View Post
I take it you didn't actually read the link in the OP 12th
I did, but it's not the link I really have an issue with, it's the title of the thread and ensuing and misleading attacks.
12thMan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-26-2010, 10:53 AM   #13
Gamebreaker
 
CRedskinsRule's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Pasadena, Md
Age: 47
Posts: 12,731
Re: White House backed release of Lockerbie bomber

12th, maybe this is a little of the problem. From the CNN article you linked:
Quote:
Obama said most Americans were "surprised, disappointed and angry" about the decision to let al Megrahi go. "We should have all the facts," he added. "They should be laid out there." The decision "ran contrary to how we should be treating terrorists."
contrasted with this quote from the OP article:
Quote:
The US has tried to keep the letter secret, refusing to give permission to the Scottish authorities to publish it on the grounds it would prevent future "frank and open communications" with other governments.
So, do we lay it all out, or prevent the letter's disclosure. If Pres Obama thinks the letter should not be published, then he should state that some facts can't be released at this time, due to the strategic nature of the conversations, or national interests, or what ever he wants to say. But don't tell the national media that all the facts should be laid out, and at the same time have your administration trying to suppress a key letter.
__________________
Dirtbag59, sending songs to oblivion 1 writer at a time.
CRedskinsRule is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 07-26-2010, 11:09 AM   #14
Registered User
 
firstdown's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: chesapeake, va
Age: 50
Posts: 15,818
Re: White House backed release of Lockerbie bomber

Quote:
Originally Posted by 12thMan View Post
So did Obama back the release or condemn, First and GMScud? It can't be both. I love how you and GMScud manufacture controversy with these bs Obama threads.

Do you guys watch the news -- at all? Or just scour the internet for sh*t to whine about?

Now here's some actual reporting on what Obama said about the release.

Obama, Cameron blast release of Lockerbie bomber - CNN.com
That article is months after the fact and is only 6 days old and this happened how long ago. Funny how thay had harsh words but stop at that.

Washington (CNN) -- U.S. President Barack Obama and British Prime Minister David Cameron on Tuesday blasted Scottish authorities' decision to release the convicted Lockerbie bomber last year and agreed on the need to push for a more transparent disclosure of the circumstances surrounding Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed al Megrahi's release.
Cameron, however, said he is opposed to a British government investigation into the release.
firstdown is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-26-2010, 11:11 AM   #15
Eternally Legendary
 
saden1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Seattle
Age: 35
Posts: 9,926
Re: White House backed release of Lockerbie bomber

Quote:
The US has tried to keep the letter secret, refusing to give permission to the Scottish authorities to publish it on the grounds it would prevent future "frank and open communications" with other governments.

In the letter, sent on August 12 last year to Scottish First Minister Alex Salmond and justice officials, Mr LeBaron wrote that the US wanted Megrahi to remain imprisoned in view of the nature of the crime.
If you believe the letter exists and the letter's content says we "Megrahi to remain imprisoned" what exactly in this "key letter" is being suppressed?
__________________
"The Redskins have always suffered from chronic organizational deformities under Snyder."

-Jenkins
saden1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 09:15 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site is not officially affiliated with the Washington Redskins or the NFL.
Page generated in 0.34129 seconds with 9 queries

Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.2.0 RC5

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25