Feeling grumpy
My leg hurts, I'm being bithched at and I don't have any money. Anyone want to trade?
I have been in combat over the last few days over at HAX plogspot (Swedish), where he initially stated that we should accept 17 chinese former prisoners from Gitmo.
I said that "Why the hell do we want terrorist suspects in our country?"
The responses were an uproare.
Iv'e been called a nazi, an idiot, a bigot, a SD hang-on (which I'm ceartainly not- I'm not a socialist!) and other... Well, not so cosy things.
Thing is; Even if the 17 chinese are unguilty (which they probaly are not- atleast not all of them)- they are released because of technical reasons. Yes, they have been inprisoned for 7 years, and now is up for release. That does not mean that they are not guilty- just that they could not be prooven guilty!
They are muslims who were taken in Afghanistan (I belive), no one knows what they were taken for, but I don't think that the USA army would spend any energy or money on a wild goose chase. 7 years of inprisonment equals a lot of money!
As a matter of fact, if you are an illegal combatant- which all the insurgents are- then you have no rights at all! The Geneva convetion-nill! The human rights convetion- nill! ASO,ASO.
That the forces in Iraq and Afghanistan still complies with these conventions is not only stupid but also mortaly dangerous.
The prisoners at Gitmo are up to 90% guilty as sin. And yet they release 90% of them.
posted by pela68 at 22:01
3 Comments:
WoW! I guess Liberals are the same hysterical folks the world over!
From what I gather those Chinese detainees had all gone to al Qaedai terror training camps.
Most of those in Gitmo were captured on the battlefields of Afghanistan.
The math isn't that hard to do.
If they aren't terrorists, in that they've already committed terrorist acts (other than being in Afghanistan with the pro-Taliban forces), they are certainly terror sympathizers, in so much as they attended those al Qaeda training camps.
The facts seem to say that you're a voice of reason among all those bleeding hearts.
Saturday, 11 October 2008 at 04:14:00 CEST
jmk:
First of all; thanks for your comment!
I was surprised over HAX statement from the beginning. He is normally a very smart guy with conservative/libertarian values. What surprised me was the comment war that happened with leftists coming from all over.
I took a peek at it just now and it seems that reasonable people now are in majority. It will be interresting to se how it develops.
Saturday, 11 October 2008 at 09:01:00 CEST
It's very difficult to dialogue with many of the Liberals here in the U.S. Pela, as they deliberately seem to seek to villify those they disagree with, rather than to dialogue at all.
I'd hope it's better elsewhere. The few Scandanavians I've met have been very reasonable people.
The American Left (as exemplified by the likes of Michael "Sicko" Moore and Al Franken) are extremely misguided people, who often appear to be more malevolent than merely wrong-headed.
Reasonable people can certainly disagree with America's foray into Iraq, but to deny that radical Islam is at war with what it sees as "the decadent West," is quite another thing.
Typically, the American Left sees that as "Muslim-bashing."
<
<
Right now, I'm looking at the global credit crisis and for anyone interested, it started right here in the U.S. and it ISN'T "a failure of Capitalism" as some have suggested, as America hasn't had a "free market" since 1912...we've had a government-regulated market-based economy since that time and have alternated beween Keynesian (a more government regulated system) and Supply Side (more market-based system) since that time.
What has caused the current debacle is "credit-socialism" or "lending affirmative action" BY the government! BOTH American Democrats and Republicans supported more loans being made available to more low-income, high-risk borrowers, so they re-tooled a 1979 law called "The Community Reinvestment Act" to force private banks to lend more money to more high-risk borrowers.
THAT resulted in the "subprime" mortgage mess - "subprime" refers to subprime or UNCREDITWORTHY borrowers not the interest rates, which are ultimately higher rates.
The part that the two American GSEs (Government Sponsored Enterprises) Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac played in all this was (1) backing, then buying and ultimately fraudulently packaging them for sale to financial markets worldwide as "U.S. Government-backed mortgage instruments."
Of course, the folks at Fannie and Freddie KNEW that the U.S. government was unable to back up or guarantee the $1 TRILLION in bad/high-risk loans before they packaged and sold them - that's the fraud.
When savvy investors saw all those financial institutions holding all that "bad debt" they swooped in to short-sell (in effect bet that the stock prices of those entities would fall) and as the stock prices tanked for those companies, most of them couldn't get the short-term credit they need to exist.
What we have is a FAILURE of government OVER-regulation and TOXIC regulation, and NOT a failure of any market-based initiatives nor the private sector.
Ironically enough, at least here, the media is misreporting this as "a failure of the market" and, in effect, supporting MORE Keynesianism for a problem rooted in Keynesian policies!
Saturday, 11 October 2008 at 20:08:00 CEST
Post a Comment
<< Home