Evildoers. Remember how we weren't supposed to worry about the rights of detainees at Gitmo because, after all, they were all Very Bad Men? Via Jim Henley, an ABC report tells us:
According to Time, activities leading toward release of the 140 prisoners have accelerated since the Supreme Court agreed to hear the case. It said U.S. officials had concluded some detainees were kidnapped for reward money offered for al Qaeda and Taliban fighters. [...]
Slated for release were "the easiest 20 percent" of detainees, a military official told the magazine. It did not identify its source, who said the military was waiting for "a politically propitious time to release them."
Yes, I suppose now that the Supreme Court might take a peek, we might want to think about releasing the one-fifth of Gitmo prisoners who we can easily tell are innocent. As soon as it's politically propitious, of course. How's December of '04 for you guys? [Hit & Run]
This raises an interesting question. Suppose a terrorist takes hostages, and the hostages are then captured by another party. If that other party continues holding the hostages instead of letting them go, does that make the other party a terrorist as well?
11:58:19 AM 
|
