Quote:
|
Originally Posted by GAsux
But does not that then rationalize the argument to detain prisoners at Gitmo? There very well may be no charges against them either, and perhaps they are guilty of nothing more than association as well, but by that logic it seems to me to justify detention of them as well. In fact, the folks at Gitmo are probably MORE connected to terrorist attacks and Al Qaeda than bin Laden's family.
|
IT WASN'T EVEN A WEEK AFTER 9/11!!!!!!! YES, detaining potential terrorists or terrorist-links is a GOOD thing, but detaining them with no trial for an undetermined amount of time at Gitmo seems to me like a BAD thing, but I digress....
They should've waited like everyone else, and more importantly, they should've been investigated
again in light of their relative attacking our country. If we can detain people with Arabic names, or probe people who opposed the war in Iraq, then we can certainly inconvenience the fucking Bin Laden family for a few extra days. Put them up in a nice hotel, treat them like the royalty they certainly think they are. Do whatever, but keep them, probe them, and MAKE SURE.
Quote:
|
And again, it alludes to a veiled reference that Bush was somehow complicit in the 9/11 attacks.
|
I disagree. I think the point he was making was that the Bush family would/will kowtow to the Saudis, and that they would kowtow so much as to let people with possible terrorist attachments fly out like beloved diplomats. I don't think Moore ever argues for Bush complicity with 9/11, although you could certainly argue that his ambiguity dances on the line at times throughout the film....
Threaded Mode