the one that represented many in gitmo stated that if he captured bin laden that he would NOT torture him and that if it caused a happening that there were scores of american deaths (as happened on 9/11) that he would be ok with that, as long as bin laden was given his rights to trial
and he is a lt. colonel in the air force.the overwhelming facts have been put out there that 95% of the terrorist leaders and perpetrators of terrorism against us are gitmo alumni and the opposing debate still says that everthing that gitmo represents is wrong and that all should be released and gitmo closed, permenantly.
....and some people wonder how we have gotten to the point that we are hogtied when it comes to terrorist and terrorism against America....
there was a vote before the debate and it was almost equal with for, against, and undecided...afterwards, another vote was taken and the undecided votes all leaned toward criminals instead of enemy combatants. i'm not sure why i was surprised at the outcome, since it is bloomberg...lambasting all that is republican (the 2 for enemy combatant status were republican and the 2 for criminal status were democrats).
*another thing that was said, that kind of haunts me - one that was pro enemy combatat was a former head of the cia, made it as his final statement...(paraphrased) "for far too many Americans, the drive to the office on sept. 12, '01...was no different than the drive to the office on sept. 10, '01, and that is the most dangerous way of thinking we could have." in other words, too many think that it isn't possibly going to happen, again.
ok, i gotta stop now, my pressure is climbin a lil too high
