Two men released from the US “war on terror” prison at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba have appeared in a video posted on a jihadist website, the SITE monitoring service reported.
One of the two former inmates, a Saudi man identified as Abu Sufyan al-Azdi al-Shahri, or prisoner number 372, has been elevated to the senior ranks of Al-Qaeda in Yemen, a US counter-terrorism official told AFP.
Three other men appear in the video, including Abu al-Hareth Muhammad al-Oufi, identified as an Al-Qaeda field commander. SITE later said he was prisoner No. 333.
A Pentagon spokesman, Commander Jeffrey Gordon, on Saturday declined to confirm the SITE information.
“We remain concerned about ex-Guantanamo detainees who have re-affiliated with terrorist organizations after their departure,” said Gordon.
[...]
“By Allah, imprisonment only increased our persistence in our principles for which we went out, did jihad for, and were imprisoned for,” al-Shihri was quoted as saying.
[...]
The latest case highlights the risk the new US administration faces as it moves to empty Guantanamo of its remaining 245 prisoners and close the controversial detention camp within a year.
Who was it that elevated them in rank? Cheney?
>let them go. Regardless of whether they’re going to go back to being terrorists. It’s not like terrorist organizations have trouble recruiting, it’s a zero impact.
BY that logic, they should never be captured.
>our spies can keep tabs on them.
Yes our vaunted spy network in the Middle East.
Uncle Dave _you_ don’t get it. The Jihad will end when the entire world bows down to Mecca 3/4 times a day.
That will be when the last infidel dies.
It may not end then because they don’t all agree.
P.S. For the brain dead who never bother to read what these people say about themselves they state that they rejoined the Jihad after doing time. That means they were _already_ in the Jihad when captured.
Send them to California.
#59 Fusion said: “My first reaction was they were cheering for the Cardinals in the Super Bowl.”
Wow, they really do hate America.
#64, QB,
Well, they could have been shouting
ARRRGGOOOEESSS
Random thought.
New tracking devices/microscopic nanotechnology used to follow and listen on some of these prisoners to get an inside scoop?
Hmm…am I crazy?
#66, Matty
Hmm…am I crazy?
That would depend upon how much you act like Cow-Paddy.
BUT, if it could go in, it could also be taken out. Then, it would need a long life battery. It wouldn’t work well inside buildings unless a receiver was pretty close. Then add in that it could be detected by any detection equipment.
Good idea, but not something I am aware would work. Yet.
#63: “Uncle Dave _you_ don’t get it. The Jihad will end when the entire world bows down to Mecca 3/4 times a day.”
As I’ve said before, I hate having to explain the obvious…
That is exactly the point I was making. Since the whole world will never be Muslim, the war will never end. Hence, the prisoners will never be released.
#62
On the battlefield prisoners are taken. Doesn’t mean they have to be held indefinitely in limbo.
If we don’t have one why the hell not!? CIA get’s an estimated 1 trillion plus dollars a year.
Yeah I know 1 trillion is an exaggeration. The CIA’s budget is top secret. Basicly a liscense to steal.
haha,Paddy-O
BRUTALLY OWNED
can’t provide evidence….ever…
If his promotion came with a pay increase and an expense account he is doing better than most of us.
#72, Dallas,
ha ha ha, Very good point. I wonder if he gets to fly First Class or has to settle for sitting with the peons.
A lot of them are guilty of fighting while not wearing a uniform. That is a war crime punishable by death. The purpose of a uniform is to distinguish lawful combatants from civilians. Fighting without a recognizable uniform undermines this and hence that is why combatants are required uniforms.
They could have been regular POWs if they would have thought to have T-shirts made up that said Al-Queda and their name. Then again, it would make terrorist acts more difficult, but that is why that rule is part of the laws of war.
Even if we treat them as POWs, then we need to hold them for the duration of the war on terrorism. After the war we can try them for war crimes or let them go.
Colonel Hogan was not constantly demanding a lawyer from Colonel Klink. They recognized that they were there until the end of the war or they escaped.
#74, Benji,
A lot of them are guilty of fighting while not wearing a uniform. That is a war crime punishable by death.
Perhaps you could cite something agreeing that not wearing a “uniform” is a war crime.
Colonel Hogan was not constantly demanding a lawyer from Colonel Klink. They recognized that they were there until the end of the war or they escaped.
OK, now I understand. You get your legal advice from a 1960′s TV comedy show.
I can’t believe we held POWs without trial when at war in Vietnam and Germany. They should have been brought back for trial.
#76, Lyin’ Mike,
I can’t believe we held POWs without trial when at war in Vietnam and Germany. They should have been brought back for trial.
And I can’t believe you are so ignorantly stupid.
POWs during WWI & II were held as POWs. They were not tortured. They were allowed to write and receive letters. They were not kept in solitary confinement. They were not forced to be blind folded and transported thousands of miles while wearing a diaper.
Cow-Paddy,
Where are you? Why can’t you answer the question? Where did Pelosi say she wanted Guantanamo detainees released into the US?
#75
quoted
“# that of having a fixed distinctive sign recognizable at a distance (there are limited exceptions to this among countries who observe the 1977 Protocol I);”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Third_Geneva_Convention#Part_I:_General_provisions
#79, Benji,
So part were you referring to?
Did you read the PART III that reads
Which is all fine and dandy. But my questions to you was
Where is not wearing a uniform a war crime?