FREE TAPATALK APP

Roadtoad · 19th December 2008, 11:30 AM

Quote:

Lindh, 27, was offered the 20-year term in return for his guilty plea in July 2002 to charges of providing services to the Taliban and carrying illegal explosives. He has denounced the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks by Osama bin Laden’s al-Qaeda terrorist group and has cooperated with the government in terrorism investigations.

“John has been incarcerated now for seven years,” his parents said in a statement today. “We hope that President Bush and First Lady Laura Bush will recognize that justice will be served by commuting John’s prison sentence, and allowing him to come home to his family.”

People like Lindh and his family need to be slapped across the chops with tire irons, only I can't see wasting a perfectly good tool. Lindh was not simply some mixed up kid; he chose to fight against this nation. He's a traitor, whose actions resulted in the death of people who were sworn to defend this nation. He's nothing more than a fungus, and he damned well ought to serve out his sentence.

I don't often agree with Michelle Malkin, however, her article on this hits home, especially considering the number of folks on this board who have kids in harm's way at this time of the year...

Quote:

The farther we move from the September 11 attacks, the cloudier our collective memory of Lindh's case becomes. Sympathetic journalists have rewritten the history, embracing him as a naive young hippie-dippie from Marin County, Calif., who was just caught in the "wrong place at the wrong time."

Others, like Esquire magazine writer Tom Junod, have proclaimed him "innocent" and lamented his life behind bars in a federal medium-security facility. Junod criticized the government for forbidding Lindh to speak Arabic -- human rights atrocity! Meanwhile, he enjoys the privilege of cooking meals for himself and fellow inmates, working in the library, and praying to Mecca. Junod insisted that Lindh deserves more "credit for his sense of purpose or his vast reserves of will" and more "credit for what it took to get to Afghanistan, much less what it took for him to get back to America."

In Afghanistan, I remind you, Jihad Johnny took up arms with the terrorists. His purpose was to kill Americans, and his "reserves of will" accomplished the goal. He told the feds he trained with al-Qaida before the September 11 attacks and fought alongside them after Osama bin Laden's henchmen murdered 3,000 of Lindh's fellow citizens on American soil. He wrote a letter to his mother expressing support for the U.S.S. Cole bombing that took 17 sailors' lives, and despite an emphatic denial by Lindh's father that Jihad Johnny took up arms against his country, he recounted how his rifle malfunctioned on the front lines in Takar.

Wow. Just a "confused kid," huh? Seriously. Do the people calling for a commutation of Lindh's sentence live on the same plane as the rest of us?

More from Malkin, about Mike Spann:

Quote:

Mike Spann's family visited the fortress after his murder. They talked to Afghan doctors who will never forget his bravery. "They said they thought Mike might run and retreat, but he held his position and fought using his AK rifle until out of ammo, and then drew and began firing his pistol," Spann's father said. "While watching Mike fight they were able to jump up and run to safety.

"They said the only reason that they and several others were able to live was because Mike stood his position and fought off the prisoners while enabling them the time to run to safety. The doctors stated that as they fled toward a safe haven they saw Mike run out of ammo and then witnessed him fighting hand to hand until he was overcome by the numerous al-Qaida and Taliban prisoners."

American hero Mike Spann will not get to cook dinner for his widow, Shannon, and their three young children. Mike Spann cannot curl up with a good book or go to church with his family. Pray for Mike Spann, show his family the compassion and gratitude they deserve -- and may American traitor John Walker Lindh rot in hell.

For once, I wish there WERE a hell, so Lindh could rot there.

Malkin's column is here.

billw · 19th December 2008, 11:39 AM

Originally Posted by Roadtoad

He's a traitor, whose actions resulted in the death of people who were sworn to defend this nation.

Funny, that's how I feel about George W. Bush.

And Michelle Malkin is, euphemistically speaking, "a device used to introduce a stream of water into the body for medical or hygienic reasons."

That being said, however, I'm not gonna lose any sleep if Lindh doesn't get pardoned.

Drudgewire · 19th December 2008, 11:41 AM

Quote:

“John has been incarcerated now for seven years,” his parents said in a statement today. “We hope that President Bush and First Lady Laura Bush will recognize that justice will be served by commuting John’s prison sentence, and allowing him to come home to his family.”

Yeah, good luck with that.

Darth Rotor · 19th December 2008, 11:43 AM

Originally Posted by Roadtoad

For once, I wish there WERE a hell, so Lindh could rot there.

Pardon? No.

He willfully took up arms against his own country in support of illegal organizations. He's as worthy of a pardon as any merc in Angola, 1975.

Compare this to the draft dogers, honorable and otherwise: they didn't take up arms against much of anyone. Carter's move made some sense. Pardon to Lindh? No. None.

It's also inconsistent with where Bush is coming from.

DR

tomwaits · 19th December 2008, 11:52 AM

Originally Posted by billw

Funny, that's how I feel about George W. Bush.

Then perhaps you don't know what constitutes treason in the US?

Cainkane1 · 19th December 2008, 11:56 AM

Nope he needs to stay where he is. It will do that traitor a world of good to have to stay in prison till he's middleaged.

Roadtoad · 19th December 2008, 11:56 AM

Originally Posted by billw

Funny, that's how I feel about George W. Bush.

And Michelle Malkin is, euphemistically speaking, "a device used to introduce a stream of water into the body for medical or hygienic reasons."

That being said, however, I'm not gonna lose any sleep if Lindh doesn't get pardoned.

Regardless of how any of us feels about Bush or Malkin, Lindh is scum. A pardon? Bull(feces).

ravdin · 19th December 2008, 12:02 PM

IMHO, Lindh already received a great deal of clemency with his 20 year sentence. He joined a violent religious sect and took up arms against the United States. He can rot for all I care.

CFLarsen · 19th December 2008, 12:06 PM

What are the Iraqis who helped the US overthrow Saddam? Also traitors.

The only thing that makes them not traitors is that their side won.

Benedict Arnold, anyone?

ravdin · 19th December 2008, 12:18 PM

Originally Posted by CFLarsen

What are the Iraqis who helped the US overthrow Saddam? Also traitors.

The only thing that makes them not traitors is that their side won.

Benedict Arnold, anyone?

Interesting point, but in this case it doesn't add up. Putting nationalism aside, the cause for which Lindh decided to take up arms was a very bad one. It's for this reason that I don't have any pity for him.

Darth Rotor · 19th December 2008, 12:20 PM

Originally Posted by CFLarsen

What are the Iraqis who helped the US overthrow Saddam? Also traitors.

Larsen, have they been taken to court and convicted of treason?

Quote:

The only thing that makes them not traitors is that their side won.

The only difference is no one has bothered with trials over this. When the US leaves, that will likely change.

Quote:

Benedict Arnold, anyone?

Non sequitur, anyone?

If you really want to use an Iraq analogy, you might want to look at the last five years of interfactional reprisals and violence to see who is doing what about traitors. The old Ba'athists have taken their pound of flesh from quite a few parties, as have some of the Shia factions.

No courts, Larsen, just knives, guns, RPGs and bombs.

Way to use a horses

analogy.

DR

Roadtoad · 19th December 2008, 12:24 PM

Originally Posted by CFLarsen

What are the Iraqis who helped the US overthrow Saddam? Also traitors.

The only thing that makes them not traitors is that their side won.

Benedict Arnold, anyone?

I'd beg to differ, Claus. For one thing, Lindh went to Afghanistan to fight.

Further, there's a critical difference in Iraq that does not exist in Afghanistan: the Taliban had provided material support for Al Qaeda in the run-up to 9/11. That's pretty much an established fact. The "facts" we've been given about Iraq have been more or less muddled by CIA incompetence and the Bush Administration's deceptions. There may have been support for Al Qaeda, but we'll never get a complete view on that given the blunders and outright lies we've been told.

There HAD been support on the part of Saddam Hussein for terrorism, (such as with Abu Nidal), and it's been documented. But, that's another matter, perhaps for another thread.

Iraq was an acknowledged mess long before our actions, though there was still control over the country from the Tikriti hoodlums running it. It's debateable whether the Iraqis who fought on our side were "traitors," given they were largely Shi'ite, and Hussein and his thugs were Sunni. (Again, long debate will probably ensue, and it's probably better elsewhere.)

Lindh's family has been making excuses from day one. I don't accept it. This man chose to try and kill his fellow Americans, fighting against us, then deciding to withhold information that might have saved the life of Mike Spann. That's well beyond the realm of being a Benedict Arnold.

billw · 19th December 2008, 12:30 PM

Originally Posted by tomwaits

Then perhaps you don't know what constitutes treason in the US?

I know exactly what constitutes treason in the US. The quote that I was responding to referred to "traitor" not "treason." While it may be a fine distinction, the word "traitor" has meaning outside of the legal sphere, in addition to the narrower legal definition of one who commits treason.

If you actually care to know my reasons for feeling that way, start here:

The Prosecution of George W. Bush for Murder by Vincent Bugliosi Published by Vanguard Press; May 2008;978-159315-481-3

http://www.prosecutionofbush.com

Drudgewire · 19th December 2008, 12:32 PM

Bugliosi lost his mind the second OJ was found not guilty the first time.

CFLarsen · 19th December 2008, 12:33 PM

There is an absolute way to determine if someone is a traitor or not?

ravdin · 19th December 2008, 12:38 PM

Originally Posted by CFLarsen

There is an absolute way to determine if someone is a traitor or not?

Do you have a point? If so, declare.

tomwaits · 19th December 2008, 12:38 PM

Originally Posted by billw

I know exactly what constitutes treason in the US. The quote that I was responding to referred to "traitor" not "treason." While it may be a fine distinction, the word "traitor" has meaning outside of the legal sphere, in addition to the narrower legal definition of one who commits treason.

So what is your definition of "traitor"? I would say the legal definition is a pretty good one. I would definitely not say that someone who may have done his country wrong out of incompetence is a traitor.

Quote:

If you actually care to know my reasons for feeling that way, start here:

The Prosecution of George W. Bush for Murder by Vincent Bugliosi Published by Vanguard Press; May 2008;978-159315-481-3

http://www.prosecutionofbush.com

There was already a thread about that very book, and most people seemed to think that Bugliosi had nothing to stand on. Regardless, this book, as far as I know, was about murder and its legal definition, which does not equal treason.

tomwaits · 19th December 2008, 12:40 PM

Originally Posted by CFLarsen

There is an absolute way to determine if someone is a traitor or not?

There is an objective, legal one. Is that what you meant?

LibraryLady · 19th December 2008, 12:41 PM

Actually, Bugliosi wrote a fairly cogent book on the first Simpson trial, where he argued that the verdict was caused by the prosecution not doing its job properly.

Roadtoad · 19th December 2008, 12:47 PM

Originally Posted by LibraryLady

Actually, Bugliosi wrote a fairly cogent book on the first Simpson trial, where he argued that the verdict was caused by the prosecution not doing its job properly.

It's even worse. I've seen the documentation of the DNA evidence at the same lab where they tested it. Had Clark and Darden done their job, OJ wouldn't have been in Vegas in the first place.

Odd how Barry Scheck is taking evidence which was treated even WORSE than that used against OJ and getting people off Death Row.

Back on topic: Sorry. Even if Bugliosi were to represent Lindh, I think he'd still be in prison. And I don't think he should be released until his full sentence is served.

tomwaits · 19th December 2008, 12:48 PM

Originally Posted by LibraryLady

Actually, Bugliosi wrote a fairly cogent book on the first Simpson trial, where he argued that the verdict was caused by the prosecution not doing its job properly.

I have not read Bugliosi's books, but I have seen him several times on C-SPAN. His arguments about the OJ trial were good, and he wrote a very lengthy refutation of all the JFK assassination theories. But, his book about trying Bush for murder didn't seem very rational.

PhantomWolf · 19th December 2008, 12:52 PM

Well if Bush sticks to his guns on what he's said before, he won't get it. Bush has stated previously that only those that have served their time will be eligable for pardons.

CFLarsen · 19th December 2008, 01:05 PM

History is indeed written by the victors.

Roadtoad · 19th December 2008, 01:08 PM

But, Claus, that doesn't make what Lindh did right.

billw · 19th December 2008, 01:21 PM

Originally Posted by tomwaits

So what is your definition of "traitor"? I would say the legal definition is a pretty good one. I would definitely not say that someone who may have done his country wrong out of incompetence is a traitor.

I'll go with Merriam-Webster definition #1: "One who betrays another's trust or is false to an obligation or duty"

I guess our difference of opinion hinges on whether W did the bad things he did deliberately, or out of simple incompetence. Frankly, I don't care. He should have to suffer consequences more onerous than having a Florsheim Wingtip flung at his head.

Originally Posted by tomwaits

There was already a thread about that very book, and most people seemed to think that Bugliosi had nothing to stand on. Regardless, this book, as far as I know, was about murder and its legal definition, which does not equal treason.

Thanks for the pointer; hadn't seen that thread. Of course my first snarky impulse is to ask what law school "most people" went to

I remember quite well for months and months and months before the war, W, and others in his administration talking about the Iraqi WMD's. It was never presented as "probable" or "hypothetical." Oh no. We definitely, positively knew 100% for certain with no doubts whatsoever that Saddam had WMD's. Not only that, but we knew exactly what they were, and where they were. Perhaps an easy enough conclusion to come to when you deliberately ignore all evidence that doesn't fit your preconceived notions and biases, and only consider (or just make up out of whole cloth) evidence that supports you. But don't try and tell me that this was a reasonable and proper exercise of due diligence. And the WMD's are just one issue out of many others.

There is no question in my mind that not only did W betray the trust of others, he was also false to his duties. By definition, a traitor. Bugliosi, as a lawyer, is focussing on the legal issues re murder - but I don't find it a huge stretch to consider murder as a type of betrayal.

LibraryLady · 19th December 2008, 01:27 PM

I've read two of his books, the one on Manson and the one on the Simpson trial, and was impressed both times. I hope he isn't losing touch with reality.

ravdin · 19th December 2008, 01:28 PM

Originally Posted by CFLarsen

History is indeed written by the victors.

Since I rather enjoy not living under Sharia law, I'd say victory for our side is a good thing. I'd also point out that Lindh's advocates are free to spread any version of events they see fit (as they should be), and these civilized values are not shared by Lindh's comrades in arms.

WildCat · 19th December 2008, 01:48 PM

Heh, he's staying in a federal prison in Terre Haute, IN right next to the one former IL Gov. George Ryan is staying. Sen. Dick Durbin is trying to get Ryan pardoned (as is Blago

).

Neither one should be pardoned IMHO.

I'll never understand how someone growing up in the US can decide to join a repressive, brutal, totalitarian regime such as the Taliban.

RoboTimbo · 19th December 2008, 01:58 PM

Originally Posted by CFLarsen

History is indeed written by the victors.

He's a hero to you because he took up arms against his own country? Just coincidentally that would be the US. Mustn't be a hater, Claus.

CFLarsen · 19th December 2008, 02:10 PM

I haven't said anything about being right.

billw · 19th December 2008, 04:48 PM

Originally Posted by LibraryLady

I've read two of his books, the one on Manson and the one on the Simpson trial, and was impressed both times. I hope he isn't losing touch with reality.

I went to hear him speak about The Prosecution of George W. Bush for Murder at an ACLU meeting at the Neighborhood Church in Pasadena last month, and it seemed to me like his feet were pretty firmly on the ground. Maybe I'm wrong to do so, but I believe that he is sincere when he says that he is not ideologically motivated.

During the Q&A session that followed his talk, there were several questions (having nothing to do with the book) from 911 truthers and Illuminati fanciers. He basically told them not to waste his time with nonsense.

He also mentioned that he shopped the manuscript to over 20 publishers before finding one willing to go with it

hgc · 19th December 2008, 05:01 PM

There is no evidence that Lindh willingly took up arms against The United States. When he joined the Talaban, they were not at war with the US. After 9/11 he was already in their army. Did he have the ability to leave? I am disappointed that he plead guilty, and there was no trial so that the reality of the Lindh case could have received an airing in open court.

His 20 year sentence is a travesty of paranoia.

Roadtoad · 19th December 2008, 06:09 PM

The Taliban were irregulars. Further, he sent letters home claiming support for the Taliban's role in 9/11, IIRC.

Perhaps he should have plead innocent. It would have opened the door for a death sentence.

No, I don't see it as a victory for the paranoid. I see it as genuinely merciful, because there were those Americans who fought on the side of Germany in WWII. No word on their fates.

And before you ask: Evidence.

mikeyx · 19th December 2008, 06:12 PM

Originally Posted by billw

Funny, that's how I feel about George W. Bush.

That being said, however, I'm not gonna lose any sleep if Lindh doesn't get pardoned.

You and me both, he chose his fate. Suck it up junior.....

RecoveringYuppy · 19th December 2008, 06:15 PM

Originally Posted by Roadtoad

Perhaps he should have plead innocent. It would have opened the door for a death sentence.

Death sentence? For what charges? And every source I can find says he pled not guilty to all the charges against him.

Roadtoad · 19th December 2008, 06:24 PM

Originally Posted by RecoveringYuppy

Death sentence? For what charges? And every source I can find says he pled not guilty to all the charges against him.

That was his initial plea. It helps to do a little research. Wikipedia can be your friend.

RecoveringYuppy · 19th December 2008, 06:32 PM

I read the wikipedia article. Don't see any claim of death penalty charges and yes, the plea I cited, was his initial one.

Roadtoad · 19th December 2008, 07:17 PM

The penalty for high treason in the United States is Death.

That simple.

RecoveringYuppy · 19th December 2008, 07:21 PM

When was he charged with treason?

Roadtoad · 19th December 2008, 07:32 PM

The charge wasn't specified, admittedly, but it was on the table at one point, IIRC.

Even so, he ought to be happy he got off with 20 years. Considering had it gone to trial, it could have been a hell of a lot worse.

19th December 2008, 11:41 AM	#3
Drudgewire Critical Doofus Join Date: Feb 2006 Posts: 9,434	Quote: “John has been incarcerated now for seven years,” his parents said in a statement today. “We hope that President Bush and First Lady Laura Bush will recognize that justice will be served by commuting John’s prison sentence, and allowing him to come home to his family.” Yeah, good luck with that.
	__________________ "You post a lie, it is proven 100% false, you move the goalposts and post yet another lie and it continues on around till we're back to the original lie as if it will somehow become true if it's re-iterated again. The same misquotes over and over again. The same hindsight bias, appeals to authority, etc." -lapman describing every twoofer on the internet

19th December 2008, 11:43 AM	#4
Darth Rotor Salted Sith Cynic Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: Rat cheer Posts: 34,371	Originally Posted by Roadtoad For once, I wish there WERE a hell, so Lindh could rot there. Pardon? No. He willfully took up arms against his own country in support of illegal organizations. He's as worthy of a pardon as any merc in Angola, 1975. Compare this to the draft dogers, honorable and otherwise: they didn't take up arms against much of anyone. Carter's move made some sense. Pardon to Lindh? No. None. It's also inconsistent with where Bush is coming from. DR
	__________________ Helicopters don't so much fly as beat the air into submission. "Jesus wept, but did He laugh?"--F.H. Buckley____"There is one thing that was too great for God to show us when He walked upon our earth ... His mirth." --Chesterton__"If the barbarian in us is excised, so is our humanity."--D'rok__ "I only use my gun whenever kindness fails."-- Robert Earl Keen__"Sturgeon spares none.". -- The Marquis Last edited by Darth Rotor; 19th December 2008 at 11:45 AM.

19th December 2008, 11:56 AM	#6
Cainkane1 Philosopher Join Date: Jul 2005 Location: The great American southeast Posts: 7,237	Nope he needs to stay where he is. It will do that traitor a world of good to have to stay in prison till he's middleaged.
	__________________ If at first you don't succeed try try again. Then if you fail to succeed to Hell with that. Try something else.

19th December 2008, 12:06 PM	#9
CFLarsen Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Aug 2001 Posts: 42,804	What are the Iraqis who helped the US overthrow Saddam? Also traitors. The only thing that makes them not traitors is that their side won. Benedict Arnold, anyone?
	__________________ SkepticReport.com

19th December 2008, 12:20 PM	#11
Darth Rotor Salted Sith Cynic Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: Rat cheer Posts: 34,371	Originally Posted by CFLarsen What are the Iraqis who helped the US overthrow Saddam? Also traitors. Larsen, have they been taken to court and convicted of treason? Quote: The only thing that makes them not traitors is that their side won. The only difference is no one has bothered with trials over this. When the US leaves, that will likely change. Quote: Benedict Arnold, anyone? Non sequitur, anyone? If you really want to use an Iraq analogy, you might want to look at the last five years of interfactional reprisals and violence to see who is doing what about traitors. The old Ba'athists have taken their pound of flesh from quite a few parties, as have some of the Shia factions. No courts, Larsen, just knives, guns, RPGs and bombs. Way to use a horses analogy. DR
	__________________ Helicopters don't so much fly as beat the air into submission. "Jesus wept, but did He laugh?"--F.H. Buckley____"There is one thing that was too great for God to show us when He walked upon our earth ... His mirth." --Chesterton__"If the barbarian in us is excised, so is our humanity."--D'rok__ "I only use my gun whenever kindness fails."-- Robert Earl Keen__"Sturgeon spares none.". -- The Marquis Last edited by Darth Rotor; 19th December 2008 at 12:22 PM.

19th December 2008, 11:30 AM	#1
Roadtoad Bufo Caminus Inedibilis Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: Gone. Posts: 15,739	John Walker Lindh: Requesting a Pardon The story is here... Quote: Lindh, 27, was offered the 20-year term in return for his guilty plea in July 2002 to charges of providing services to the Taliban and carrying illegal explosives. He has denounced the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks by Osama bin Laden’s al-Qaeda terrorist group and has cooperated with the government in terrorism investigations. “John has been incarcerated now for seven years,” his parents said in a statement today. “We hope that President Bush and First Lady Laura Bush will recognize that justice will be served by commuting John’s prison sentence, and allowing him to come home to his family.” People like Lindh and his family need to be slapped across the chops with tire irons, only I can't see wasting a perfectly good tool. Lindh was not simply some mixed up kid; he chose to fight against this nation. He's a traitor, whose actions resulted in the death of people who were sworn to defend this nation. He's nothing more than a fungus, and he damned well ought to serve out his sentence. I don't often agree with Michelle Malkin, however, her article on this hits home, especially considering the number of folks on this board who have kids in harm's way at this time of the year... Quote: The farther we move from the September 11 attacks, the cloudier our collective memory of Lindh's case becomes. Sympathetic journalists have rewritten the history, embracing him as a naive young hippie-dippie from Marin County, Calif., who was just caught in the "wrong place at the wrong time." Others, like Esquire magazine writer Tom Junod, have proclaimed him "innocent" and lamented his life behind bars in a federal medium-security facility. Junod criticized the government for forbidding Lindh to speak Arabic -- human rights atrocity! Meanwhile, he enjoys the privilege of cooking meals for himself and fellow inmates, working in the library, and praying to Mecca. Junod insisted that Lindh deserves more "credit for his sense of purpose or his vast reserves of will" and more "credit for what it took to get to Afghanistan, much less what it took for him to get back to America." In Afghanistan, I remind you, Jihad Johnny took up arms with the terrorists. His purpose was to kill Americans, and his "reserves of will" accomplished the goal. He told the feds he trained with al-Qaida before the September 11 attacks and fought alongside them after Osama bin Laden's henchmen murdered 3,000 of Lindh's fellow citizens on American soil. He wrote a letter to his mother expressing support for the U.S.S. Cole bombing that took 17 sailors' lives, and despite an emphatic denial by Lindh's father that Jihad Johnny took up arms against his country, he recounted how his rifle malfunctioned on the front lines in Takar. Wow. Just a "confused kid," huh? Seriously. Do the people calling for a commutation of Lindh's sentence live on the same plane as the rest of us? More from Malkin, about Mike Spann: Quote: Mike Spann's family visited the fortress after his murder. They talked to Afghan doctors who will never forget his bravery. "They said they thought Mike might run and retreat, but he held his position and fought using his AK rifle until out of ammo, and then drew and began firing his pistol," Spann's father said. "While watching Mike fight they were able to jump up and run to safety. "They said the only reason that they and several others were able to live was because Mike stood his position and fought off the prisoners while enabling them the time to run to safety. The doctors stated that as they fled toward a safe haven they saw Mike run out of ammo and then witnessed him fighting hand to hand until he was overcome by the numerous al-Qaida and Taliban prisoners." American hero Mike Spann will not get to cook dinner for his widow, Shannon, and their three young children. Mike Spann cannot curl up with a good book or go to church with his family. Pray for Mike Spann, show his family the compassion and gratitude they deserve -- and may American traitor John Walker Lindh rot in hell. For once, I wish there WERE a hell, so Lindh could rot there. Malkin's column is here.

19th December 2008, 11:39 AM	#2
billw Critical Thinker Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: Far North Glendale Posts: 471	Originally Posted by Roadtoad He's a traitor, whose actions resulted in the death of people who were sworn to defend this nation. Funny, that's how I feel about George W. Bush. And Michelle Malkin is, euphemistically speaking, "a device used to introduce a stream of water into the body for medical or hygienic reasons." That being said, however, I'm not gonna lose any sleep if Lindh doesn't get pardoned.

19th December 2008, 11:52 AM	#5
tomwaits Master Poster Join Date: Nov 2007 Location: Chicago, IL, USA Posts: 2,289	Originally Posted by billw Funny, that's how I feel about George W. Bush. Then perhaps you don't know what constitutes treason in the US?

19th December 2008, 12:02 PM	#8
ravdin Illuminator Join Date: Oct 2005 Location: San Francisco, CA Posts: 3,610	IMHO, Lindh already received a great deal of clemency with his 20 year sentence. He joined a violent religious sect and took up arms against the United States. He can rot for all I care.

19th December 2008, 12:18 PM	#10
ravdin Illuminator Join Date: Oct 2005 Location: San Francisco, CA Posts: 3,610	Originally Posted by CFLarsen What are the Iraqis who helped the US overthrow Saddam? Also traitors. The only thing that makes them not traitors is that their side won. Benedict Arnold, anyone? Interesting point, but in this case it doesn't add up. Putting nationalism aside, the cause for which Lindh decided to take up arms was a very bad one. It's for this reason that I don't have any pity for him.

19th December 2008, 12:24 PM	#12
Roadtoad Bufo Caminus Inedibilis Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: Gone. Posts: 15,739	Originally Posted by CFLarsen What are the Iraqis who helped the US overthrow Saddam? Also traitors. The only thing that makes them not traitors is that their side won. Benedict Arnold, anyone? I'd beg to differ, Claus. For one thing, Lindh went to Afghanistan to fight. Further, there's a critical difference in Iraq that does not exist in Afghanistan: the Taliban had provided material support for Al Qaeda in the run-up to 9/11. That's pretty much an established fact. The "facts" we've been given about Iraq have been more or less muddled by CIA incompetence and the Bush Administration's deceptions. There may have been support for Al Qaeda, but we'll never get a complete view on that given the blunders and outright lies we've been told. There HAD been support on the part of Saddam Hussein for terrorism, (such as with Abu Nidal), and it's been documented. But, that's another matter, perhaps for another thread. Iraq was an acknowledged mess long before our actions, though there was still control over the country from the Tikriti hoodlums running it. It's debateable whether the Iraqis who fought on our side were "traitors," given they were largely Shi'ite, and Hussein and his thugs were Sunni. (Again, long debate will probably ensue, and it's probably better elsewhere.) Lindh's family has been making excuses from day one. I don't accept it. This man chose to try and kill his fellow Americans, fighting against us, then deciding to withhold information that might have saved the life of Mike Spann. That's well beyond the realm of being a Benedict Arnold.

19th December 2008, 12:30 PM	#13
billw Critical Thinker Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: Far North Glendale Posts: 471	Originally Posted by tomwaits Then perhaps you don't know what constitutes treason in the US? I know exactly what constitutes treason in the US. The quote that I was responding to referred to "traitor" not "treason." While it may be a fine distinction, the word "traitor" has meaning outside of the legal sphere, in addition to the narrower legal definition of one who commits treason. If you actually care to know my reasons for feeling that way, start here: The Prosecution of George W. Bush for Murder by Vincent Bugliosi Published by Vanguard Press; May 2008;978-159315-481-3 http://www.prosecutionofbush.com

19th December 2008, 12:32 PM	#14
Drudgewire Critical Doofus Join Date: Feb 2006 Posts: 9,434	Bugliosi lost his mind the second OJ was found not guilty the first time.
	__________________ "You post a lie, it is proven 100% false, you move the goalposts and post yet another lie and it continues on around till we're back to the original lie as if it will somehow become true if it's re-iterated again. The same misquotes over and over again. The same hindsight bias, appeals to authority, etc." -lapman describing every twoofer on the internet

19th December 2008, 12:33 PM	#15
CFLarsen Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Aug 2001 Posts: 42,804	There is an absolute way to determine if someone is a traitor or not?
	__________________ SkepticReport.com

19th December 2008, 12:38 PM	#16
ravdin Illuminator Join Date: Oct 2005 Location: San Francisco, CA Posts: 3,610	Originally Posted by CFLarsen There is an absolute way to determine if someone is a traitor or not? Do you have a point? If so, declare.

19th December 2008, 12:38 PM	#17
tomwaits Master Poster Join Date: Nov 2007 Location: Chicago, IL, USA Posts: 2,289	Originally Posted by billw I know exactly what constitutes treason in the US. The quote that I was responding to referred to "traitor" not "treason." While it may be a fine distinction, the word "traitor" has meaning outside of the legal sphere, in addition to the narrower legal definition of one who commits treason. So what is your definition of "traitor"? I would say the legal definition is a pretty good one. I would definitely not say that someone who may have done his country wrong out of incompetence is a traitor. Quote: If you actually care to know my reasons for feeling that way, start here: The Prosecution of George W. Bush for Murder by Vincent Bugliosi Published by Vanguard Press; May 2008;978-159315-481-3 http://www.prosecutionofbush.com There was already a thread about that very book, and most people seemed to think that Bugliosi had nothing to stand on. Regardless, this book, as far as I know, was about murder and its legal definition, which does not equal treason.

19th December 2008, 12:40 PM	#18
tomwaits Master Poster Join Date: Nov 2007 Location: Chicago, IL, USA Posts: 2,289	Originally Posted by CFLarsen There is an absolute way to determine if someone is a traitor or not? There is an objective, legal one. Is that what you meant?

19th December 2008, 12:41 PM	#19
LibraryLady ...but not JUST a LibraryLady Join Date: Sep 2004 Location: Building a house in the common ground Posts: 13,130	Actually, Bugliosi wrote a fairly cogent book on the first Simpson trial, where he argued that the verdict was caused by the prosecution not doing its job properly.
	__________________ What would Hüsker Dü? I am still not a political person, but I am proud that Richard’s and my name is on a court case that can help reinforce the love, the commitment, the fairness, and the family that so many people, black or white, young or old, gay or straight, seek in life. I support the freedom to marry for all. That’s what Loving, and loving, are all about. Mildred Loving

19th December 2008, 12:47 PM	#20
Roadtoad Bufo Caminus Inedibilis Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: Gone. Posts: 15,739	Originally Posted by LibraryLady Actually, Bugliosi wrote a fairly cogent book on the first Simpson trial, where he argued that the verdict was caused by the prosecution not doing its job properly. It's even worse. I've seen the documentation of the DNA evidence at the same lab where they tested it. Had Clark and Darden done their job, OJ wouldn't have been in Vegas in the first place. Odd how Barry Scheck is taking evidence which was treated even WORSE than that used against OJ and getting people off Death Row. Back on topic: Sorry. Even if Bugliosi were to represent Lindh, I think he'd still be in prison. And I don't think he should be released until his full sentence is served.

19th December 2008, 12:48 PM	#21
tomwaits Master Poster Join Date: Nov 2007 Location: Chicago, IL, USA Posts: 2,289	Originally Posted by LibraryLady Actually, Bugliosi wrote a fairly cogent book on the first Simpson trial, where he argued that the verdict was caused by the prosecution not doing its job properly. I have not read Bugliosi's books, but I have seen him several times on C-SPAN. His arguments about the OJ trial were good, and he wrote a very lengthy refutation of all the JFK assassination theories. But, his book about trying Bush for murder didn't seem very rational.

19th December 2008, 12:52 PM	#22
PhantomWolf Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Lost Deimos Moon Base Posts: 10,004	Well if Bush sticks to his guns on what he's said before, he won't get it. Bush has stated previously that only those that have served their time will be eligable for pardons.
	__________________ It must be fun to lead a life completely unburdened by reality. -- JayUtah I am not able to rightly apprehend the kind of confusion of ideas that could provoke such a question. -- Charles Babbage (1791-1871) My Apollo Page. 1 on 1 Debating Forum for Skeptics and sceptics.

19th December 2008, 01:05 PM	#23
CFLarsen Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Aug 2001 Posts: 42,804	History is indeed written by the victors.
	__________________ SkepticReport.com

19th December 2008, 01:08 PM	#24
Roadtoad Bufo Caminus Inedibilis Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: Gone. Posts: 15,739	But, Claus, that doesn't make what Lindh did right.

19th December 2008, 01:21 PM	#25
billw Critical Thinker Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: Far North Glendale Posts: 471	Originally Posted by tomwaits So what is your definition of "traitor"? I would say the legal definition is a pretty good one. I would definitely not say that someone who may have done his country wrong out of incompetence is a traitor. I'll go with Merriam-Webster definition #1: "One who betrays another's trust or is false to an obligation or duty" I guess our difference of opinion hinges on whether W did the bad things he did deliberately, or out of simple incompetence. Frankly, I don't care. He should have to suffer consequences more onerous than having a Florsheim Wingtip flung at his head. Originally Posted by tomwaits There was already a thread about that very book, and most people seemed to think that Bugliosi had nothing to stand on. Regardless, this book, as far as I know, was about murder and its legal definition, which does not equal treason. Thanks for the pointer; hadn't seen that thread. Of course my first snarky impulse is to ask what law school "most people" went to I remember quite well for months and months and months before the war, W, and others in his administration talking about the Iraqi WMD's. It was never presented as "probable" or "hypothetical." Oh no. We definitely, positively knew 100% for certain with no doubts whatsoever that Saddam had WMD's. Not only that, but we knew exactly what they were, and where they were. Perhaps an easy enough conclusion to come to when you deliberately ignore all evidence that doesn't fit your preconceived notions and biases, and only consider (or just make up out of whole cloth) evidence that supports you. But don't try and tell me that this was a reasonable and proper exercise of due diligence. And the WMD's are just one issue out of many others. There is no question in my mind that not only did W betray the trust of others, he was also false to his duties. By definition, a traitor. Bugliosi, as a lawyer, is focussing on the legal issues re murder - but I don't find it a huge stretch to consider murder as a type of betrayal.

19th December 2008, 01:27 PM	#26
LibraryLady ...but not JUST a LibraryLady Join Date: Sep 2004 Location: Building a house in the common ground Posts: 13,130	I've read two of his books, the one on Manson and the one on the Simpson trial, and was impressed both times. I hope he isn't losing touch with reality.
	__________________ What would Hüsker Dü? I am still not a political person, but I am proud that Richard’s and my name is on a court case that can help reinforce the love, the commitment, the fairness, and the family that so many people, black or white, young or old, gay or straight, seek in life. I support the freedom to marry for all. That’s what Loving, and loving, are all about. Mildred Loving

19th December 2008, 01:28 PM	#27
ravdin Illuminator Join Date: Oct 2005 Location: San Francisco, CA Posts: 3,610	Originally Posted by CFLarsen History is indeed written by the victors. Since I rather enjoy not living under Sharia law, I'd say victory for our side is a good thing. I'd also point out that Lindh's advocates are free to spread any version of events they see fit (as they should be), and these civilized values are not shared by Lindh's comrades in arms.

19th December 2008, 01:48 PM	#28
WildCat NWO Master Conspirator Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Albany Park, Chicago Posts: 49,455	Heh, he's staying in a federal prison in Terre Haute, IN right next to the one former IL Gov. George Ryan is staying. Sen. Dick Durbin is trying to get Ryan pardoned (as is Blago ). Neither one should be pardoned IMHO. I'll never understand how someone growing up in the US can decide to join a repressive, brutal, totalitarian regime such as the Taliban.
	Last edited by WildCat; 19th December 2008 at 01:49 PM.

19th December 2008, 01:58 PM	#29
RoboTimbo Hostile Nanobacon Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: Prosperity, AZ Posts: 22,050	Originally Posted by CFLarsen History is indeed written by the victors. He's a hero to you because he took up arms against his own country? Just coincidentally that would be the US. Mustn't be a hater, Claus.

19th December 2008, 02:10 PM	#30
CFLarsen Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Aug 2001 Posts: 42,804	I haven't said anything about being right.
	__________________ SkepticReport.com

19th December 2008, 04:48 PM	#31
billw Critical Thinker Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: Far North Glendale Posts: 471	Originally Posted by LibraryLady I've read two of his books, the one on Manson and the one on the Simpson trial, and was impressed both times. I hope he isn't losing touch with reality. I went to hear him speak about The Prosecution of George W. Bush for Murder at an ACLU meeting at the Neighborhood Church in Pasadena last month, and it seemed to me like his feet were pretty firmly on the ground. Maybe I'm wrong to do so, but I believe that he is sincere when he says that he is not ideologically motivated. During the Q&A session that followed his talk, there were several questions (having nothing to do with the book) from 911 truthers and Illuminati fanciers. He basically told them not to waste his time with nonsense. He also mentioned that he shopped the manuscript to over 20 publishers before finding one willing to go with it
	Last edited by billw; 19th December 2008 at 04:50 PM. Reason: Added last paragraph about publishers

19th December 2008, 05:01 PM	#32
hgc Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Jun 2002 Posts: 13,128	There is no evidence that Lindh willingly took up arms against The United States. When he joined the Talaban, they were not at war with the US. After 9/11 he was already in their army. Did he have the ability to leave? I am disappointed that he plead guilty, and there was no trial so that the reality of the Lindh case could have received an airing in open court. His 20 year sentence is a travesty of paranoia.
	__________________ Bowel-shaking earthquakes of doubt and remorse assail him and wail him with monster truck force. - Cake, The Distance Was there a second singer on the grassy Knowles? - Stephen Colbert

19th December 2008, 06:09 PM	#33
Roadtoad Bufo Caminus Inedibilis Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: Gone. Posts: 15,739	The Taliban were irregulars. Further, he sent letters home claiming support for the Taliban's role in 9/11, IIRC. Perhaps he should have plead innocent. It would have opened the door for a death sentence. No, I don't see it as a victory for the paranoid. I see it as genuinely merciful, because there were those Americans who fought on the side of Germany in WWII. No word on their fates. And before you ask: Evidence.
	Last edited by Roadtoad; 19th December 2008 at 06:12 PM. Reason: Add links. Correct facts.

19th December 2008, 06:12 PM	#34
mikeyx Banned Join Date: Oct 2007 Posts: 3,570	Originally Posted by billw Funny, that's how I feel about George W. Bush. That being said, however, I'm not gonna lose any sleep if Lindh doesn't get pardoned. You and me both, he chose his fate. Suck it up junior.....
mikeyx Banned Join Date: Oct 2007 Posts: 3,570

19th December 2008, 06:15 PM	#35
RecoveringYuppy Illuminator Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: Tucson, AZ Posts: 3,877	Originally Posted by Roadtoad Perhaps he should have plead innocent. It would have opened the door for a death sentence. Death sentence? For what charges? And every source I can find says he pled not guilty to all the charges against him.
	__________________ REJ (Robert E Jones) posting anonymously under my real name for 30 years. Make a fire for a man and you keep him warm for a day. Set him on fire and you keep him warm for the rest of his life.

19th December 2008, 06:24 PM	#36
Roadtoad Bufo Caminus Inedibilis Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: Gone. Posts: 15,739	Originally Posted by RecoveringYuppy Death sentence? For what charges? And every source I can find says he pled not guilty to all the charges against him. That was his initial plea. It helps to do a little research. Wikipedia can be your friend.