Re: Johnny Taliban freed [slowguy] [ In reply to ]

May 23, 19 20:49

Post #26 of 46 (1288 views)

slowguy wrote:

gphin305 wrote:

You are missing the point. It's not a matter of "specific" crime in this case. It's a matter of rehabilitation / remorse which this guy has shown no evidence. In fact, he has shown just the opposite.....unrepentant, and an intent to continue to spread and support violent extremist Islam upon his release. This guy does not deserve to be let back into society......at this point.

That's not how our criminal justice system works.

People aren't sentenced to "rehabilitation." They're sentenced to prison time. You can't force someone to rehabilitate. You lock them up for however many years they're sentenced to, and then you let them go.

Whether or not his "good behavior" is sufficient for his early release may be a separate issue, but we don't get to keep people in prison indefinitely until we deem them deserving of reentering society.

This isn't a discussion about how our criminal justice system works. Kay brought up "redemption" and "second chances" and asked about "specific crimes" ......I gave her an answer. This guy is a piece of shit like the original poster stated and doesn't deserve to be let out at this point. Why don't you tell us why its right that this guy is being let out.......and dispense with the "how our laws work?.

Re: Johnny Taliban freed [gphin305] [ In reply to ]

May 23, 19 21:10

Post #27 of 46 (1281 views)

gphin305 wrote:

slowguy wrote:

gphin305 wrote:

You are missing the point. It's not a matter of "specific" crime in this case. It's a matter of rehabilitation / remorse which this guy has shown no evidence. In fact, he has shown just the opposite.....unrepentant, and an intent to continue to spread and support violent extremist Islam upon his release. This guy does not deserve to be let back into society......at this point.

That's not how our criminal justice system works.

People aren't sentenced to "rehabilitation." They're sentenced to prison time. You can't force someone to rehabilitate. You lock them up for however many years they're sentenced to, and then you let them go.

Whether or not his "good behavior" is sufficient for his early release may be a separate issue, but we don't get to keep people in prison indefinitely until we deem them deserving of reentering society.

This isn't a discussion about how our criminal justice system works. Kay brought up "redemption" and "second chances" and asked about "specific crimes" ......I gave her an answer. This guy is a piece of shit like the original poster stated and doesn't deserve to be let out at this point. Why don't you tell us why its right that this guy is being let out.......and dispense with the "how our laws work?.

Because if we don't, then how are we to govern, will anarchy be the end result.
Is your issue that this"PoS' is getting out, or is it that you consider the initial sentence to not be adequate.

A similar issue that with this POS is again be replayed around the world with citizens of other countries trying to return home after their stint in ISIS.

BTW, I'm former Australian Army, and know many personnel that have served in Iraq and Afghanistan, so please don't attack me for my next question...
Can someone tell me why we went to Afghanistan?

Re: Johnny Taliban freed [gofigure] [ In reply to ]

May 23, 19 21:25

Post #28 of 46 (1271 views)

gofigure wrote:

Kay, BZ is the allied tactical signal for "Well done". I think he is being immature and sarcastic. Might I also throw a non sarcastic Bravo Zulu your way for asking a reasonable and pertinent question. I've got plenty of BZ's to go around. I hope his response is worthy of one.

+1

Re: Johnny Taliban freed [Constantine] [ In reply to ]

May 23, 19 21:43

Post #29 of 46 (1261 views)

Goddamn, it's been 20 years? I knew that obviously, but we've still got fucking troops dying in Afghanistan 20 years later.

Re: Johnny Taliban freed [gphin305] [ In reply to ]

May 23, 19 21:52

Post #30 of 46 (1246 views)

gphin305 wrote:

slowguy wrote:

gphin305 wrote:

You are missing the point. It's not a matter of "specific" crime in this case. It's a matter of rehabilitation / remorse which this guy has shown no evidence. In fact, he has shown just the opposite.....unrepentant, and an intent to continue to spread and support violent extremist Islam upon his release. This guy does not deserve to be let back into society......at this point.

That's not how our criminal justice system works.

People aren't sentenced to "rehabilitation." They're sentenced to prison time. You can't force someone to rehabilitate. You lock them up for however many years they're sentenced to, and then you let them go.

Whether or not his "good behavior" is sufficient for his early release may be a separate issue, but we don't get to keep people in prison indefinitely until we deem them deserving of reentering society.

This isn't a discussion about how our criminal justice system works. Kay brought up "redemption" and "second chances" and asked about "specific crimes" ......I gave her an answer. This guy is a piece of shit like the original poster stated and doesn't deserve to be let out at this point. Why don't you tell us why its right that this guy is being let out.......and dispense with the "how our laws work?.

Assuming this guy has served the sentence, and his "good conduct" early release meets normal guidelines, then it's right that he's let out BECAUSE that's how our system works. "Deserve" doesn't have jack-all to do with it. Whether he's a piece of shit doesn't matter. Lots of pieces of shit out on the streets. Sometimes bad guys don't go to jail. Sometimes bad guys don't magically become good guys during their prison time. So what? If you have a problem with how much time this guy is doing in prison, your issue should be with the prosecutors who were unable to convict him on something like 8 of 9 original charges.

Slowguy

(insert pithy phrase here...)

Re: Johnny Taliban freed [slowguy] [ In reply to ]

May 23, 19 22:15

Post #31 of 46 (1241 views)

slowguy wrote:

gphin305 wrote:

slowguy wrote:

gphin305 wrote:

You are missing the point. It's not a matter of "specific" crime in this case. It's a matter of rehabilitation / remorse which this guy has shown no evidence. In fact, he has shown just the opposite.....unrepentant, and an intent to continue to spread and support violent extremist Islam upon his release. This guy does not deserve to be let back into society......at this point.

That's not how our criminal justice system works.

People aren't sentenced to "rehabilitation." They're sentenced to prison time. You can't force someone to rehabilitate. You lock them up for however many years they're sentenced to, and then you let them go.

Whether or not his "good behavior" is sufficient for his early release may be a separate issue, but we don't get to keep people in prison indefinitely until we deem them deserving of reentering society.

This isn't a discussion about how our criminal justice system works. Kay brought up "redemption" and "second chances" and asked about "specific crimes" ......I gave her an answer. This guy is a piece of shit like the original poster stated and doesn't deserve to be let out at this point. Why don't you tell us why its right that this guy is being let out.......and dispense with the "how our laws work?.

Assuming this guy has served the sentence, and his "good conduct" early release meets normal guidelines, then it's right that he's let out BECAUSE that's how our system works. "Deserve" doesn't have jack-all to do with it. Whether he's a piece of shit doesn't matter. Lots of pieces of shit out on the streets. Sometimes bad guys don't go to jail. Sometimes bad guys don't magically become good guys during their prison time. So what? If you have a problem with how much time this guy is doing in prison, your issue should be with the prosecutors who were unable to convict him on something like 8 of 9 original charges.

Totally exonerated!

Oh wait, wrong thread.

Re: Johnny Taliban freed [gphin305] [ In reply to ]

May 24, 19 6:55

Post #32 of 46 (1171 views)

gphin305 wrote:

This isn't a discussion about how our criminal justice system works. Kay brought up "redemption" and "second chances" and asked about "specific crimes" ......I gave her an answer. This guy is a piece of shit like the original poster stated and doesn't deserve to be let out at this point. Why don't you tell us why its right that this guy is being let out.......and dispense with the "how our laws work?.

No you did not give Kay an answer. You posed 2 questions in response. And then when into your POS characterization.

Throughout the world, America has no peer in the matter of our founding, our adopting a democratic form of government that is structured by our Constitution, that enumerates citizens rights, that defines our justice system and allows for us establish laws to govern behavior. Do you really wish to cede that moral high ground because of one POS and essentially dispense with "how our laws work"?

I can reach only one conclusion, that your stated position is antithetical to that moral high ground and is centered in hate and fear. Hate and fear trumps rule of law is not the american way. And that is why it is right to let this guy out!

Re: Johnny Taliban freed [slowguy] [ In reply to ]

May 24, 19 9:00

Post #33 of 46 (1134 views)

slowguy wrote:

gphin305 wrote:

You are missing the point. It's not a matter of "specific" crime in this case. It's a matter of rehabilitation / remorse which this guy has shown no evidence. In fact, he has shown just the opposite.....unrepentant, and an intent to continue to spread and support violent extremist Islam upon his release. This guy does not deserve to be let back into society......at this point.

That's not how our criminal justice system works.

People aren't sentenced to "rehabilitation." They're sentenced to prison time. You can't force someone to rehabilitate. You lock them up for however many years they're sentenced to, and then you let them go.

Whether or not his "good behavior" is sufficient for his early release may be a separate issue, but we don't get to keep people in prison indefinitely until we deem them deserving of reentering society.

We do get to keep people in prison indefinitely, and have done so numerous times in our history. WW2 interment camps, Guantanamo etc. Illinois has a law on the books that allows sex offenders to be kept behind bars indefinitely. The US Govt. has kept people in jail for contempt of court for nearly seven years, and cites the appeals court verdict that "no temporal limitation on the amount of time that a contemnor can be confined for civil contempt when it is undisputed that the contemnor has the ability to comply with the underlying order." That my friend is the definition of indefinitely.

https://www.theregister.co.uk/...not_decrypting_data/

"The great pleasure in life is doing what people say you cannot do."

Re: Johnny Taliban freed [jkca1] [ In reply to ]

May 24, 19 10:10

Post #34 of 46 (1109 views)

jkca1 wrote:

slowguy wrote:

gphin305 wrote:

You are missing the point. It's not a matter of "specific" crime in this case. It's a matter of rehabilitation / remorse which this guy has shown no evidence. In fact, he has shown just the opposite.....unrepentant, and an intent to continue to spread and support violent extremist Islam upon his release. This guy does not deserve to be let back into society......at this point.

That's not how our criminal justice system works.

People aren't sentenced to "rehabilitation." They're sentenced to prison time. You can't force someone to rehabilitate. You lock them up for however many years they're sentenced to, and then you let them go.

Whether or not his "good behavior" is sufficient for his early release may be a separate issue, but we don't get to keep people in prison indefinitely until we deem them deserving of reentering society.

We do get to keep people in prison indefinitely, and have done so numerous times in our history. WW2 interment camps, Guantanamo etc. Illinois has a law on the books that allows sex offenders to be kept behind bars indefinitely. The US Govt. has kept people in jail for contempt of court for nearly seven years, and cites the appeals court verdict that "no temporal limitation on the amount of time that a contemnor can be confined for civil contempt when it is undisputed that the contemnor has the ability to comply with the underlying order." That my friend is the definition of indefinitely.

https://www.theregister.co.uk/...not_decrypting_data/

He was tried, convicted and sentenced to 20 years. I believe Slowguy meant you are not allowed to indefinitely keep someone in prison past their sentence until we think he is ready to go back into society. That is a completely different topic than what your definition is about.

_____
TEAM HD
Each day is what you make of it so make it the best day possible.

Re: Johnny Taliban freed [TheRef65] [ In reply to ]

May 24, 19 10:23

Post #35 of 46 (1098 views)

TheRef65 wrote:

jkca1 wrote:

slowguy wrote:

gphin305 wrote:

You are missing the point. It's not a matter of "specific" crime in this case. It's a matter of rehabilitation / remorse which this guy has shown no evidence. In fact, he has shown just the opposite.....unrepentant, and an intent to continue to spread and support violent extremist Islam upon his release. This guy does not deserve to be let back into society......at this point.

That's not how our criminal justice system works.

People aren't sentenced to "rehabilitation." They're sentenced to prison time. You can't force someone to rehabilitate. You lock them up for however many years they're sentenced to, and then you let them go.

Whether or not his "good behavior" is sufficient for his early release may be a separate issue, but we don't get to keep people in prison indefinitely until we deem them deserving of reentering society.

We do get to keep people in prison indefinitely, and have done so numerous times in our history. WW2 interment camps, Guantanamo etc. Illinois has a law on the books that allows sex offenders to be kept behind bars indefinitely. The US Govt. has kept people in jail for contempt of court for nearly seven years, and cites the appeals court verdict that "no temporal limitation on the amount of time that a contemnor can be confined for civil contempt when it is undisputed that the contemnor has the ability to comply with the underlying order." That my friend is the definition of indefinitely.

https://www.theregister.co.uk/...not_decrypting_data/

He was tried, convicted and sentenced to 20 years. I believe Slowguy meant you are not allowed to indefinitely keep someone in prison past their sentence until we think he is ready to go back into society. That is a completely different topic than what your definition is about.

New Mexico holds hundreds of people in prison past their release date...

https://www.pbs.org/...t-their-release-date

" Rommel Jones, almost ten months after the state said it would make amends for the four years he spent in prison beyond his release date, no settlement had been paid and no apology offered"

"The great pleasure in life is doing what people say you cannot do."

Re: Johnny Taliban freed [jkca1] [ In reply to ]

May 24, 19 13:01

Post #36 of 46 (1063 views)

I read both your references and am not understanding the point you are trying to make.
One was about the specific charge of contempt of court. Does not apply to Taliban Johnny. The other was about availability of resources in support of housing or rehabbing a parolee. Again doe not apply with our boy.

Re: Johnny Taliban freed [jkca1] [ In reply to ]

May 24, 19 14:19

Post #37 of 46 (1043 views)

Quote:

We do get to keep people in prison indefinitely, and have done so numerous times in our history. WW2 interment camps, Guantanamo etc.

Neither of those are particularly shining moments in our history. Hopefully you're not pointing to them as examples of how our system is designed to work.

Quote:

The US Govt. has kept people in jail for contempt of court for nearly seven years....

A different issue since the underlying "contempt" is ongoing.

Pretty obviously, the issue at hand is when a person is convicted and sentenced to a specific amount of time in prison, you don't get to just decide, "Nah, we don't think he deserves to get out, let's keep him here until we're satisfied."

Slowguy

(insert pithy phrase here...)

Re: Johnny Taliban freed [gofigure] [ In reply to ]

May 24, 19 20:09

Post #38 of 46 (1004 views)

gofigure wrote:

gphin305 wrote:

This isn't a discussion about how our criminal justice system works. Kay brought up "redemption" and "second chances" and asked about "specific crimes" ......I gave her an answer. This guy is a piece of shit like the original poster stated and doesn't deserve to be let out at this point. Why don't you tell us why its right that this guy is being let out.......and dispense with the "how our laws work?.

No you did not give Kay an answer. You posed 2 questions in response. And then when into your POS characterization.

Throughout the world, America has no peer in the matter of our founding, our adopting a democratic form of government that is structured by our Constitution, that enumerates citizens rights, that defines our justice system and allows for us establish laws to govern behavior. Do you really wish to cede that moral high ground because of one POS and essentially dispense with "how our laws work"?

I can reach only one conclusion, that your stated position is antithetical to that moral high ground and is centered in hate and fear. Hate and fear trumps rule of law is not the american way. And that is why it is right to let this guy out!

Seems like you might be totally off base here with your "conclusion".. But you lost any credibility on this subject when you "wished him only the best" in your earlier post. We have a guy here who hates America and is doing his best to aide jihadists who would like nothing more to see America destroyed and you wish him the best? That's one warped opinion.

Re: Johnny Taliban freed [gphin305] [ In reply to ]

May 25, 19 9:53

Post #39 of 46 (958 views)

I don't at all see how my credibility is lost on the subject by my wishing for him the best. Who among us doesn't wish for the best in our fellow citizens? He is currently not an enemy combatant, nor a terrorist. I sincerely hope he has a change of heart and realizes my best wishes for him. Expressing hate for america is not a crime. American jihadists on american soil wanting to see america destroyed also is not a crime. Thought policing has not yet been codified.

If he does not realize my best wishes and he is found to have provided material aide to one of our designated enemies or act in some hostile fashion against our country, my wish for him then would be the same as it was when he was taken prisoner on an Afghan battlefield 18 years ago. Indict him, convict him and punish him to the maximum allowable.

Compliance with our rule of law and the Laws of Warfare hold the moral high ground. I stand by my hate and fear conclusion for those not sharing those standards.

Care to join me on the high ground of "warped" positions?

Re: Johnny Taliban freed [gofigure] [ In reply to ]

May 25, 19 10:21

Post #40 of 46 (951 views)

He'll step on his dick in some form, and it will be off to the big house.

Be Uncommon

Re: Johnny Taliban freed [ZimZam] [ In reply to ]

May 25, 19 10:48

Post #41 of 46 (944 views)

ZimZam wrote:

He'll step on his dick in some form, and it will be off to the big house.

I am not betting against it. Although 17 years is a long time for some dedicated intelligent planning.

We'll see if Trump is right about those traitorous FBI hacks and how they bungle surveillance or entrap illegally. No wait, it is his team there now not O'Bama's. They will do right.

Re: Johnny Taliban freed [gofigure] [ In reply to ]

May 25, 19 11:06

Post #42 of 46 (939 views)

gofigure wrote:

I don't at all see how my credibility is lost on the subject by my wishing for him the best. Who among us doesn't wish for the best in our fellow citizens? He is currently not an enemy combatant, nor a terrorist. I sincerely hope he has a change of heart and realizes my best wishes for him. Expressing hate for america is not a crime. American jihadists on american soil wanting to see america destroyed also is not a crime. Thought policing has not yet been codified.

If he does not realize my best wishes and he is found to have provided material aide to one of our designated enemies or act in some hostile fashion against our country, my wish for him then would be the same as it was when he was taken prisoner on an Afghan battlefield 18 years ago. Indict him, convict him and punish him to the maximum allowable.

Compliance with our rule of law and the Laws of Warfare hold the moral high ground. I stand by my hate and fear conclusion for those not sharing those standards.

Care to join me on the high ground of "warped" positions?

Well said. It is surprising how some people will so quickly abandon the principles that make our nation great, and revert to the same base motives as our enemies.

Re: Johnny Taliban freed [eb] [ In reply to ]

May 25, 19 16:45

Post #43 of 46 (915 views)

eb wrote:

gofigure wrote:

I don't at all see how my credibility is lost on the subject by my wishing for him the best. Who among us doesn't wish for the best in our fellow citizens? He is currently not an enemy combatant, nor a terrorist. I sincerely hope he has a change of heart and realizes my best wishes for him. Expressing hate for america is not a crime. American jihadists on american soil wanting to see america destroyed also is not a crime. Thought policing has not yet been codified.

If he does not realize my best wishes and he is found to have provided material aide to one of our designated enemies or act in some hostile fashion against our country, my wish for him then would be the same as it was when he was taken prisoner on an Afghan battlefield 18 years ago. Indict him, convict him and punish him to the maximum allowable.

Compliance with our rule of law and the Laws of Warfare hold the moral high ground. I stand by my hate and fear conclusion for those not sharing those standards.

Care to join me on the high ground of "warped" positions?

Well said. It is surprising how some people will so quickly abandon the principles that make our nation great, and revert to the same base motives as our enemies.

From USA Today......as well as other sources:
"In the run-up to Lindh's release, Foreign Policy reported that two government documents it obtained expressed concerns about Lindh's extremist views. One document, from the National Counterterrorism Center, found that as of 2016 Lindh "continued to advocate for global jihad" and to write and translate violent extremists texts," the magazine reported"..

Make sure you two get back to us when another American is killed because of his actions.

Re: Johnny Taliban freed [gphin305] [ In reply to ]

May 25, 19 16:49

Post #44 of 46 (913 views)

Jeezus H Christ.

He's going to commit suicide, die of a drug overdose, be the victim of a hit and run, or something else innocuous.

Re: Johnny Taliban freed [Kay Serrar] [ In reply to ]

May 25, 19 16:54

Post #45 of 46 (910 views)

Lindh has not paid his debt.

Washed up footy player turned Triathlete.

Re: Johnny Taliban freed [gphin305] [ In reply to ]

May 25, 19 17:41

Post #46 of 46 (870 views)

gphin305 wrote:

eb wrote:

gofigure wrote:

I don't at all see how my credibility is lost on the subject by my wishing for him the best. Who among us doesn't wish for the best in our fellow citizens? He is currently not an enemy combatant, nor a terrorist. I sincerely hope he has a change of heart and realizes my best wishes for him. Expressing hate for america is not a crime. American jihadists on american soil wanting to see america destroyed also is not a crime. Thought policing has not yet been codified.

If he does not realize my best wishes and he is found to have provided material aide to one of our designated enemies or act in some hostile fashion against our country, my wish for him then would be the same as it was when he was taken prisoner on an Afghan battlefield 18 years ago. Indict him, convict him and punish him to the maximum allowable.

Compliance with our rule of law and the Laws of Warfare hold the moral high ground. I stand by my hate and fear conclusion for those not sharing those standards.

Care to join me on the high ground of "warped" positions?

Well said. It is surprising how some people will so quickly abandon the principles that make our nation great, and revert to the same base motives as our enemies.

From USA Today......as well as other sources:
"In the run-up to Lindh's release, Foreign Policy reported that two government documents it obtained expressed concerns about Lindh's extremist views. One document, from the National Counterterrorism Center, found that as of 2016 Lindh "continued to advocate for global jihad" and to write and translate violent extremists texts," the magazine reported"..

Make sure you two get back to us when another American is killed because of his actions.

Hate and fear will win the day and keep us strong and safe. Not so. I still prefer the high ground. Last invite to join the legions on that hill. Since I am debating you, I will persist one more time. If and when he breaks the law not before. Fair enough?

Not a lawyer, but translating texts that incite specific violent acts against america and then further publishing texts might fall into the recently revised ( by our president) definition of treasonous behavior. If so, quiet patience is in order. As windy described, the odds of some other self inflicted malady to befall him are far better.

The more hate and fear of this one terribly terrifying man that we serve up to all who would listen, the more we serve to motivate jihadist wannabes, and the more we preordain his reactionary tendency. And then my best wishes for him will have been in vain. IMHO.

Last edited by: gofigure: May 25, 19 19:11

Our Partners

transition-DOT-area-AT-slowtwitch-DOT-com

Advertise with us

©1999-2024 Slowtwitch, Inc., and Slowtwitch.com
Reproduction of material from any Slowtwitch.com page
without written permission is strictly prohibited.