3 ms·
Well, here’s a rare case where only death sentences seem appropriate. A custodial sentence (in the US) wouldn’t be workable as we’d probably just end up with an
by ryanlol 7y ago
Well, here’s a rare case where only death sentences seem appropriate. A custodial sentence (in the US) wouldn’t be workable as we’d probably just end up with another president pardoning the heroic war criminals.
- rsynnott 7y agoDid you read the article? There doesn't seem to be any particular evidence that he _did_ anything; he's detained without trial.
- ryanlol 7y agoI’m obviously not talking about the author.
- mkl 7y agoI think they might be referring (very unclearly) to the two people named in the headline. It still doesn't make sense though.
- ryanlol 7y ago>very unclearly Sure, if you really want to interpret me in the most uncharitable way possible.
- mkl 7y agoNothing uncharitable or deliberate about it. I had to read your comment about three times before I figured out that you might not mean the author. That's the most charitable interpretation I could find, and I searched for it since I had trouble believing you would want the prisoner executed, which is the obvious interpretation. The number of downvotes you've received show that other people had the same difficulty.
- YawningAngel 7y agoI don't think the OP is suggesting killing the author.
- beerandt 7y agoHere shouldn't have been tortured. He should have a trial. >evidence that he _did_ anything There wouldn't be. It's not an "article", it's a (very good) plea for public sympathy written by the detainee. Do you expect him to implicate himself? I don't even question whether he was tortured. But I do seriously question whether he was an innocent bystander, given the classified WikiLeaks documents on him.