Interrogation isn't the same as tortured - good grief Carl you are smarter than that association by linking my 2 posts together just to try to prove some ridiculous point. Are you tortured when the cops take you to the jail to interrogate you on a theft charge?? Maybe in your city but not here. I think if the majority of prisoners at Gitmo were water boarded then yes - you would have an argument.
I'm saying that you're asking for details to support the blanket claim of someone else but you had just made a blanket claim supported only by what you've characterized as a reasonable assumption.
My comment was sarcastic in nature. Though we do know that a good many prisoners at Guantanamo Bay were tortured.
Understood - thanks for the clarification and throwing a wet blanket on all of our blanket assumptions. Regardless, I would agree wt JR in principle that perhaps way to many were taken to Gitmo if they were going to release that many during the Bush years - seems like some field interrogation could have limited the #s. But I wasn't there...
I don't think that you're mistaken and now he is five prisoners closer to realizing that goal. Progress.
Neither of those two have anything to do with what led up to Bergdahl's decision of him deserting or not...
Quite a bit of difference between deserting and going AWOL, isn't there? Also, my understanding is that court-martial proceedings have a presumption of innocence identical to that in the criminal justice system.
But young Jedi, your picture, had nothing to do with Bergdahl himself deserting or going AWOL. Whether or not he deserted or went AWOL, that is a big difference.
