Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community - View Single Post - the bush admin knowingly held innocent people in gitmo...what should happen?

Cimarron29414 · 04-09-2010, 09:31 AM

rb, what I am saying is that he is making claims that he has intimate knowledge, distinct public admissions that Bush/Cheney/Rumsfeld knew that specific individuals held had not committed attacks against the US and that they ordered those individuals to remain captive, in spite of that knowledge.

That is a new claim to me. One I have never heard before and it should easily be able to be corroborated with multiple sources. The times piece makes no attempt to pull evidence from any other place other than Wilkerson's mouth. It is practically a single source piece. What's more, rather than linking to the "obtained document" so we can read it ourselves, they cherry-picked from it for the article in a "trust us, it's there" sort of way. It's completely nonsensical not to link to the document and let us read the context. Unless, of course, there's other stuff in there that contradicts the story you are trying to write...

You have even stated yourself that you can find no other source for the case other than this times piece. So, until I get more - I'll retain my wait and see approach.

As for the other stuff, I am well aware of the many sides of suspicion leading up to the Iraq campaign. That has little to do with whether this guy in this story is a bonafide whistle blowing patriot or a "golly, I wish I was still relevant" loon.

04-09-2010, 09:31 AM	#7 (permalink)
Cimarron29414 Still Free Location: comfortably perched at the top of the bell curve!	rb, what I am saying is that he is making claims that he has intimate knowledge, distinct public admissions that Bush/Cheney/Rumsfeld knew that specific individuals held had not committed attacks against the US and that they ordered those individuals to remain captive, in spite of that knowledge. That is a new claim to me. One I have never heard before and it should easily be able to be corroborated with multiple sources. The times piece makes no attempt to pull evidence from any other place other than Wilkerson's mouth. It is practically a single source piece. What's more, rather than linking to the "obtained document" so we can read it ourselves, they cherry-picked from it for the article in a "trust us, it's there" sort of way. It's completely nonsensical not to link to the document and let us read the context. Unless, of course, there's other stuff in there that contradicts the story you are trying to write... You have even stated yourself that you can find no other source for the case other than this times piece. So, until I get more - I'll retain my wait and see approach. As for the other stuff, I am well aware of the many sides of suspicion leading up to the Iraq campaign. That has little to do with whether this guy in this story is a bonafide whistle blowing patriot or a "golly, I wish I was still relevant" loon. __________________ Gives a man a halo, does mead. "Here lies The_Jazz: Killed by an ambitious, sparkly, pink butterfly." Last edited by Cimarron29414; 04-09-2010 at 10:01 AM..