Quote:
Originally posted by The Larry Davis Experience
Now don't get all Bilmore on me. I advanced no hypothesis, so I have rejected no alternative. The Brits could indeed be sucking; "perfunctory questioning" doesn't seem like a phrase I want my antiterrorism service using, like, ever. Between two years and 8 hours, though, somebody sure isn't assessing these guys accurately. All I did say is that it looks like they may get some cash out of the deal.
I'd love to see a follow up report in three months with these guys living the high life with a tricked out Escalade, drinking malt liquor out of a chalice, stripper pole in the basement, that sort of thing. It would make a good Mastercard commercial, if I weren't sick of everyone in the world using that "....priceless" line.
Anyway, from Gattigap's post I can see I'm not exactly up to the minute here, so I'll end this post now and go start writing my "Kerry to win the Dem nomination" bulletin.
|
oooh oooooh ooooooh -- this is not a "hypothesis" but do you think that maybe the US people shared with the British people at least some of what they know about the newly released detainees and so maybe the British people took 8 hours or so to confirm the info gathered over 2 years by the US people? Or, now, this is going out on a limb, that the British maybe did some research/investigation regarding the detainees during the two years between when they were originally detained and now?
Nah. I'm sure it's just that the British are willing to take their chances that they are releasing dangerous terrorists out into the world, because it's not like there would be any international issues if the newly released detainees went and did terrorist stuff. I mean, the British are generally into that non-secure stuff, like letting rabid dogs in the country and stuff.
Stuff.
