53
It only took them 23 years of torture to get him to agree.
Convenient that's it's occuring right before the anniversary as well.
I like how the AP story says he's "accused" and "has agreed to plea". Pretty passive wording instead of "person who committed", etc. I don't think they fully believe it either.
That's how journalism is supposed to work. Being loosey-goosey with any definitive statements is how you end up with situations like people questioning whether or not JD Vance definitely absolutely 100% had sex with a couch.
AP are meant to be as neutral as possible
And how often do we see loaded language regardless. I'm praising them for being neutral when often times the media isn't. Especially with a topic like 9/11
It’s standard journalistic practice to refer to say that someone is accused or alleged to have committed crimes until they’re convicted. Even in obvious cases, such as mass shootings where the shooter is on video.
I wonder if Ron DeSantis had a go at him...
Did they need to torture them? They were already in prison for life. Pleading guilty just took the death penalty off the table.
Bruh…he was in Guantanamo Bay. It’s literally a torture chamber.
He’ll likely spend the rest of his life at Guantanamo now as a result of this plea. There’s apparently a law on the books now that makes it illegal to transfer Guantanamo prisoners to US prisons.
I'm sorry, I didn't mean to appear to defend. I just meant they were going to hold him there for life anyways, which is also an abuse of the lack of justice system.
I've read quite a bit about the Gitmo experience. 20 years of mind games would turn many innocent people into just giving up. Some of these folk were snatched off the street by Pakistan security services on dodgy Intel. They then spend decades in cages being disbelieved. The only evidence against them is their own confession. The military's job was to secure that 'evidence'.
When do the torturers get put in court?
Shhh, we don't talk about that.
Hello, I'm ignorant. Was Osama not the mastermind of 9/11?
No.
"There is no hard evidence linking Bin Laden to the attacks of 9/11". -FBI
Of course, there is no evidence for KSM's involvement either. He was tortured more than 100 times over the course of a month. The 9/11 commission had no access to him, not even his "interview" transcripts. Everything we know is from the mouths of the CIA agents who interrogated him, who admitted that he was completely unreliable.
lol And people defend America. 🚬
Lol CIA doesn't operate under any American laws. I'll try and defend American armed forces all day but fuck all that the CIA does.
Why does he look like Ron Jeremy after getting a DUI?
Associated Press Media Bias Fact Check Credibility: [High] (Click to view Full Report)
Name: Associated Press Bias: Left-Center
Factual Reporting: High
Country: United States of America
Full Report: https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/associated-press/
Check the bias and credibility of this article on Ground.News
Thanks to Media Bias Fact Check for their access to the API.
Please consider supporting them by donating.
Footer
Beep boop. This action was performed automatically. If you dont like me then please block me.💔
If you have any questions or comments about me, you can make a post to LW Support lemmy community.
this post was submitted on 01 Aug 2024
53 points (100.0% liked)
News
23376 readers
3393 users here now
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.
Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.
7. No duplicate posts.
If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners.
The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS