Does anyone else feel a little uneasy about the freeing of 1,000 Iraqis?

[KansDem]

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x1805935

Doesn't this sound so "third-world country?" I mean, how many times growing up did we heard about some far-away land "freeing" somebody or somebodies as a "good-will gesture?"

I grew up thinking that people in prison where there because they had committed a crime and were found guilty of that crime in a court of law. Evidence was presented and refuted, witnesses were called and questioned, and, in the end, the jury pronounced them guilty and the judge sentenced them. In spite of a few anomalies, this was the law of the land. I never once thought that people in prison could be released as a "good-will gesture." As I stated in the above paragraph, only the third-world countries did this.

As one DUer said, "Why are they in there in the 1st place?"

[BlueJac]

1. Just another cheap PHOTO-OP

Rove at work!

[tatertop]

3. who is this meant to fool?

[BlueJac]

5. Only for the few hundred at the pro war protest!

[tatertop]

2. regardless of why they were in they will all hate us now

[Kipling]

4. So they were locked up for a year, then we "realised" they were innocent.

GOODWILL!?

[Humor_In_Cuneiform]

6. I felt angry and found myself

yelling at the radio or wherever I heard it from, "Then why were they in there to begin with if you can just release them? This is such crap!"

If they did do something, they should be and remain imprisoned. Releasing them would be criminal in itself.

If not it was criminal holding them.



:wtf: