Land Of The Free? Imprisonment Without Trial [Archive] - Page 2

View Full Version : Land Of The Free? Imprisonment Without Trial

Pages : 1 [2]

ilw

09-15-2003, 04:06 PM

I'm not gonna carry on debating cos I think i would be repeating myself, but I'll summarise and clarify

1) What rights does a country have in choosing how to deal with its inhabitants eg what rights does it have in regards to choosing what constitutes a crime, and what a punishment within its borders
2) Who decides (decided?) what rights a country has regarding its inhabitants
3) What right does a country have to enforce what it perceives as a right in another country and to what extent is it allowed to go in order to enforce this right.
4) What rights do people have regarding their beliefs, eg are they allowed to believe in and continue practices based on a belief despite the fact that science can show its false
5) Theres more to life than democracy if when thinking about any of these points you fall in the trap of thinking well it must be up to the people to decide then you are just chasing your own tail.
6) I'm sure theres a 6, but minesweeper keeps distracting me so I'll post it later if i think of it.

To a certain extent I am playing devil's advocate, I'm pointing out the flaws and the grey areas of the system that exists now. The system that exists now between countries is essentially a heavily restrained 'might is right' idea.

Edit: And as for the country I suppose Lichtenstein would be a nice starting point :devil:

Barbarossa

09-15-2003, 04:58 PM

Rat Faced

09-15-2003, 06:45 PM

Originally posted by ilw@15 September 2003 - 16:06
I'm not gonna carry on debating cos I think i would be repeating myself, but I'll summarise and clarify

1) What rights does a country have in choosing how to deal with its inhabitants eg what rights does it have in regards to choosing what constitutes a crime, and what a punishment within its borders
2) Who decides (decided?) what rights a country has regarding its inhabitants
3) What right does a country have to enforce what it perceives as a right in another country and to what extent is it allowed to go in order to enforce this right.
4) What rights do people have regarding their beliefs, eg are they allowed to believe in and continue practices based on a belief despite the fact that science can show its false
5) Theres more to life than democracy if when thinking about any of these points you fall in the trap of thinking well it must be up to the people to decide then you are just chasing your own tail.
6) I'm sure theres a 6, but minesweeper keeps distracting me so I'll post it later if i think of it.

To a certain extent I am playing devil's advocate, I'm pointing out the flaws and the grey areas of the system that exists now. The system that exists now between countries is essentially a heavily restrained 'might is right' idea.

Edit: And as for the country I suppose Lichtenstein would be a nice starting point :devil:
1/ None

2/ The people of that country, ultimatly. They may have to FORCE their views in some situations.

3/ None

4/ They have a right to believe anything they want to, in my opinion.

5/ Agreed. Democracy = Cakes and Circus'. People will vote for what THEY want, irrespective of the good it will do the country or population at large.

6/ There are plenty of others.

Immaterial of all this, im free to follow MY beliefs, irrespective of what my Government or their Government (or even parents) want.

If they want to be educated, i'll support that.

If they dont, im equally happy with that.

Robert A Heinlein:

Democracy: Based on the principle that the many know better than the few.

Theocracy: based on the priciple that the few know better than the many.

Monarchy/Despot/Dictator: Based on the principle that one knows better than the many.

Huh, say again?

Who decides?

j2k4

09-16-2003, 05:05 AM

Originally posted by Billy_Dean@15 September 2003 - 01:48
What about the ones you miss j2t4? 

But Bush cited the U.S. military victories in Afghanistan and Iraq as examples of the strides the United States has made in cracking down on anti-American militants and those who might harbour them or provide them with weapons of mass destruction.

A little quiz for my American friends. The above quote was from a news report.

Can you spot what really pisses a lot of people off in the above quote?

Clue: It's what's not there.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

@ j2k4

I await with 'bated breath the true, inside story of 9/11.

I seem to remember your theory was, that 911 happened because America was seen as the "Great Satan" and had no political motive, is that right?

What do you want me to say? Do I really have to point out US involvement in Muslim countries? Do I have to point out that Osama Bin Laden was recruited, armed and financed by the US, then abandoned? Look at every US involvement in the muslim world for your answers. Look especially at Saudi Arabia.

I must say I find this, as an answer, or an attempt to fulfill the "promise" of your original post, is more than a bit disappointing.

I may have mentioned the U.S. as being seen as the "Great Satan", but I deny having defined our intent as being devoid of political motivation.

As a matter-of-fact, I believe I have said, on several occasions, and in several ways, in several threads, the U.S. rarely moves personnel around internationally except in the case of political interest rising to the level of being a motivating factor.

As far as that goes, I think you'll find the vast majority of international maneuvering by any country is similarly motivated.

Your discovery of this tendency, and urge to define it as "exceptional" in the case of the U.S., marks you as a bit of deductive neophyte.

The reasons you finally give are neither new nor enlightening, Billy.

Oh, well.

My hopes weren't high.

AussieSheila

09-16-2003, 05:19 AM

Originally posted by ilw@15 September 2003 - 13:23
i'm now of the opinion that its nothing i wasn't aware of, all very sad, but irrelevant.
:P A little like your attitude, Ian.

I don't get why you're philosophizing while people are dying.

Billy_Dean

09-16-2003, 06:01 AM

The U.S. commit, with all haste, genocide upon itself, as we are infidels, and Islam, as viewed by Osama, cannot countenance our continued existence.

I'm glad you lot are posting on here, America has a reputation in the world of an arrogant, couldn't care less, what's best for the US is best for the world attitude. So much so, you still don't understand, two years later, why 911 happened.

Just for us American thickos, why don't you tell us, in very precise and exact terms, why 9/11 "happened"?

That deserved a long answer did it? It happened because of the underhanded, uneven, biased, couldn't care less attitude of the United States in dealing with Muslim countries. Have you a different opinion?

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

And now ... a few j2k4-isms, to ponder...

As to accusations of "double-standards", again; SO WHAT?

The U.S. has pretended to "care" what other countries thought about us and our motivations.

I believe we should cease this "caring for appearance' sake".

I did not mean to imply the U.S. actually cared about other countries; as we all know, this is simply not true.

The U.S. has suffered the slings and arrows it has precisely because we have cared-it is my contention the process would be better served if we did not care.

Make up your mind about what you DO actually think before you post, j2. If the US does not CARE, why should anyone CARE what happens to the US?

As for your hopes j2k4, just what are they? You seem very deft at avoiding getting your toes wet. You answer what suits you, and are often proved wrong. We are still waiting for your response to the replies to your idiotic pronouncement that the IRA didn't export terrorism. Puts a dint in your arguments about not negotiating with terrorists doesn't it?

But keep up with the holier-than-thou attitude, you give a real insight into the mind of America.

B)

clocker

09-16-2003, 12:57 PM

Originally posted by Billy_Dean@15 September 2003 - 23:01

But keep up with the holier-than-thou attitude, you give a real insight into the mind of America.

B)
Am I to assume then, that you, Billy Dean, are providing "real insight" into the mind of Australia?

j2k4

09-16-2003, 03:17 PM

Originally posted by Billy_Dean@16 September 2003 - 01:01

The U.S. commit, with all haste, genocide upon itself, as we are infidels, and Islam, as viewed by Osama, cannot countenance our continued existence.

I'm glad you lot are posting on here, America has a reputation in the world of an arrogant, couldn't care less, what's best for the US is best for the world attitude. So much so, you still don't understand, two years later, why 911 happened.

Just for us American thickos, why don't you tell us, in very precise and exact terms, why 9/11 "happened"?

That deserved a long answer did it? It happened because of the underhanded, uneven, biased, couldn't care less attitude of the United States in dealing with Muslim countries. Have you a different opinion?

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

And now ... a few j2k4-isms, to ponder...

As to accusations of "double-standards", again; SO WHAT?

The U.S. has pretended to "care" what other countries thought about us and our motivations.

I believe we should cease this "caring for appearance' sake".

I did not mean to imply the U.S. actually cared about other countries; as we all know, this is simply not true.

The U.S. has suffered the slings and arrows it has precisely because we have cared-it is my contention the process would be better served if we did not care.

Make up your mind about what you DO actually think before you post, j2. If the US does not CARE, why should anyone CARE what happens to the US?

As for your hopes j2k4, just what are they? You seem very deft at avoiding getting your toes wet. You answer what suits you, and are often proved wrong. We are still waiting for your response to the replies to your idiotic pronouncement that the IRA didn't export terrorism. Puts a dint in your arguments about not negotiating with terrorists doesn't it?

But keep up with the holier-than-thou attitude, you give a real insight into the mind of America.

B)
Billy-

Your post is inane, confusing, off-point, and an all-'round poor effort at escaping responsibility for providing what you promised; you would make a good American liberal-full of emptiness.

Your quotes are unattributed, so I will indicate to others (who shouldn't have to be bothered to back-track in order to un-ravel your sloppiness) that the first and third quotes in the first section are mine; the other is yours.

The first is my response to your query as to what Osama would require of the U.S., were he and Dubya to sit down at the negotiating table.

The third is my response to your accusation of ignorance as to the "reason(s)" we were attacked on 9/11; it is nothing more than a request that you provide for us all your specially enlightened views as to Osama's motivations.

In response, you parroted the standard line.

Your second section of quotes are accurate, although their meaning and nuance might be clearer if you had managed to included your statements which indicated them.

Since you have not seen fit to do so, I will try to provide context without the boring quotes:

My statements were given in response to Billy Dean's whining responses to my views on U.S. foreign policy and the political situation in the mideast.

As he rejects my views and opinions on their face, without any accompanying analysis or refutation (and, no Billy, I'm not talking about my "I.R.A." remark, which statement you also mis-interpreted), he is left with nothing, from a tactical point-of-view, other than comments in the vein of, "ARE WE THERE YET?", IS THAT YOUR BEST SHOT?", "YOUR IGNORANCE/ARROGANCE ARE TYPICALLY AMERICAN!"

By now we know if Billy can't google it, he can't know it, as he trusts the propaganda of "links" and the rhetoric of the "other-wise uninformed" more than he trusts (or can trust) his ability to suss things for himself, or to flesh out an opinion, of which he has only one: The U.S.A. sucks.

Rat Faced

09-16-2003, 03:39 PM

The U.S.A. sucks.

Thats anti-americanism, implying the people.

It was obvious to me that he has been attacking US foreign policy, not the people in general....... although he was very inarticulate with his choice of words at one point, which detracted from his arguments in my opinion...

I'm glad you lot are posting on here, America has a reputation in the world of an arrogant, couldn't care less, what's best for the US is best for the world attitude. So much so, you still don't understand, two years later, why 911 happened.

The overall tone has been about Policy, not people.

As has been pointed out: Anti-American is a nonsense to any educated person.

Every country in the world has its mirror in the America's, the cultures are too varied there to "Generalise" that way.

Billy_Dean

09-16-2003, 03:43 PM

You just don't get it do you?

Tell me this ... have you ever said the reason for 911 was to do with US policy overseas? Have you ever said Osama bin Laden had political motives? Maybe you should give us your views again, just to clear things up. Better read back first tho' you wouldn't want to make any more boobs like this ....

j2k4

The U.S. has suffered the slings and arrows it has precisely because we have cared-it is my contention the process would be better served if we did not care.

j2k4

I did not mean to imply the U.S. actually cared about other countries; as we all know, this is simply not true.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

From j2k4

(and, no Billy, I'm not talking about my "I.R.A." remark, which statement you also mis-interpreted)

Also from j2k4

As to the I.R.A., while they practiced terrorism, they did not export it as has Osama; I trust you see the difference.

Well, err .. no.. I don't see the difference. A clear statement; *As to the I.R.A., while they practiced terrorism, they did not export it... * They DID export it, and, again, you're wrong.

Are we there yet?

Edit:

Clocko

Am I to assume then, that you, Billy Dean, are providing "real insight" into the mind of Australia?

I'm actually English Clocko, I live in Australia.

But I like you, so sorry if my remark upset you. Here's a nice pic of someone else who is English, and also lives in Australia.
She is much nicer than me, by all accounts.

http://www.piczonline.com/client/bowrabob/sMonk_highlight.jpg

B)

j2k4

09-16-2003, 05:26 PM

Originally posted by Rat Faced@16 September 2003 - 10:39

The U.S.A. sucks.

Thats anti-americanism, implying the people.

It was obvious to me that he has been attacking US foreign policy, not the people in general....... although he was very inarticulate with his choice of words at one point, which detracted from his arguments in my opinion...

I'm glad you lot are posting on here, America has a reputation in the world of an arrogant, couldn't care less, what's best for the US is best for the world attitude. So much so, you still don't understand, two years later, why 911 happened.

The overall tone has been about Policy, not people.

As has been pointed out: Anti-American is a nonsense to any educated person.

Every country in the world has its mirror in the America's, the cultures are too varied there to "Generalise" that way.

Seconds out...........Round 2.
Excuse me, Rat.

I was generalizing as Billy was.

No I didn't mean to imply he was including the citizenry (at large) of the U.S. in his anti-U.S. sentiments, such as they are-merely those citizens who don't agree with his holding our government as guilty of criminal intent and action.

He assumes sane people would agree with him as a matter of course.

As to your suppositions re: anti-Americanism:

I have, on occasion and in jest, made remarks denigrating the French and their culture.

When pressed, I have made it plain my problem is with Jacques Chirac, not the people of France.

If anti-Americanism is indeed nonsensical to "any educated person", as you say, then I would posit your stance as a commentary on the intellectual limitations of some who post here.

It would not be my place (nor my way) to name names. Those who are prefer their Americans to be close-mouthed.

j2k4

09-16-2003, 05:44 PM

Originally posted by Billy_Dean@16 September 2003 - 10:43

You just don't get it do you?

Tell me this ... have you ever said the reason for 911 was to do with US policy overseas? Have you ever said Osama bin Laden had political motives? Maybe you should give us your views again, just to clear things up. Better read back first tho' you wouldn't want to make any more boobs like this ....

j2k4

The U.S. has suffered the slings and arrows it has precisely because we have cared-it is my contention the process would be better served if we did not care.

j2k4

I did not mean to imply the U.S. actually cared about other countries; as we all know, this is simply not true.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

From j2k4

(and, no Billy, I'm not talking about my "I.R.A." remark, which statement you also mis-interpreted)

Also from j2k4

As to the I.R.A., while they practiced terrorism, they did not export it as has Osama; I trust you see the difference.

Well, err .. no.. I don't see the difference. A clear statement; *As to the I.R.A., while they practiced terrorism, they did not export it... * They DID export it, and, again, you're wrong.

Are we there yet?

Edit:

Clocko

Am I to assume then, that you, Billy Dean, are providing "real insight" into the mind of Australia?

I'm actually English Clocko, I live in Australia.

But I like you, so sorry if my remark upset you. Here's a nice pic of someone else who is English, and also lives in Australia.
She is much nicer than me, by all accounts.

http://www.piczonline.com/client/bowrabob/sMonk_highlight.jpg

B)
See?

All these insults unaccompanied by a scintilla of content.

I thought Osama's motivations were apparent to all; to the extent that they needn't even be mentioned.

But I assumed (fie on me) that no matter how much people hated the U.S., they would (as Rat says they must) intellectually reject Osama's "reasons" as genuine justification for crashing planes into buildings and killing 3000+ people-nevermind the economic consequences, which reverberated around the world.

Rat Faced

09-16-2003, 07:30 PM

I guess Rat's suppositions about "educated people" don't wash.

You are, of course correct on this point.

You can have an Honours Degree's and still lack "Common Sense"....... In my opinion a much more worthy attribute, and also by the phrase's nature misleading, as I have never found it to be very "Common" as is my understanding of the word.

However, Im sure you know what i meant in the original statement ;)

j2k4

09-17-2003, 04:14 AM

Originally posted by Rat Faced@16 September 2003 - 14:30

I guess Rat's suppositions about "educated people" don't wash.

You are, of course correct on this point.

You can have an Honours Degree's and still lack "Common Sense"....... In my opinion a much more worthy attribute, and also by the phrase's nature misleading, as I have never found it to be very "Common" as is my understanding of the word.

However, Im sure you know what i meant in the original statement ;)
Yes, I did.

I just chose to use it to demonstrate an exception, as the opportunity was ripe, and could not be wasted.

Good on you anyway, Rat- :)

Billy_Dean

09-17-2003, 05:39 AM

Well, that's a good sign, you seem to be getting your sense of humour back.

I eagerly await an opinion.

:)

ilw

09-17-2003, 09:12 AM

Hoping not to get caught in the crossfire, but since we were talking about women's rights in Afghanistan I thought i'd post a link to the debate about women in Islam that the BBC did.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/talking_point/s....stm#transcript (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/talking_point/special/islam/3094894.stm#transcript)
Some of it makes for quite interesting reading.

You're saying that Islam accords women these rights but do they have them in practice in a place you could point to?

Basma El Shayyal:
Unfortunately not no,

That one actually made me laugh

Billy_Dean

09-17-2003, 09:48 AM

I've watched some of these programs on a BBC (?) series called Faith to Faith.

This discussion centres around women's rights according to someone's interpretation of the Koran. It was a relevant point you highlighted, the constant use of the words, in practise meaning, of course, that in the real world things are different.

I once took a friend to a little village named Azila, in the Rif Mountains in Morocco, to the annual dope harvest. Westerners camp in the fields and help bring the plants in. If that sort of thing interests you, I can recommend harvest time, September-ish. A good time is had by all. Except the local women. Observe them whilst you are there. That's the real world.

B)

Bender

09-17-2003, 06:34 PM

Is this turning into another thread in which Billy_Dean and j2k4 try to slaughter each other, or are we going to stay on topic?
If not, I (or any other Mod) will be very happy to close this one too.

(Warnings sent to both.)

hobbes

09-17-2003, 06:48 PM

Originally posted by Bender@17 September 2003 - 19:34
Is this turning into another thread in which Billy_Dean and j2k4 try to slaughter each other, or are we going to stay on topic?
If not, I (or any other Mod) will be very happy to close this one too.

(Warnings sent to both.)
Please stay on topic, lead by example, you lunatic locksmith. ;)

Anyway, this thread has been derailed for a long time and I think this comet is about to burn itself out.

j2k4

09-17-2003, 06:49 PM

Originally posted by Bender@17 September 2003 - 13:34
Is this turning into another thread in which Billy_Dean and j2k4 try to slaughter each other, or are we going to stay on topic?
If not, I (or any other Mod) will be very happy to close this one too.

(Warnings sent to both.)
You have my word, Bender.

It would probably be best to close it anyway, as the subject of the thread hasn't been mentioned in 7 or 8 pages, I think you'll find.

I would welcome your continued stewardship as re: the Billy/j2 contretemps.

Billy_Dean

09-18-2003, 11:38 AM

Originally posted by j2k4@18 September 2003 - 03:49
I would welcome your continued stewardship as re: the Billy/j2 contretemps.
Yeah, I'll say whatever he said ...

:huh:

Rat Faced

09-18-2003, 02:20 PM

In an effort to keep this thread open, Ive gone over the last few pages and deleted all outright flaming, and edited a few posts to delete some flaming.

Appologise if you dont agree with the ones i deleted...but tough, its done now.

lynx

09-18-2003, 03:48 PM

I understand your intentions, RF, but since those being flamed have already read the posts, I can't see how it will have much effect. Still, anything for a quiet life.

Calvarian2003

10-02-2003, 09:19 AM

Originally posted by echidna@7 August 2003 - 08:05
SodiumChloride & DarkBlizzard

you claim that these people are terrorists yet there is no evidence of this
can you substantiate any of your accusations? [since your government won't i doubt that you can]
No evidence? NO EVIDENCE?! Have you been sleeping? These guys were practically caught with their finger on the trigger!

And as for those who claim that the TERRORISTS at Guantanamo Bay are being mistreated, since when was 3 square meals a day, allowance to observe their religion, and lots of sunshine? :P

It's more than what they deserve after plotting to blow up my family, and 100 million other families in countries around the world. Let me put it this way; if the situation were reversed, I doubt that they would be so kind to us. Quite likely, we would have been tortured and put to death in MUCH less time than they've been imprisoned.

I have no qualms of conscience in leaving them imprisoned for the rest of their lives. It is a fate befitting of murderers and terrorists.

Rat Faced

10-02-2003, 09:53 AM

Originally posted by Calvarian2003+2 October 2003 - 09:19--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Calvarian2003 @ 2 October 2003 - 09:19)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-echidna@7 August 2003 - 08:05
SodiumChloride & DarkBlizzard

you claim that these people are terrorists yet there is no evidence of this
can you substantiate any of your accusations? [since your government won't i doubt that you can]
No evidence? NO EVIDENCE?! Have you been sleeping? These guys were practically caught with their finger on the trigger!

And as for those who claim that the TERRORISTS at Guantanamo Bay are being mistreated, since when was 3 square meals a day, allowance to observe their religion, and lots of sunshine? :P

It's more than what they deserve after plotting to blow up my family, and 100 million other families in countries around the world. Let me put it this way; if the situation were reversed, I doubt that they would be so kind to us. Quite likely, we would have been tortured and put to death in MUCH less time than they've been imprisoned.

I have no qualms of conscience in leaving them imprisoned for the rest of their lives. It is a fate befitting of murderers and terrorists. [/b][/quote]
What a load of crap.

They are STILL being sent there...for disagreeing with the warlords over growing drugs etc.

Why dont you actually look around the world and smell the crap your being spoonfed.

Calvarian2003

10-02-2003, 02:38 PM

Rat Faced... you must have replied to kind to half the posts by me on this board...
Do tell, what independent news source would you recommend? Here's a great one:

www.worldnetdaily.com

They haven't yet been bought off by the government or big business like CNN and co....

ilw

10-02-2003, 02:44 PM

Calvarian, is that site representative of most of your beliefs?

Calvarian2003

10-02-2003, 02:54 PM

NOT AT ALL ilw! I read news from all over the place. I'm just less trustful as to what news giants like CNN tell the world. And it seems that a lot of Americans don't either.

Oh, and that depends on what you mean by 'beliefs'. I assume you mean values. I guess you'd call me conservative, and that website is conservative, so it doesn't exactly oppose my values, but I certainly don't agree with everything they say.

j2k4

10-02-2003, 03:51 PM

Calvarian2003-

Welcome to the sandbox; I haven't bumped into you before, probably because my presence here has been somewhat sporadic lately due to other events.

I am trying to regain my, er.....regularity (as it were).

Enjoy your time here! :)

Calvarian2003

10-02-2003, 03:59 PM

j2k4, thank you for the welcome! And the first one I've received too. I've read some of your earlier posts; you surely stand out from a lot of the other people on this board for all the right reasons. I'm not sure how often I'll be on this board myself; I'm sure a couple would be happy if I left now though! lol

Billy_Dean

10-02-2003, 04:44 PM

Originally posted by Calvarian2003@3 October 2003 - 00:59
j2k4, thank you for the welcome! And the first one I've received too. I've read some of your earlier posts; you surely stand out from a lot of the other people on this board for all the right reasons. I'm not sure how often I'll be on this board myself; I'm sure a couple would be happy if I left now though! lol
Personally I'm quite happy for you to stay.

I liked the "sandbox" remark j2.

:)

J'Pol

10-02-2003, 06:18 PM

Originally posted by Calvarian2003@2 October 2003 - 16:59
j2k4, thank you for the welcome! And the first one I've received too. I've read some of your earlier posts; you surely stand out from a lot of the other people on this board for all the right reasons. I'm not sure how often I'll be on this board myself; I'm sure a couple would be happy if I left now though! lol
A welcome from me too, always good to meet new chaps.

I look forward to discussing things with you.

Enjoy yourself here, hope to see you around.

j2k4

10-02-2003, 07:03 PM

Originally posted by Billy_Dean+2 October 2003 - 11:44--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Billy_Dean @ 2 October 2003 - 11:44)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-Calvarian2003@3 October 2003 - 00:59
j2k4, thank you for the welcome! And the first one I've received too. I've read some of your earlier posts; you surely stand out from a lot of the other people on this board for all the right reasons. I'm not sure how often I'll be on this board myself; I'm sure a couple would be happy if I left now though! lol
Personally I'm quite happy for you to stay.

I liked the "sandbox" remark j2.

:) [/b][/quote]
Why, thank you, Billy.

J'Pol

10-02-2003, 07:21 PM

Pair of spammers if you ask me.

billyfridge

10-02-2003, 07:58 PM

Originally posted by Rat Faced@2 October 2003 - 09:53
C

It's more than what they deserve after plotting to blow up my family, and 100 million other families in countries around the world. Let me put it this way; if the situation were reversed, I doubt that they would be so kind to us. Quite likely, we would have been tortured and put to death in MUCH less time than they've been imprisoned.

I have no qualms of conscience in leaving them imprisoned for the rest of their lives. It is a fate befitting of murderers and terrorists.

[/quote]
Calvarian, i agree with what you're saying. why would the US etc, imprison
innocent people? i'm sure there is a bloody good reason why these thugs are there.
I'm ashamed to admit there are Brits there too, but i think they're ethnic Brits.
WHAT the hell were they doing in Iraq or Afghanistan, (holidaying on our assistance payouts?)
These bastard terrorists don't give ANYBODY a fair trial so why waste time and money giving them a trial. The US should drag every bit of info out of them and
HANG them. I know the weeping nellie civil lib dogooders wont agree but who gives a sex act?

J'Pol

10-02-2003, 08:07 PM

You don't feel this may be a wee bit harsh then.

Rat Faced

10-02-2003, 09:27 PM

Calvarian, i agree with what you're saying. why would the US etc, imprison
innocent people?

But billy, thats what we all want to know?

Havent you read the thread?

There isnt any evidence, so they wont get a Fair Trial... Bush has as much admited that...

And why are they still being sent there?

Oh yeh, they speak out against the Warlords that are growing the Opium, raping their wives and killing their parents/children.....

Calvarian, no im not an American, and dont watch CNN or FOX.

blackhatknight

10-04-2003, 06:52 PM

First they came for the Jews
and I did not speak out
because I was not a Jew.
Then they came for the Communists
and I did not speak out
because I was not a Communist.
Then they came for the trade unionists
and I did not speak out
because I was not a trade unionist.
Then they came for me
and there was no one left to speak out for me.

-Pastor Martin Niemoller 1892-1984 (about his experience with the Nazis)

ilw

10-04-2003, 07:00 PM

http://cagle.slate.msn.com/news/TRIBUNALS/Tribunals/kirkklj.gif

http://cagle.slate.msn.com/news/TRIBUNALS/AshcroftTribunals/wassermahjgn.gif

http://cagle.slate.msn.com/news/TRIBUNALS/Tribunals/babin.gif

http://cagle.slate.msn.com/news/TRIBUNALS/Tribunals/asayhjg.gif

And one in defence

http://cagle.slate.msn.com/news/OJTribunal/OJTribunals/varvjkel.gif