user ballots
Login
Register
Add One
FAQ/Contact
Popular Ballots
Recent Popular
Recent Votes
Best
Worst
Yes or No
Choices
What If
Prediction
Advice
Would You
Crime
Recommend
Quiz
TV & Movie
Music & Radio
Political
Science
Sports
Relationship
Techonology
Culture
Philosophy
Religion
Ethics
History
Food & Health
Fashion & Beauty
Crime
FanBase
Discussion
Bug Report
|
COMMENTS:
The source of the quote is Salon.
"It's, like, so dif'cult to tell 'em ragheads apart y'know? Sumtimes you be thinkin' one of 'ems a militia dude with an AK but after emptying yer clip into his face, well, turns out s'just a little gurl holdin' a pail of durty fer her famly."
It doesn't matter what nation, creed, color or race you are IF YOU ARE A SOLDIER YOU ARE A HIRED KILLER. No more, no less.
We cannot expect semi-literate, blood-hungry simpletons to reamin on the leash when dropped into enemy territory with nothing more than an enormous weapons catalogue and billions of dollars of murderous hardware at his disposal can we?
Voted : The neo-cons will condemn this atrocity, as they would if it had been done by the insurgents.
Well, I mean they should. And based on wishful thinking I vote they will.
cranky the last time I checked a person was innocent until proven guilty in America.If the Pentagon has evidence that these men committed war crimes then let them present their evidence in court.
Corrupt:
Is it fair, then, that to neo-cons that blacks, muslims, women, liberals, democrats, gays, etc., are always guilty and never innocent?
And do you think the neo-con response will by any different if these soldiers are tried and found guilty?
If anybody believes that a certain group is always guilty of alleged crimes then they are wrong reguradless of their political views.I think if these men are found guilty the so-called neo-cons would have no choice but to admit that American soldiers have committed war crimes.I do think this verdict would make them change their mind about the war and it shouldn't.One or two bad soldiers does not make the war invalid or wrong.
Last time I checked the killing of unarmed civilians was a crime.
Did I miss a meeting?
^I guess you were an eyewitness to the crime cause how else would you know that these soldiers killed those civilians?
Corrupt- "cranky the last time I checked a person was innocent until proven guilty in America."
- Well... last time I checked the US has not been consistent on such a policy. The importance of a right to a trial? I agree. But there is inconsistency, in that the Guantanamo prisoners haven't had that right. What if the Iraqi government had arrested all the suspects, forbid them from a trial, detained them indefinitely for 'questioning'? That wouldn't be right. That is exactly what Guantanamo is like- shameful and wrong.
Alright Socrates but the Supreme Court has ruled that those men must be charged and they will be charged and prosecuted.Moreover it's not against the law to hold a suspected murder etc before a court hearing.This is especially if the person is considered a possible danger or "flight risk".Ofcourse if the person can make bail they can leave the custody of the authorities.
Some of the individuals have been in Guantanamo for over four years. It isnt' right to hold someone for four years without access to legal representation or without being charged. And, despite what the Supreme Court ruled, not much is happening. And why did it come down to the Supreme Court forcing the Bushies to obey the law?
Again, in the Bush New World Order, if you have the wrong affiliation, you are guilty, period. Forget about guilty until being proven innocent.
It takes time cranky to charge all the detainees at Gitmo but the Feds have no choice but to follow the Supreme Court order.
Voted : The neo-cons will condemn this atrocity, as they would if it had been done by the insurgents.
But, it starting to appear that intial reports were a bit skewed to say the least.
|
|
