Try the bastard for treason

[Freida]

I want this American traitor fighting with the Taliban brought back to the US and tried for treason!

nuff said

[wrecker05]

Amen.

[jhans]

I would have prefered it if the Northern Alliance was allowed to administer their brand of justice.

[Laurie]

I believe I heard on the news that there are now THREE bastards. I say we have a big B-B-Q.

[wrecker05]

Us Law as of 1/5/99

Title 18
Section 2381. Treason

Whoever, owing allegiance to the United States, levies war
against them or adheres to their enemies, giving them aid and
comfort within the United States or elsewhere, is guilty of treason
and shall suffer death, or shall be imprisoned not less than five
years and fined under this title but not less than $10,000; and
shall be incapable of holding any office under the United States.

[This message has been edited by wrecker05 (edited 12-04-2001).]

[wrecker05]

JH I have a question for you? Isn't it illegal for a US citizen to serve in a foreign military service?
I wasn't able to locate an answer except for those who have dual citizenship.

One more, under Title 18 section 2381 are these traitors mentioned in this thread guity of treason?
(I hope so)

[Eddy's Geist]

Big deal... so some 20 year old kid is running around the Kashmir fighting Indians and then starts fighting against the Northern Alliance with an AK-47.

The kids been doing this for at least 6 months.

Let me ask each and everyone of you something. Lets say you're in his shoes and you're part of a rag tag army who "declares war" on the country from where you come from. Are you going to put your hand up and say "Excuse me sir, I'm American and I can't fight agaisnt my own country"?

You do that and you're going to get a bullet in your head post haste.

Me? I'd do what ever I had to to stay alive and hopefully get myself out of the situation when I see the most oppurtune time. Even if that meant firing an AK at Northern Alliance troops that may have US special forces troops commanding them.

The rest of you can all be happy knowing that your grieving families will get to do some CNN interviews and maybe get their names in People magazine.

[Ty]

Ok Eddie,

I can see your logic. The only problem I see is that this boy has been quoted as saying he supports the bombing on 9/11 and the bombing of the USS Cole. As far as I'm concerned he was fighting against us to fight against us, not to save his ass.

[jhans]

Wrecker, I am definitely not an expert on this subject. I know that with the outbreak of WWII there were Americans that went to Canada and joined their armed forces prior to America’s entry into the war. I know that there were American’s who joined the German forces also. There were also American’s who fought in the Spanish Civil War. In addition, there are American’s around the world who in no official U.S. capacity act as mercenaries for various governments around the world. The only time I can remember that Americans were tried for this is for those who joined the German forces in WWII. However, I am positive that none were convicted of treason and I am pretty sure that some were convicted of lesser offenses.

As for the second part of your question, no one could answer it at this time. I’d guess that if you could get two or more Taliban associates to testify against him and American’s were still pretty pissed off about what he did, you might get a conviction. However, I’m guessing if he gets convicted of anything it will be for a lesser crime. That’s kind of why I made the statement above about letting the Northern Alliance take care of the problem

[Freida]

Eddy: You say you'd do whatever you had to do to stay alive. You mean like call your wealthy family and tell them to get you the hell out of the Middle East?

I doubt this asshole fought because he had no choice. It's not like he started fighting with the Taliban without knowing what they stand for and who they hate.

[Freida]

Oh, and by the way. If he was doing what he had to in order to survive, why not surrender to the US troops at the first opportunity? I don't think he surrendered himself, and it doesn't sound as though he's offering any intelligence on the Taliban. You'd think he would cooperate with his own government if he's just some poor 20 year old kid who found himself in a tight spot.

[Deamon]

*shrugs* atleast he had the guts to come out and fight for what he believed in, I can't say the same for myself..

[wrecker05]

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Deamon:
*shrugs* atleast he had the guts to come out and fight for what he believed in, .</font>

Or did he? Seems he cried like a baby, I am an American, I am an American. Hoping not to get hurt.
If he truly fought for what he believed in why did he surrender?

[Eddy's Geist]

Freida, yeah, the more i read about the kid the more there is to dislike about him. First off, I'm not defending his choice of fighting partners. I abhor the Taliban and have for several years. I have heard that he tried to surrender but things got ugly before he could and he ended up playing 'rat in a hole'. If I were him I certainly would have high tailed it to the pakistani border before turning myself in to the NA. All the same, I don't think he's deserved the coveted "traiter" award that so many pansy-ass rebels would like to get. I do think he should be stripped of his citizinship though.

[Deamon]

To avoid starving to death? Death has the bad way of making even the bravest come to the wrong side

[shotglass]

Because he is a child of privilege, like a Kennedy or an albertarnoldgoreJUNIOR who has no idea of what the US is or stands for. All he has to do to get rich is to outlive his parents. And, like a Kennedy, will squander whatever he is given because he does not understand what work is and does not value what he is given.

He is devoid of common sense, patriotism, and should be dealt with the same way we are dealing with the rest of the Taliban. Permanently.

[Freida]

"At least he had the guts to come out and fight for what he believe in."

What the F*%@#? How old are you? So you place "guts" above common sense. There are a lot of people throughout history who have had the "guts" to fight for the wrong cause. In other words, the KKK had the "guts" to burn crosses and kill black Americans. Nazis had the "guts" to slaughter Jews. And take your pick from any number of countries in Africa like Sudan or Nigeria. Sudan has an atrocious child sex-slave operation that too many people have the "guts" to fight for.

What exactly do you think this punk, John Walker, believed in?

[Eddy's Geist]

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by shotglass:
Because he is a child of privilege, like a Kennedy or an albertarnoldgoreJUNIOR who has no idea of what the US is or stands for. </font>

Dubya came from the Bush clan.. that's some serious "old money" right there!
Went to an Ivy league school like Kennedy and Gore too!
The one thing that Dubya can claim that kennedy and Gore can't is that he's directly related to the Royal family in England! Woohoo! our own royalty!

Hey, Shotglass.. how do you equate wealth with a lack of patriotism? For that matter, what do you have against gaining wealth and taking care of your family? You a communist or sumthin' ?

By the way, didn't Kennedy and Gore both fight in combat... unlike Dubya who was lucky enough to get into the National Guard?



[This message has been edited by Eddy's Geist (edited 12-06-2001).]

[Eddy's Geist]

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Eddy's Geist:
Hey! Kind of like Dubya Bush!

Dubya came from the Bush clan.. that's some serious "old money" right there!
Went to an Ivy league school like Kennedy and Gore too!
The one thing that Dubya can claim that kennedy and Bush can't is that he's directly related to the Royal family in England! Woohoo! our own royalty!

Hey, Shotglass.. how do you equate wealth with a lack of patriotism? For that matter, what do you have against gaining wealth and taking care of your family? You a communist or sumthin' ?

By the way, didn't Kennedy and Gore both fight in combat... unlike Dubya who was lucky enough to get into the National Guard?

</font>

[wrecker05]

Actually Gore never fought or saw any combat. If I recall correctly, one of his military buddies said the only combat Gore saw was if he accidently discharged his weapon.

http://www.newhousenews.com/archive/story1b090500.html

Gore's Vietnam Experience a Double-Edged Sword

By BILL WALSH

c.2000 Newhouse News Service

\


LOS ANGELES -- WASHINGTON -- Vietnam may be the war America would like to forget, but Vice President Al Gore would like people to remember one thing this election season about that ugly conflict in Southeast Asia: He volunteered.

While many of his contemporaries were scrambling to avoid service, Gore enlisted in the U.S. Army, a fact highlighted at the Democratic National Convention last month and reinforced in a television ad campaign airing in 17 states titled simply "1969."

Gore's Vietnam strategy, the political gurus say, is designed to both contrast himself from Republican rival George W. Bush, who has had to fend off allegations that his father's political connections kept him stateside during the hostilities, and President Clinton, who took pains to avoid military service altogether.

But in invoking the memory of Vietnam, Gore has also ignited discontent over his own military service. Vietnam veterans, in particular, have objected to what they see as Gore posing as a front-line "grunt" when he was really, as one of them put it, safely "in the rear with the gear."

They say his five months "in country" were far less than the normal 12-month tour of duty and that his assignment as an Army journalist attached to an engineering brigade kept him far from the shooting, something not mentioned in the TV spots.

Many vets give Gore points for signing up at all, since he could have sought shelter in graduate school or, arguably, used his own political clout to land a spot stateside in the National Guard. But others see Gore's enlistment as a calculated risk. They charge that the Army would never have allowed then-U.S. Sen. Albert Gore's son to stray into the line of fire.

"It stinks that Al Gore is using this `I-went-to-Vietnam' bulls--- when his daddy got him a short tour," said retired Army Maj. Glenn MacDonald of Phoenix. "I wish he'd shut up about it."

MacDonald, a Democrat, said he was inclined to vote for Gore until he saw the "1969" ad and it infuriated him. He said he has spoken to "at least 10 other" veterans who are Democrats who feel the same way.

"Let me tell you, not one of them is going to go for Gore," MacDonald said.

To be sure, many of the loudest critics of Gore's service record are Republican veterans who aren't likely to vote for the vice president anyway. Years of defense cuts by the Clinton-Gore administration and Gore's own support for allowing gays to serve openly in the military have alienated many active-duty and retired military people alike.

But their skepticism exposes a risk of Gore's Vietnam strategy: that by touting his service, Gore, who has cast himself as a modern-day populist fighting for the little guy, leaves himself open to criticism that he got special treatment as the son of privilege.

"I was not politically connected, so they stuck me with the Marines and the Navy walking posts in the middle of the night," said Vietnam veteran Gary Curtiss of Slidell, La. "Why didn't Al Gore come with me?"

Like many of his generation, Gore opposed the war in Vietnam. But he has said he enlisted in August 1969 because "it was the right thing to do."

At the time, his father was facing a tough re-election battle complicated by the Tennessee senator's vocal opposition to the war. The son has rejected the suggestion that his chief reason for going was to bolster his father's political chances. (Ultimately, the senior Gore was narrowly defeated.)

In an interview with the Associated Press in July, the vice president said that the primary reason he volunteered was because "if I got out of it, someone would go in my place."

"Carthage (Tenn.) is a small town and whoever went in my place would have a face, a name, a family and a fate, and I didn't want to think about walking down the sidewalk and running into the family of some boy sent in my place," Gore said.

Some veterans are inclined to take Gore at his word.

"I'm sure he had as much clout as George Bush did to stay out and join the National Guard, but he chose active duty," said Edmund Cournoyer Jr. of Springfield, Mass., who served in the Navy from 1973 to 1983. "You had no choice how long you stayed in Vietnam. It's not how long you were there, it's that you were there at all."

Judith Tripler Katz of Tabernacle, N.J., who served 13 months in Vietnam as an Army nurse, agreed.

"Do you remember the line in the Creedence Clearwater Revival song ("Fortunate Son") where John Fogerty sings, `I ain't no senator's son'?" Katz asked. "Al Gore could have easily avoided the draft. Instead he enlisted and did what thousands of his less politically connected peers had to do. I believe this is a hallmark of a leader I can trust."

Oddly enough, many of those who criticize Gore's Vietnam service are willing to excuse Bush's during the same period, along with that of Richard Cheney, his vice presidential running mate, who got a student deferment.

Bush never left the United States during the Vietnam War, serving from 1968 to 1973 as a F-102 fighter pilot in the Texas Air National Guard. Published reports have raised questions about whether then-Congressman George H. Bush pulled strings to get his son a National Guard posting. The Boston Globe recently questioned whether the younger Bush even showed up for all his assignments. The governor's campaign insists that he did.

As a political matter, experts say, fine distinctions over the candidates' service records are likely to matter little to voters.

Military service has never been a prerequisite for holding the post of commander-in-chief and the twice-elected Clinton demonstrated that even actively avoiding service isn't a disqualification.

"Here is a guy who did everything he could to get out of the draft and if he ran today he would probably win," said Larry Berman, a political scientist with the University of California.

Berman says the Gore campaign is betting that most voters will be impressed with Gore's volunteering for duty and discount details about his assignment and his length of duty.

He said voters are likely to remember the many young men of the same generation who faced the gut-wrenching decision of what to do if their draft number came up. Gore's decision, Berman said, serves as an effective counterpoint to the ones made by the two political figures he is battling in this campaign.

"This is one more way he can distance himself from Clinton and separate himself from Bush," Berman said. "All of this isn't really about Vietnam. Vietnam isn't an issue in this election. But character is an issue. This is about character."

[Eddy's Geist]

Thanks Wrecker for the information on Gore! All the same, 5 months "in country" albeit at the "rear" is a bit more than staying home.

Still doesn't excuse Dubya though.

[This message has been edited by Eddy's Geist (edited 12-06-2001).]

[wrecker05]

If his father intervened then, no. Unfortunately, I don't know for sure if he did. The most vocal of those who stated that his father intervened seem to always be Democrats. So I can't tell if their just following partisan lines or the truth.

[Laurie]

*applauds Freida*

I agree with every last word posted. Bravo!

He knew exactly what he was doing over there and what kind of gov't he was involved in. Talk about a way to get a power trip taken care of. As far as I'm concerned, that's all the Talibanian gov't is. A bunch of wacked-out, immature, crazy men fullfilling their need for power.

[Deamon]

Heh, I don't.. I think these 'crazy' 'power hungry' men are strangely similiar to capitalist economic barons that are more subtle with their ambitions, The taliban didn't initiate attack on towers either, America just wants to blame the Taliban for helping out a friend

[wrecker05]

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Deamon:
America just wants to blame the Taliban for helping out a friend</font>

You mean Osama?

[Eddy's Geist]

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Laurie:
*applauds Freida*
A bunch of wacked-out, immature, crazy men fullfilling their need for power. </font>

I think they all have wee little winkies too. I'd bet my missing foreskin on it in fact!

[Eddy's Geist]

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by wrecker05:
If his father intervened then, no. Unfortunately, I don't know for sure if he did. The most vocal of those who stated that his father intervened seem to always be Democrats. So I can't tell if their just following partisan lines or the truth.</font>

hahahahha! It doesn't matter if there was intervention or not! Dubya STILL didn't go to war. Wrecker, you served your time in the military. You went into combat situations... how can you still defend Dubya?

Wrecker, you do know that in America it is ok to be a republican and still not agree with everything the party or the party's candidates say? http://bushwhacked.net/ubb/wink.gif

Addendum:

Wrecker, what was your rank prior to entering Boot Camp? Not a 2nd Lt.? Well.. that must be because you're dumber than Dubya, right? http://bushwhacked.net/ubb/wink.gif

"Before he went to basic training, Bush was approved for an automatic commission as a second lieutenant and assignment to flight school despite a score of just 25 percent on a pilot aptitude test. Such commissions were not
uncommon, although most often they went to prospective pilots who had college ROTC courses or prior Air Force experience. Bush had neither."
http://www.boston.com/news/politics/campaign2000/news/One_year_gap_in_Bush_s_Guard_duty+.shtml

Here's some FOIA documents on Dubya's service:
http://www.cis.net/~coldfeet/document.htm




[This message has been edited by Eddy's Geist (edited 12-07-2001).]

[Freida]

Donald Rumsfield has a great op ed in today's Wall Street Journal. In it he quotes Abagail Adams lamenting,

"Posterity who are to reap the blessings will scarely be able to conceive the hardships and sufferings of their ancestors."

This is why John Walker is such a disgrace to the United States of America and why so many want him tried for treason. That any American could be so ungrateful for the blessings this country affords is just inconceivable.

Those like Deamon will no doubt have a few simple-minded comments about our blessings. But if you are living in a Western country, you are enjoying blessings that have resulted from those who fought and died for freedom.

If you are free to log on to this web site without fear, you are enjoying the blessings that resulted from those who fought against totalitarianism on both fronts.

John Walker was free to travel to Pakistan, free to discover himself and free to choose his philosophy. He was too selfish and self absorbed to recognize why he was free.



[This message has been edited by Freida (edited 12-07-2001).]

[Laurie]

I don't recall the last time any Wall Streeters crashed planes into any buildings killing thousands of people. The only thing those suits are guilty of is wanting money and the power that goes along with it. They aren't typically violent in nature.

And maybe the Taliban didn't initiate the attacks here, but they are harboring and making themselves pretty good accomplices by hiding that coward of a man.

We've wanted to get into the Middle East for years. Osama just opened the door by ordering those attacks. He played right into our government's hands. Though it's a sad thing, I know for a fact the gov't was looking for such a chance to jump in and get involved over there. We've wanted a military base there forever, and Osama just made sure of that. Not only is he extreme, but a stupid one at that.

[wrecker05]

Eddy, at least Bush didn't try to claim to be a frontline grunt as Gore did, although I haven't researched too much into Bush's NG career.
Now I can tell you that usually if an individual has completed a bachelors degree they are given the rank of at least warrant officer in the navy, army marines,coast guard, and 2nd Lt in the air force. I haven't ever met anyone who flies combat planes that are below the rank of 2nd Lt.

[Eddy's Geist]

Well, Wrecker. From chatting with you I get the idea that you're probably more intelligent than Dubya and I'd rather see you receiving the expensive training instead of some rich kid who's Dad was very, very well connected. I'd also wager that you wouldn't of shirked your duty to your country to go work on some politician's election campaign.

What would you have done, Wrecker? Logged as many hours as possible flying some great equipment or went off and worked a campaign?

[wrecker05]

I would be flying. Given a choice I would have chosen infantry instead.

[Dursie]

Try him for treason! Most Americans are saying. Guiliani,or whatever the ex-Mayor
of New York's name is, Cried, Execute him. American's love Scapegoats, someone to blame, and take their frustrations out on.. I agree with Eddy's Geist, and i have said it many times myself, If someone was fighting for the Taliban, or the Al Qeda, and all of a sudden that persons Country was at war with them, that person couldn't just get up,
and say,"sorry i have to go, i can't fight against my own Country". These factions would put a bullet in the blokes head, they wouldn't even think about it, so why don't these people who want his blood, just think about it, and then shut their f___ing mouths.
There is also an Australian who was caught fighting for the Taliban, or Al Qeda, it hasn't been made clear which. He
is in the same boat as this American. Now
seeing as he's an Australian, he should be brought back to Australia for our Authorities to take whatever action it deems apropriate to punish him, but do you think the American's will hand him over? Not a chance. They have him locked in a cage in Cuba, and they are talking about court marshalling him. WHO THE HELL DO THESE AMERICAN'S THINK THEY ARE? HE IS AN AUSTRALIAN, NOT AN AMERICAN, SO THEY HAVE NO RIGHT TO HOLD HIM WHAT SO EVER. His family
over here are trying to find out imformation about him, but the American Authorities wont tell them anything. He isn't covered by the Geneva Convention, because he isn't classed as a prisoner of war, so these Barsteds think they can do what they want with him. If it were the other way around, the American's would be demanding their man be handed over.
I am so sick of America trying to run the world, and there are many more like me here, and all over the world. They make me sick. This is aimed at the American Government, not normal every day citizens........................I wouldn't be an American for anything.........................

------------------
Remember! Where-ever you go, There you are!

[Deamon]

I don't think any of them should die, instead rewarded for their courage, they fought against the most powerful country in the world. They haven't committed treason in any sort, they haven't sold secrets, or killed any americans, they are heroes in my eyes.. f*ck you patriotic americans, atleast they have the guts to risk their lives for what they believe in

[wrecker05]

Personally I say kill them all.One shot to the head, all problems solved.

[Auff]

I'm with Wrecker on this, except first duct tape their heads together so you can use one bullet to kill two and save bullets. I suppose if we use big, jacketted ammo we could do 5 or 6 at a time.

Dursie, you need to read my reply to you on "Osama is Dead".

[Eddy's Geist]

I go away for a weekend and pull a "Ray Milland" style of "Lost Weekend" and I come back to find people making sense. Cool. Johnny Walker showed a fantasic amount of good old fashioned American Spirit by giving his best on the front lines. What's really pathetic is how we're going to use him as our whipping boy because we weren't bright enough to catch Mullah Omar or Bin Laden. I propose a very thick and kitschy bronze statue of Walker in every elementary school yard to show our children that one can reach for the stars and reach them if we try hard enough.. or at least if we have a sweet ass Kalishnikov in our hands. I like Kalishnikovs.. almost as much as Aprilia motorcycles. Not as much. But close. Ducati's are cool too but they aren't as cool as an HK. I want an HK but the fucxen Feds say that I can't have one. Dicks. http://bushwhacked.net/ubb/wink.gif

[jhans]

Eddy, I figured it out. Half the time when you are posting you are completely sober. The other half you are on drugs. You need to wait until after the weekend buzz wears off before you start posting. Do you ever catch yourself looking at a thread and thinking *what the hell, who used my name to post this shit*? I have a friend that used to experience a similar condition when he would get f#%ked up. When he would sober up he would start asking everyone if they saw who threw up on him and pissed all over his bed. Fortunately, he got help for his problem. :)

[Eddy's Geist]

Originally posted by jhansberger
Do you ever catch yourself looking at a thread and thinking *what the hell, who used my name to post this shit*?

Kind of.. usually it's the other way around and I'm twisted completely out of my mind and I have to ask Sleeping Ed "How could you be so daft as to dare and release the inner demons whilst you be sober?" Luckily, I'm usually standing in the middle of the pentagram though and I can keep Awake Ed from trying to steal my battered soul and locking it in the Night of Doom(tm) coffin.
:alien:

[Deamon]

I think you've confused me enough, stop it..
:what:

[Lt. Kije]

Sure, try him for treason.

Have a public trial with lots of media coverage.

Especially focus on the fact that the FBI forgot to get a signature on any confession.

Bring up that the "confession" of which we have heard so much is only pieced together from agent's notes.

Then try to have a fair, unbiased trial, without reference to the fact that John Ashcroft has already hopelessly polluted the prosecution's case by convicting Lindt on television, radio, and in print media.

Good luck.

[wrecker05]

Yeah but for every case that sees a lot of media coverage the prosecution almost always convicts the plaintiff over the mainstream media. Whether directly or indirectly through leaks to the press. He is guilty, he was there, he did know of terrorist attacks against the US, and he did fight for the Taliban a Al Queida supported government.
I think they would at least tape the interviews, if not video them. I could be wrong on that though.

[Lt. Kije]

Originally posted by wrecker05
... He is guilty, he was there, he did know of terrorist attacks against the US, and he did fight for the Taliban a Al Queida supported government... Y'See? This is exactly what I mean. Were you there? Did you infiltrate Al Qaeda? If so, you're blowing your cover big time.

If not, you're just like the rest of us. We suspect, we may even believe, but we don't know. In the absence of absolute knowledge, we do the best we can with a flawed justice system, one that assumes innocence and requires proof of guilt.

I also think it's a mistake to go to the military tribunals that assume guilt, just because we're really pissed off this time. Such a move would brand us as hypocrites in the eyes of the world.

I fear that what will come of Lindt's trial will not be a glowing example to all the world that the US can be fair, can play according to it's own rules, can practice what it preaches. Given the rants that Ashcroft has made to the media about Lindt's guilt I will be very surprised and gratified if the US Judicial System performs without hypocrisy in the proceedings.

That's what I suspect and believe. But I don't know. I hope to be surprised.

[wrecker05]

I see the point you are trying to make. Unfortunately thats one of the problems of up to the minute news. It will be interesting to see the outcome of this.
Perhaps part of the problem is our desire to see immediate results.
I also feel sometimes the accused always use the "I Can't Get A Fair Trial Because...." and people think Holy Crap they are innocent.

[Lt. Kije]

I believe in the First Amendment that protects the freedom of the press...to find out things. The media has a right to report the truth, and to discover that truth.

Much as I love 'em, the media does not have a right to be told things just 'cause they want the ratings. Mr. Ashcroft, repeat after me: "I cannot answer questions that would prejudice any jury members."

[wrecker05]

Even with cases involving heavy media coverage, you can always find an impartial jury. The OJ Simpson case comes to mind.

[Lt. Kije]

You're kidding, right?

http://www.cnn.com/US/9604/01/simpson_juror/
http://www.usatoday.com/news/index/nns190.htm
http://www.courttv.com/casefiles/simpson/criminal/summary/week18.html

"...Meanwhile, the jury underwent another change. A 71-year-old black woman was seated to replace a white woman juror. The excused juror had been the focus of bitter complaints by former juror Jeanette Harris, and she was one of the jurors who took part in a revolt last month...."

[wrecker05]

Well My humble opinion on alot of the OJ jury is: Would you like to give up your job and be sequestered for that long. In a case like OJ the question of jury tampering will always be around.
Now are you saying that this walker character will not recieve a fair trial?

[Auff]

Just shoot the idiot and be done with it.

[Lt. Kije]

Originally posted by wrecker05
Now are you saying that this walker character will not recieve a fair trial? I can't answer with certainty, any more than I can say with certainty that the sun will come up tomorrow. I can say that I expect it to, just as I can say I expect Lindt's trial to be unfair, either on or under the surface.

Look at it objectively: there is no confession, thanks to the FBI screwup. Lindt's Muslim brothers are worthless as witnesses. American witnesses? That's a little trickier: did any of them see him fire a weapon? Remember that he can only be convicted of the things he was charged with: conspiring to kill Americans and providing support to terrorists. Both a which are a bitch to prove given the circumstances. A third-year legal student could get him off.

So with that established, we now look to the fact that the AG had better get a guilty verdict, because he's already issued one to every reporter that will listen.

Now: Do I think he's guilty? Well, that's the way I'd bet. But I don't envy the guys who have to prove it.

Thanks, Auff. You're what makes America great. :rolleyes:

[Auff]

Yeah, OK, the heck with the trial. Just call him innocent, after all, he is the product of modern liberalism. Just drop him off in Brighton Beach, NY, and let him thumb home.

[Lt. Kije]

Ah, it is scintillating wit of this calibre that makes me proud to be, not only a liberal, but a libertarian! Fear not, Auff: modern liberalism will protect your right to say any damnfool thing you like.

For the record: I'll agree that Lindt is the product of modern liberalism if you agree that Kenneth Lay is the product of modern conservatism. Deal?

[wrecker05]

Originally posted by Lt. Kije
: modern liberalism will protect your right to say any damnfool thing you like.

My dealings with liberals have led to the opposite. I have found liberals are the first to want to yank the freedom of speech issue if not agreed with.

[Lt. Kije]

Well, wrecker, I'm sorry that you have encountered some of the bad ones. They were wrong.

[Auff]

Wait one minute Lieutenant: how can one be liberal and libertarian at the same time? Liberals believe that government can solve all of societies ills, therefore wanting more of it, while libertarians want as little government as possible. I see libertarians on the same side as conservatives, just that conservatives are willing to give up some freedoms for the sake of traditional values, while libertarians are willing to abandon tradition in favor of maximum freedom.

I will have to agree with Wrecker on the “yank the freedom of speech issue if not agreed with”, as this has been my experience also, but it is not an official policy of liberalism. But then, modern liberals have an agenda that must be hidden, because if the uneducated masses that vote Democrat knew what the true policies were, there would be very few Democrats left.

With regards to the Lindt-Lay analogy, we have no such agreement. Lindt is the product of a liberal State, liberal parents, damn traditional values, children must find their own way upbringing that appears to be fashionable among the Baby-Boomer generation. Lay is a crook, period. I am not aware whether he is a Republican or a Democrat. Does anyone know? Since the press has not said I would be willing to bet a buck or two that he is a Dem.

:cool:

[wrecker05]

You think sociology class is fact and/or science

you associate the words "model American" with Bill Clinton

you think Dan Rather represents media impartiality

the first word in the description of your hair color is "neon"

you've ever tried to protect the ozone layer

you've stood for animal rights, but wear leather belts and sandals

you've ever given money to a bum so he can buy more, er... food

you use the words "Clarence Thomas" & "Uncle Tom" in the same sentence

you have a bumper sticker that says "You Can't Hug with Nuclear Arms"

you believe diversity represents the answer to everything

you pay a 185 percent markup for organically grown food

you don't want to kill rapists and murderers, but do think abortion's OK

you want more funding for AIDS research but less for cancer/heart research

you abhor censorship unless it's censoring religion or Conservatism

you found yourself unemployed after Clinton was in

you think "separation of church and state" is in the Constitution

you stay informed by watching MTV News

you have an "I'm Straight But Not Narrow" button

you think religion is bad for school kids to learn

you think condom give-aways are just what schools need

you think Jesse Jackson is a good spokesman for the black community

you think Jesse Jackson is good at anything at all

you lie in bed at night worried that "they're" out to get you

you attribute the rising crime rate to the Republicans

you attribute all inner city problems to the Republicans

you attribute the rising illegitimate birth rate to the Republicans

you've held up grocery lines picking between plastic or paper

you think National Organization for Women members are heterosexuals

you're on a committee for the Gay Jewish Women's Cultural Center

you think banning weapons is a solution for ending crime

you tell me how to live by telling me I can't tell people how to live

you think any male in the Kennedy Klan is sober and monogamous

[Auff]

Does that apply to Teddy "The Swimmer"?

[Lt. Kije]

Originally posted by Auff
But then, modern liberals have an agenda that must be hidden, because if the uneducated masses that vote Democrat knew what the true policies were, there would be very few Democrats left.While this may be true, I don't know that it is. And neither do you. I personally have never been invited to the "hidden agenda" meetings; I don't know the secret handshake.

And this is what makes me so tired at trying to be reasonable when talking with conservatives: the predilection to make unfounded accusations toward anyone who disagrees with you.

Liberals have a hidden agenda. Really. Pretty damn' well hidden, wouldn't you say?

The conservative agenda is not so well camoflaged. The recent hijacking of the American government by the Supreme Court was, I think, dangerously close to revealing your actual aims.

Of course I don't know that there was an actual conspiriacy to turn the United States into a kleptocracy, and I'll admit that. You, however, will baldly state that the liberals have a "hidden agenda." You sound like a hysterical witch-hunter.

And wrecker? Puh-leeeze. You copied-and-reposted mockery of those who don't endorse your narrow views sounds quite a lot like schoolyard name-calling. Do you really, really believe everything that you just signed your name to?

I would be embarrassed to show so little style in print.

While you're both here, though: aren't you secretly just a leeeetle embarrased to have Dubya spouting such senseless wank as "Axis of Evil" before his handlers got the gag back in? I mean, couldn't you have found someone less embarrassing to represent your side of the aisle?

Be grateful for Powell. He may be the only one on your side with any ethics.

[Macbeth]

O Please Lt. Kije, Wrecker's posting was an attempt at humor (and a successful one).

I would be embarrased to show so little sense of humour.

[lucie]

No doubt the "humor" passed well under Lt. Kijes' radar, as he is obviously older than 13, and was attempting actual debate at the time. "Neener-neener" my have it's place in certain conversations, but not in a serious discussion.

If soundbytes are the best you guys can do, I'll go back to serious discussion boards.

Ta, chappies.

[Lt. Kije]

Thanks, lucie. Not only am I older than 13, but so are many of my books.

Macbeth, I have an excellent sense of humor. I just hadn't brought it to a political debate. I also tend to neglect it when a proponent of an opposing view descends to mockery. I do, however, count such a descent as evidence of my victory.

wrecker, if I may quote Jeff Foxworthy, "Here's your sign."

[Ty]

So would that be decending to mockery. Just wondering, I was confused by who won.:shrug:

[Eddy's Geist]

Originally posted by wrecker05


you've ever given money to a bum so he can buy more, er... food



Yeah, I've given a few quarters to these bums before.

But I once gave 5 buck to a bum that had a sign that said "Spare some change so i can go buy more booze" ;)

You know what I love about the whole Liberal/conservative debate? the fact that you guys actually have a common 'enemy' and you're not even aware of it. The modern Anarchist. Anarchists hate conservative and liberal ideaology and they're willing to use violence and destruction to win. You guys should all play nice-nice with each other.

[wrecker05]

Lt. I threw it in for a little humor, and now I am called a child.
You and Auff were debating. Perhaps I threw it in for a little example of how a rightwing conservative might consider a liberal.I don't view it as a descent to mockery. Yet you descend into mockery as well. Kind of a double standard.

[Lt. Kije]

Originally posted by Ty
So would that be decending to mockery. Just wondering, I was confused by who won.:shrug: Then you're in the right place.

I, however, am not. I've just read the thread on offshore oil drilling, and some of you are on crack. I mean, you guys really are writing about the existence of liberals who want to, let's see: reduce you to the stone age, put you all into prisons, change the government of the United States to one of communism, force the US to depend on foreign oil (any of you own SUV's?)...and you actually seem to believe this tripe.

Okay, so I disagree with conservatives. That doesn't mean that I think they are in league with the Devil. I think they are deluded but generally well-meaning. But look at what you whackos are saying!

"We need to use cloning technology, unearth Senator McCarthy’s remains, and make us a new one. We could use his leadership about now."

I'm sorry I've been wasting my time on you. You needn't respond to this - I won't be reading. Trying to have a reasonable discussion with you lot of spitting delusionals is a waste of my time. Play amongst yourselves.

[Auff]

Lt, do I KNOW what the Liberal Agenda is? No, as I don’t know the secret handshake either. But based on their statements, actions and illogical behavior the only reasonable conclusion is that their true motives are not as stated. I don’t find anything wrong at all with my reasoning, as it is used all the time when analyzing both scientific and legal matters. Therefore my accusations are firmly grounded.

Your statement of the “recent hijacking of the American government by the Supreme Court” is merely a tired repetition of the Liberal Mantra. Face up to it: GORE LOST. I could go on and on as to why: how dead people in Chicago voted, dimpled chads, disenfranchised military voters, whatever. I believe Gore tried to steal the election and got caught, you believe something else, most people are happy with the best President we’ve had since Reagan. The issue is deader than dirt, so get over it.

[Eddy's Geist]

Kige, don't go. There's damn few opposing opinions on this board and it's good to see some well thought out rebuttals.

I do have to take issue with you on one comment though. Yes, some of the conservatives are on Crack and that's not a bad thing. Would you rather have them be in full control of their mental faculties??? ;)

[Ty]

Boy, ever heard the phrase "take it with a grain of salt" or "lighten up". You seem to completly miss the humor in threads and percieve them as serious ramblings of a psycotic extremist. If there wasn't a little humor in the threads it could get really boring.

[wrecker05]

LT. I wouldn't group all of us together. The posts you were talking about were made by 2 people not every one. I do have to agree with you on Joe McCarthy, cloning him is a really bad idea.

The hardest part about talking politics is neither side actually believes each others arguements.

[Auff]

Oh, waaaahhhhhh!!!!! The liberal gave up so soooon. They seem to be the first ones to lose a sense of humor after they lose an argument. It happens nearly every time.