Jump to content

No end in sight


Guest Guest

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 91
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Guest 2smart4u
I wonder how many in this forum have acutally watched this documentary. I was nominated for an Oscar.

You were nominated for an Oscar ??? Was it for playing a Blame America First, leftist Kool-Aid

drinking fool ??? You would have no trouble with that part.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You were nominated for an Oscar ???

Missing a "t" on a two-letter word, a simple typo, is nothing compared to your multiple question marks and the inexplicable space between them and the last word.

Now, to reiterate in terms you can understand: your grammar is worse, punk.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I doubt many of these neocon scum would have the guts to sit through it.

If Keith had told us earlier about his Oscar nomination maybe we'd have searched it out.

I watched part of the documentary. It calls Habeas corpus a fundamental right without noting that it is a Constitutional right. Applying Constitutional rights to illegal combatants in foreign countries would be the height of stupidity. Asking our soldiers to observe some analog to a Miranda reading while engaged in combat simply doesn't make sense. Moreover, it makes little sense to accord the protections of the Geneva Conventions to fighting force that preferentially attacks civilian targets. It's like sending out a side of soccer players to play Australian Rules football where the former stick with the rules and conventions of soccer. The Geneva Conventions aimed to create a humane style of warfare between signatory nations. They've never worked particularly well in the first place, and trying to apply the Conventions to fighters who do not even represent a particular nation and deliberately ignore the Conventions in the first place is folly.

By failing to note the context in law for Habeas corpus, the documentary reveals itself as a biased piece of work. Take it with a grain of salt.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Keith
If Keith had told us earlier about his Oscar nomination maybe we'd have searched it out.

I watched part of the documentary. It calls Habeas corpus a fundamental right without noting that it is a Constitutional right. Applying Constitutional rights to illegal combatants in foreign countries would be the height of stupidity. Asking our soldiers to observe some analog to a Miranda reading while engaged in combat simply doesn't make sense. Moreover, it makes little sense to accord the protections of the Geneva Conventions to fighting force that preferentially attacks civilian targets. It's like sending out a side of soccer players to play Australian Rules football where the former stick with the rules and conventions of soccer. The Geneva Conventions aimed to create a humane style of warfare between signatory nations. They've never worked particularly well in the first place, and trying to apply the Conventions to fighters who do not even represent a particular nation and deliberately ignore the Conventions in the first place is folly.

By failing to note the context in law for Habeas corpus, the documentary reveals itself as a biased piece of work. Take it with a grain of salt.

It's obvious you barely watched any of the documentary. Why don't you watch the entire thing and then make a comment

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's obvious you barely watched any of the documentary. Why don't you watch the entire thing and then make a comment

It's obvious that you're avoiding dealing with the criticism I've already made. But at least you were able to do it without talking about recruiting! :lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Guest
It's obvious that you're avoiding dealing with the criticism I've already made. But at least you were able to do it without talking about recruiting!

It's obvious that Keith is right: You didn't watch it, yet you presume to criticize it.

And of course, what post from you that touches on the law would be complete without your displaying your abysmal ignorance on the subject? Habeas corpus and Miranda warnings are completely separate things.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Educator
Missing a "t" on a two-letter word, a simple typo, is nothing compared to your multiple question marks and the inexplicable space between them and the last word.

Now, to reiterate in terms you can understand: your grammar is worse, punk.

"inexplicable space" ?? Intellectually challenged I see.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Guest
"inexplicable space" ??

Yes (still seeing the same stupid punctuation mistake, a mistake not even a grade-schooler would be caught making. Hope you're proud), as in 'there is no reasonable explanation for making such an obvious and idiotic error over and over again.'

Intellectually challenged I see.

I'm not the one who doesn't know how to punctuate sentences. ;) Do you project this strongly often?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest 2smart4u
Yes (still seeing the same stupid punctuation mistake, a mistake not even a grade-schooler would be caught making. Hope you're proud), as in 'there is no reasonable explanation for making such an obvious and idiotic error over and over again.'

I'm not the one who doesn't know how to punctuate sentences. ;) Do you project this strongly often?

I wonder what Fraude would think about a Punctuation Fetish ? (Oh my gosh, I made one of those

inexplicable spaces too)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Guest
I wonder what Fraude would think about a Punctuation Fetish ? (Oh my gosh, I made one of those

inexplicable spaces too)

Who the hell is Fraude? Just another of your errors?

Thank God 01/20/2009 will see the end of at least 2 of them.

Bye Dumbya. By Dick. Don't let the door hit your D**ba**es on the way out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest 2smart4u
I wonder what Fraude would think about a Punctuation Fetish ? (Oh my gosh, I made one of those

inexplicable spaces too)

That's "Freud" of course. Pardon my slip.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest *Autonomous*
That's "Freud" of course. Pardon my slip.

Why should we? You never do.

The thing is, a typo is simply an error. What you do is purposely disrespect the language of Milton and Shakespeare in order to give your posts all the gravitas of a .txt message from a fourteen-year-old.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Guest
Why should we? You never do.

The thing is, a typo is simply an error. What you do is purposely disrespect the language of Milton and Shakespeare in order to give your posts all the gravitas of a .txt message from a fourteen-year-old.

Are you on drugs?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...