23 Feb 07
1 edit
Originally posted by B52EWO10 years means that after that time there is the possibility for him to go free.
reread the story, he was sentenced to 100 years....stop repeating 10 YEARS for dramatic affect, it's annoying
"i am sorry your honour i was a monster but now i;ve changed, i have found jesus and i am truly a reformed man. i am no longer a danger to society. my mother need me, she has nobody else and she has cancer and she will die soon and her last wish is for me to be of use to society."
the above, and some tears, and perhaps a sobbing old lady in the room, and some idiotic comission and the possibility grows.
so do you still think he was aiming for dramatic effect?
23 Feb 07
Originally posted by ZahlanziWhat he got was not out of line with what a lot of rapists and murderers get right here at home. His punishment seems in line to me.
10 years means that after that time there is the possibility for him to go free.
"i am sorry your honour i was a monster but now i;ve changed, i have found jesus and i am truly a reformed man. i am no longer a danger to society. my mother need me, she has nobody else and she has cancer and she will die soon and her last wish is for me to be of use to soc ...[text shortened]... mission and the possibility grows.
so do you still think he was aiming for dramatic effect?
My issue is that our rapists and murderers never seem to get the punishment they deserve. These guys are just a few more in line of thugs that got off easy. The line goes back decades.
23 Feb 07
Originally posted by RedmikeCertainly does. And don't even try to equate it to radical islam. The volumee of stories of honor killings and legal rapings inside radical Islamic societies is overwhelming.
And does that logic apply to any hundreds of thousands?
That's not even to mention their treatment of women, etc.
23 Feb 07
Originally posted by MerkI was thinking more of the idea that the actions of a couple dozen terrorists are used as justification for trashing a couple of countries.
Certainly does. And don't even try to equate it to radical islam. The volumee of stories of honor killings and legal rapings inside radical Islamic societies is overwhelming.
That's not even to mention their treatment of women, etc.
Seems to me like the same sort of logic.
23 Feb 07
Originally posted by RedmikeTaliban support for al-Qeada was the reason for the invasion of Afghanistan. I'm not sure we trashed Afghanistan all that much, but more or less you could make your case apply to Afghanistan.
I was thinking more of the idea that the actions of a couple dozen terrorists are used as justification for trashing a couple of countries.
Seems to me like the same sort of logic.
Terrorism was only one of many stated reasons for attacking Iraq.
I'm not sure how a nation defending itself makes it a backward society. It would be backward not to.
23 Feb 07
Originally posted by MerkI'm not arguing that the US is backward, nor that the actions of these US forces people suggest that it is.
Taliban support for al-Qeada was the reason for the invasion of Afghanistan. I'm not sure we trashed Afghanistan all that much, but more or less you could make your case apply to Afghanistan.
Terrorism was only one of many stated reasons for attacking Iraq.
I'm not sure how a nation defending itself makes it a backward society. It would be backward not to.
What I'm saying is that you take this position while at the same time insist that attacking countries loosely connected (or not at all, in the case of Iraq) with these terrorists is justified because of the actions of a couple of dozen terrorists.
Either the actions of a few people do demonstrate something about where they come from, or they don't.
But it works both ways.
23 Feb 07
Originally posted by Redmikecouple of dozen terrorists??? Please do another headcount
I'm not arguing that the US is backward, nor that the actions of these US forces people suggest that it is.
What I'm saying is that you take this position while at the same time insist that attacking countries loosely connected (or not at all, in the case of Iraq) with these terrorists is justified because of the actions of a couple of dozen terrorists.
...[text shortened]... o demonstrate something about where they come from, or they don't.
But it works both ways.
23 Feb 07
Originally posted by scottishinnzTsk, tsk, tsk. Once again scottishinnz, you've gotten it all wrong. The U.S. doesn't endorse this type of behavior -- that's why the perpetrators were put on trial. However, had the situation been reversed, and it was Muslims who raped a Christian girl and murdered her parents, they would have been hailed as heroes and the story would have led the nightly broadcast on Al Jazeera. That's the difference.
"Cortez could only be sentenced to 100 years imprisonment, which under military law allows the possibility of parole after 10 years."
Cortez described how a fellow soldier pinned the girl to the ground and held her down while he raped her.... [b]10 years
he heard about four or five gunshots from the bedroom where Green had taken the girl' ...[text shortened]...
No wonder the arab world hates the US, when they all but endorse this type of behaviour.[/b]
23 Feb 07
Originally posted by RedmikeWhat about all the mosques around the world that contributed funding or preached the hatred of the West that bankrolled and the 19 hijackers? Also, don't forget all the Muslims who heard the message but didn't say or do anything to stop it.
How many were involved in the 9/11 attacks then? I thought there were 19?