b3ta.com board
You are not logged in. Login or Signup
Home » Messageboard » XXX » Message 5164723 (Thread)

# Sorry, chum.
I have the presumption of innocence on my side. Show me your proof of guilt.

Here's a clue: You can start by looking through the records of the trials these men have been given.
(, Mon 26 Sep 2005, 15:14, archived)
# Bush has the presumption of innocence
but that doesn't stop you and Bo'bo'bo'obo'bo'dor and others caling him a criminal.

(, Mon 26 Sep 2005, 15:18, archived)
# Aw, poor diddums...
he has to put up with people using word-like-things against his use of bombs, napalm, torture and detention without trial. There's no justice.

I know you must be feeling left out, what with having no banner and all... so I made this just for you:



(, Mon 26 Sep 2005, 15:23, archived)
# So you're reality-impaired
and instead of citing facts you can only make stupid jokes.

www.b3ta.com/board/5164747
(, Mon 26 Sep 2005, 15:25, archived)
# beats changing the subject
I have the presumption of innocence on my side. Show me your proof of guilt.

Here's a clue: You can start by looking through the records of the trials these men have been given.
(, Mon 26 Sep 2005, 15:28, archived)
# Prisoners of war don't get trials.
And being captured while fighting out of uniform doesn't even entitle someone to be a prisoner of war. It entitles them to be summarily sentenced by a military tribunal and executed on the spot.

Guantanamo inmates actually get better treatment than what they are entitled to receive under international law.
(, Mon 26 Sep 2005, 15:31, archived)
# 'They never had it so good'... is that your entire case?
They gained weight and all.

You claim they're all guilty. Show me your proof of guilt.

PS - Unlawful combatants don't get trials... that's what you meant to say, isn't it?
(, Mon 26 Sep 2005, 15:36, archived)
# I don't have access to information that would constitute proof
and you know it, which is why you've chosen this line of attack. But the rules of civil law don't apply in this case anyway.

Actually prisoners of war don't get trials. Being captured while wearing an enemy uniform is considered sufficient to imprison someone for the duration of the war.
(, Mon 26 Sep 2005, 15:40, archived)
# Gosh
does this mean that my impressions,
based as they are on left-wing propaganda, have some relation to reality?

And I didn't choose a line of attack. You made an assertion that you could not prove, and I called you on it. You ducked you dived, but at last (and this is rare for you) you had to admit that You. Were. Wrong... before swiftly pointing out that those rules don't apply in this game, rubber/glue no returns nyer-nyer-nyer.
(, Mon 26 Sep 2005, 15:46, archived)
# So it's not ok...
...for enemy combatants not to wear uniform, but CIA operatives in the field are allowed to?

Or if caught should they be summarily sentenced by military tribunal and executed on the spot?
(, Mon 26 Sep 2005, 15:44, archived)
# One might be tempted to mention a couple of 'hero' brits in Iraq.
Then again, one might not.
(, Mon 26 Sep 2005, 15:48, archived)
# yep, makes no difference really what nationality they are,
it seems like those with the biggest guns make the rules and those with the biggest guns can break the rules, but woe betide anybody else who trys.
(, Mon 26 Sep 2005, 15:50, archived)
# No, no
Don't try to dodge the question. How can you be so sure they're all terrorists, every last one of them, if they've never got a trial?
(, Mon 26 Sep 2005, 16:48, archived)