• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Point of clarification

Ozoned

Ozoned

Diamond Member
So the people that claim the invasion of Iraq is unjust and illegal, are largely American and patriotic.

Now I have heard the same people argue that we are denying basic fundamental rights and constitutional privileges to terrorist suspects and enemy combatants and argue that our constitution is worthless unless we extend the same privileges to them, that we enjoy.

And then, in the next breath claim that their President is a liar, guilty by reason of the facts and opinions that they post and there is an air of a demand that their facts and opinions must be refuted before they can extend any reasonable notion that The president is innocent of what they charge.

[*]In their eyes, there is a presumption of guilt...

So, are the terrorist suspects and enemy combatants entitled to due process, with a presumption of innocence, and The president of the Us is not?

Maybe these people are a bloodthirsty people living in a democracy. Wouldn't be the first time that they talk out both sides of their faces. :|




Oh, and don't get pissy, Winston, its not personal. 😎



 
Originally posted by: Infohawk
Are you seriously comparing allegations on a BBS with an official judicial procedure?
Click to expand...


No, I am comparing the different speaks that comes from the two sides of your beak.

🙂
 
Tell us what you have heard out of the mouths of the people in Gitmo compared to what you have heard from the Neocon Administration?
 
Originally posted by: dahunan
Tell us what you have heard out of the mouths of the people in Gitmo compared to what you have heard from the Neocon Administration?
Click to expand...

A little twist from my twisted friend,,,,,,,,,,,,,, Ok here is my response:


Sorry, using leftist logic, this is a nonsequitur.




 
Interesting.

Lets see...

The President may or may not have started a war. When he was standing around he was scooped up and arrested without charge and trial. He is now awaiting some unknown fate.


Ok, if that's how you see it.


Nothing personal, but I don't remember that. I'll have to speak to INGSOC and have history corrected for you.

Poor Bush. Subjected to physical abuse. Denied protection. I weep for him. Locked away.



Well, I have a solution and one that is equitable. What I have been arguing for with the detainees is to be charged, tried and either convicted or released.

I would quite willingly settle for the same for Bush.

What a great idea you have!
 
Originally posted by: Ozoned
Originally posted by: dahunan
Tell us what you have heard out of the mouths of the people in Gitmo compared to what you have heard from the Neocon Administration?
Click to expand...
A little twist from my twisted friend,,,,,,,,,,,,,, Ok here is my response:


Sorry, using leftist logic, this is a nonsequitur.
Click to expand...
Hardly. It is you argument that's a non sequitur. Bush is not being held incommunicado based on our allegations. Bush is not being tortured (or whatever you choose to dismiss it as) based on hearsay. Bush has not had his home destroyed and his family members killed because of our belief in his guilt. Bush is, in fact, enjoying his presumption of innocence, even while he denies it to others.

Contrary to your troll, we are actually quite consistent in our position. Let's get both Bush and our prisoners on trial. Let's stop denying justice to our prisoners, and denying Bush to Justice.
 
Originally posted by: WinstonSmith
Interesting.

Lets see...

The President may or may not have started a war. When he was standing around he was scooped up and arrested without charge and trial. He is now awaiting some unknown fate.


Ok, if that's how you see it.


Nothing personal, but I don't remember that. I'll have to speak to INGSOC and have history corrected for you.

Poor Bush. Subjected to physical abuse. Denied protection. I weep for him. Locked away.



Well, I have a solution and one that is equitable. What I have been arguing for with the detainees is to be charged, tried and either convicted or released.

I would quite willingly settle for the same for Bush.

What a great idea you have!
Click to expand...


My POV in this thread, It is about examining subjectivity. IT IS ABOUT THE CONSTITUTION. At least I think it is, based upon what I have interpreted from the double speaks that I have been hearing.

How can you manage a view that champions the presumption of innocence, in one hand and so proudly proclaims the obvious presumption of guilt in the other?
😕

Isn't what you are doing rather, Elitist, for lack of a better word?

Are there variations in the level of support that you are willing to take, in regards to what is right and wrong in the constitution?

Does it depend on the severity of your outrage?
 
Originally posted by: Bowfinger
Originally posted by: Ozoned
Originally posted by: dahunan
Tell us what you have heard out of the mouths of the people in Gitmo compared to what you have heard from the Neocon Administration?
Click to expand...
A little twist from my twisted friend,,,,,,,,,,,,,, Ok here is my response:


Sorry, using leftist logic, this is a nonsequitur.
Click to expand...
Hardly. It is you argument that's a non sequitur. Bush is not being held incommunicado based on our allegations. Bush is not being tortured (or whatever you choose to dismiss it as) based on hearsay. Bush has not had his home destroyed and his family members killed because of our belief in his guilt. Bush is, in fact, enjoying his presumption of innocence, even while he denies it to others.

Contrary to your troll, we are actually quite consistent in our position. Let's get both Bush and our prisoners on trial. Let's stop denying justice to our prisoners, and denying Bush to Justice.
Click to expand...


No, I am fairly certain that the overwhelming majority of people that are opposed to Bush presume him to be guilty of crimes.

Oh, I see, now they are simply "allegations" 1st time I ever heard of that...Glad you cleared that up for me, Bow.


The part that I bolded up there, tends to lead me to believe that How you are willing to Stand up for the constitution, ultimately depends on the severity of your outrage.
 
There is no presumption of innocence in public opinion. If Bush was on trial at a criminal court, you would have a point. You "strict constructionists" should know that. 😀
Also, unjust and illegal I can forgive, idiotic and misdirected I won't.
 
Originally posted by: Ozoned
Originally posted by: Bowfinger
Originally posted by: Ozoned
Originally posted by: dahunan
Tell us what you have heard out of the mouths of the people in Gitmo compared to what you have heard from the Neocon Administration?
Click to expand...
A little twist from my twisted friend,,,,,,,,,,,,,, Ok here is my response:


Sorry, using leftist logic, this is a nonsequitur.
Click to expand...
Hardly. It is you argument that's a non sequitur. Bush is not being held incommunicado based on our allegations. Bush is not being tortured (or whatever you choose to dismiss it as) based on hearsay. Bush has not had his home destroyed and his family members killed because of our belief in his guilt. Bush is, in fact, enjoying his presumption of innocence, even while he denies it to others.

Contrary to your troll, we are actually quite consistent in our position. Let's get both Bush and our prisoners on trial. Let's stop denying justice to our prisoners, and denying Bush to Justice.
Click to expand...
No, I am fairly certain that the overwhelming majority of people that are opposed to Bush presume him to be guilty of crimes.

Oh, I see, now they are simply "allegations" 1st time I ever heard of that...Glad you cleared that up for me, Bow.


The part that I bolded up there, tends to lead me to believe that How you are willing to Stand up for the constitution, ultimately depends on the severity of your outrage.
Click to expand...
As expected, you are once and forever a devoted troll and shameless Bush apologist. I'd ask you to let me know when you're actually interested in discussion, but let's be honest, we'd both know you were lying.

*plonk*

 
Originally posted by: Ozoned
Originally posted by: WinstonSmith
Interesting.

Lets see...

The President may or may not have started a war. When he was standing around he was scooped up and arrested without charge and trial. He is now awaiting some unknown fate.


Ok, if that's how you see it.


Nothing personal, but I don't remember that. I'll have to speak to INGSOC and have history corrected for you.

Poor Bush. Subjected to physical abuse. Denied protection. I weep for him. Locked away.



Well, I have a solution and one that is equitable. What I have been arguing for with the detainees is to be charged, tried and either convicted or released.

I would quite willingly settle for the same for Bush.

What a great idea you have!
Click to expand...


My POV in this thread, It is about examining subjectivity. IT IS ABOUT THE CONSTITUTION. At least I think it is, based upon what I have interpreted from the double speaks that I have been hearing.

How can you manage a view that champions the presumption of innocence, in one hand and so proudly proclaims the obvious presumption of guilt in the other?
😕

Isn't what you are doing rather, Elitist, for lack of a better word?

Are there variations in the level of support that you are willing to take, in regards to what is right and wrong in the constitution?

Does it depend on the severity of your outrage?
Click to expand...


I see I have annoyed you. The point is do I want to play the game of being sucked in on things that don't escape you as evidenced by the way you frame things.

Hmm... lets see. I was around for the war. I saw the claims by Powell etc. I see that the WMD search has been given up with no success. I saw the dissent in the intelligence before the war. I saw the axim of "intel isn't proof, it's intel" violated. I see the President with egg on his face because the main reason touted as the reason for the war is gone.

Funny thing about the Constitution. It does not prohibit accusations based on witnessed actions. It does not allow people to be locked up because of it. Oh they may deserve to be locked up, but before they are they are charged and tried.

Obviously this has been done with both Bush and the detainees, right? Sure.

The game is over. You can play with yourself, but while I accuse Bush of things I was around for, there are some who would have loved to impeach Kerry if elected for things he did was not around for. I wonder who that was?

Have fun. I have a child to get to bed. The kids here can debate away.
 
Originally posted by: Bowfinger
Originally posted by: Ozoned
Originally posted by: Bowfinger
Originally posted by: Ozoned
Originally posted by: dahunan
Tell us what you have heard out of the mouths of the people in Gitmo compared to what you have heard from the Neocon Administration?
Click to expand...
A little twist from my twisted friend,,,,,,,,,,,,,, Ok here is my response:


Sorry, using leftist logic, this is a nonsequitur.
Click to expand...
Hardly. It is you argument that's a non sequitur. Bush is not being held incommunicado based on our allegations. Bush is not being tortured (or whatever you choose to dismiss it as) based on hearsay. Bush has not had his home destroyed and his family members killed because of our belief in his guilt. Bush is, in fact, enjoying his presumption of innocence, even while he denies it to others.

Contrary to your troll, we are actually quite consistent in our position. Let's get both Bush and our prisoners on trial. Let's stop denying justice to our prisoners, and denying Bush to Justice.
Click to expand...
No, I am fairly certain that the overwhelming majority of people that are opposed to Bush presume him to be guilty of crimes.

Oh, I see, now they are simply "allegations" 1st time I ever heard of that...Glad you cleared that up for me, Bow.


The part that I bolded up there, tends to lead me to believe that How you are willing to Stand up for the constitution, ultimately depends on the severity of your outrage.
Click to expand...
As expected, you are once and forever a devoted troll and shameless Bush apologist. I'd ask you to let me know when you're actually interested in discussion, but let's be honest, we'd both know you were lying.

*plonk*
Click to expand...
So, you're scared of the truth when it is pointed out to you, huh? Just like in this Thread

 
Here is the deal for you Republicans. You can pontificate, you can excuse, you can justify, you can rationalize, you can support, you can scare, you can mislead, you can come up with red herrings, you can do whatever you want. This war is gonna fail, and it will be a huge stain on the Republican party for a long time. It will kill neoconservative foreign policy at a minimum, and could bring down the GOP. It's time to write Iraq off and bring our troops home.
 
Originally posted by: WinstonSmith
Originally posted by: Ozoned
Originally posted by: WinstonSmith
Interesting.

Lets see...

The President may or may not have started a war. When he was standing around he was scooped up and arrested without charge and trial. He is now awaiting some unknown fate.


Ok, if that's how you see it.


Nothing personal, but I don't remember that. I'll have to speak to INGSOC and have history corrected for you.

Poor Bush. Subjected to physical abuse. Denied protection. I weep for him. Locked away.



Well, I have a solution and one that is equitable. What I have been arguing for with the detainees is to be charged, tried and either convicted or released.

I would quite willingly settle for the same for Bush.

What a great idea you have!
Click to expand...


My POV in this thread, It is about examining subjectivity. IT IS ABOUT THE CONSTITUTION. At least I think it is, based upon what I have interpreted from the double speaks that I have been hearing.

How can you manage a view that champions the presumption of innocence, in one hand and so proudly proclaims the obvious presumption of guilt in the other?
😕

Isn't what you are doing rather, Elitist, for lack of a better word?

Are there variations in the level of support that you are willing to take, in regards to what is right and wrong in the constitution?

Does it depend on the severity of your outrage?
Click to expand...


I see I have annoyed you. The point is do I want to play the game of being sucked in on things that don't escape you as evidenced by the way you frame things.

Hmm... lets see. I was around for the war. I saw the claims by Powell etc. I see that the WMD search has been given up with no success. I saw the dissent in the intelligence before the war. I saw the axim of "intel isn't proof, it's intel" violated. I see the President with egg on his face because the main reason touted as the reason for the war is gone.

Funny thing about the Constitution. It does not prohibit accusations based on witnessed actions. It does not allow people to be locked up because of it. Oh they may deserve to be locked up, but before they are they are charged and tried.

Obviously this has been done with both Bush and the detainees, right? Sure.

The game is over. You can play with yourself, but while I accuse Bush of things I was around for, there are some who would have loved to impeach Kerry if elected for things he did was not around for. I wonder who that was?

Have fun. I have a child to get to bed. The kids here can debate away.
Click to expand...


Ahhh, I understand now. They are just accusations. Glad we cleared that up. 2 Down 200 to go...

 
Originally posted by: Ozoned


No, I am fairly certain that the overwhelming majority of people that are opposed to Bush presume him to be guilty of crimes.
Click to expand...
Just because he's a piss poor President does not make him a criminal.
 
I agree with Ozoned. It is high time for American Patriots to remove the stain on the honor of the USA and to apply the process of due process visavi the President and impeach him for high crimes and misdemeanours.
 
Originally posted by: GrGr
I agree with Ozoned. It is high time for American Patriots to remove the stain on the honor of the USA and to apply the process of due process visavi the President and impeach him for high crimes and misdemeanours.
Click to expand...

Absolutely. Do something besides b!tching and moaning and groaning and the incessant whining.

Put the ball into motion.

How about you GrGR?

Got balls?

 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top