Scotland to release Pan-Am bomber

[StinkyPinky]

Originally posted by: theflyingpig

Originally posted by: StinkyPinky

Originally posted by: TheSkinsFan

Originally posted by: Dari
When we murdered 290 Iranians, flying to SA to perform the Hajj in 1988, with a Navy missile, nobody stood trial or apologized...

Deflections and the "Two wrongs" argument... always a joy to witness! :roll:

Why not? It's a logical and reasonable point. How can Americans jump up and down about the injustice of this decision when our own countrymen shot down an airplane full of women and children just a few months prior, and our own govt refused to say sorry and then had the nerve to actually award medals to these murderers.

At least this guy got 15 years, which is a decent chunk of time. Our guys got medals and a pardon.

And then we wonder why the world thinks we're a bunch of hypocrites.

Provide a passenger manifest to support your claim of "airplane full of women and children", or edit your post to reflect the truth.

66 children were killed. The US govt admits to it.

Use google. Or, hell, just click on the wikipedia link I posted a few posts above. Geez.

 

[theflyingpig]

Originally posted by: StinkyPinky

66 children were killed. The US govt admits to it.

Use google. Or, hell, just click on the wikipedia link I posted a few posts above. Geez.

You said "airplane full of women and children". Sixty six children is hardly an "airplane full". Explain your reasons for sensationalizing your post and twisting the truth.

 

[ZeGermans]

hahaha are you seriously playing semantics with the slaughter of a few hundred people that went completely unpunished?

 

[theflyingpig]

Originally posted by: ZeGermans
hahaha are you seriously playing semantics with the slaughter of a few hundred people that went completely unpunished?

You are a fool if you think this is "playing semantics". The truth was twisted for someones pathetic agenda. I am here to correct that.

 

[ZeGermans]

full of women and children generally means "more than 0" because the implication was that it's a military target. Much like people say "that bakery/mall/whatever was full of women and children" when some Iraqi blows himself up.

 

[StinkyPinky]

Originally posted by: theflyingpig

Originally posted by: ZeGermans
hahaha are you seriously playing semantics with the slaughter of a few hundred people that went completely unpunished?

You are a fool if you think this is "playing semantics". The truth was twisted for someones pathetic agenda. I am here to correct that.

Um.....ok. Seek help.

 

[StinkyPinky]

Originally posted by: ZeGermans
full of women and children generally means "more than 0" because the implication was that it's a military target. Much like people say "that bakery/mall/whatever was full of women and children" when some Iraqi blows himself up.

You're wasting your time talking to him. Clearly he doesn't even know full of women and children means. Of course there were men on the plane, but it was still full of women and children. Someone who has a basic grasp of English would know that, but I can only suspect his English is below basic.

 

[theflyingpig]

Originally posted by: ZeGermans
full of women and children generally means "more than 0" because the implication was that it's a military target. Much like people say "that bakery/mall/whatever was full of women and children" when some Iraqi blows himself up.

I am aware of this, and it is my mission in life to stop it. The truth must be preserved. Fools like stinkypinky would ignore the truth to push their agendas. This must not be allowed. Everyone knows this.

 

[theflyingpig]

Originally posted by: StinkyPinky

Originally posted by: ZeGermans
full of women and children generally means "more than 0" because the implication was that it's a military target. Much like people say "that bakery/mall/whatever was full of women and children" when some Iraqi blows himself up.

You're wasting your time talking to him. Clearly he doesn't even know full of women and children means. Of course there were men on the plane, but it was still full of women and children. Someone who has a basic grasp of English would know that, but I can only suspect his English is below basic.

It only means "full of women and children" when you and people like you continue to twist the truth in order to push your agenda. These people died and you are twisting the facts around their deaths. It's pathetic.

 

[EagleKeeper]

Originally posted by: ZeGermans
full of women and children generally means "more than 0" because the implication was that it's a military target. Much like people say "that bakery/mall/whatever was full of women and children" when some Iraqi blows himself up.

66 of 290 is not full of. This is probably the same ratio that US airliners have on non-business routes.

While an accident, the plane was flying a profile that Iranian military aircraft had used plenty of times before. that profile was similar to an attack profile on the USS Vincennes had it been a fighter.

The Vincennes had just coming out of a firefight with Iranian gunboats - weapons were hot and the crew on edge.

This is not a justification for what happened, but more of an explanation that combat fatigue existed and the airliner was not being deliberately targeted out of the blue.

Then after the fact, Iranians attempted to blow up US citizens in San Diego as revenge.

 

[StinkyPinky]

Originally posted by: theflyingpig

Originally posted by: StinkyPinky

Originally posted by: ZeGermans
full of women and children generally means "more than 0" because the implication was that it's a military target. Much like people say "that bakery/mall/whatever was full of women and children" when some Iraqi blows himself up.

You're wasting your time talking to him. Clearly he doesn't even know full of women and children means. Of course there were men on the plane, but it was still full of women and children. Someone who has a basic grasp of English would know that, but I can only suspect his English is below basic.

It only means "full of women and children" when you and people like you continue to twist the truth in order to push your agenda. These people died and you are twisting the facts around their deaths. It's pathetic.

Um....no. It's full of women and children because that's the correct English usage of the expression.

I have no agenda by the way. I'm not even a regular posted to this forum. I just dislike hypocrisy no matter which side does it.

 

[StinkyPinky]

Originally posted by: theflyingpig

Originally posted by: ZeGermans
full of women and children generally means "more than 0" because the implication was that it's a military target. Much like people say "that bakery/mall/whatever was full of women and children" when some Iraqi blows himself up.

I am aware of this, and it is my mission in life to stop it. The truth must be preserved. Fools like stinkypinky would ignore the truth to push their agendas. This must not be allowed. Everyone knows this.

Yeah yeah. Whatever floats your boat. I'm part of the giant liberal conspiracy that hates America and wants it to be overrun by terrorists and terrorist lovers.

Didn't you get the memo?

How dare I even mention anything that might put the US in a bad light. Let's just all run around screaming "America, fuck yeah!"

 

[Mem]

Originally posted by: theflyingpig

Originally posted by: ZeGermans
full of women and children generally means "more than 0" because the implication was that it's a military target. Much like people say "that bakery/mall/whatever was full of women and children" when some Iraqi blows himself up.

I am aware of this, and it is my mission in life to stop it. The truth must be preserved. Fools like stinkypinky would ignore the truth to push their agendas. This must not be allowed. Everyone knows this.

theflyingpig I suggest you read forum guidelines,personal attacks are not allowed,link.

 

[ZeGermans]

Originally posted by: Common Courtesy
66 of 290 is not full of. This is probably the same ratio that US airliners have on non-business routes.

While an accident, the plane was flying a profile that Iranian military aircraft had used plenty of times before. that profile was similar to an attack profile on the USS Vincennes had it been a fighter.

The Vincennes had just coming out of a firefight with Iranian gunboats - weapons were hot and the crew on edge.

This is not a justification for what happened, but more of an explanation that combat fatigue existed and the airliner was not being deliberately targeted out of the blue.

Then after the fact, Iranians attempted to blow up US citizens in San Diego as revenge.

Well at least this is the official military version, sure

 

[ZeGermans]

The military would never lie about war crimes.

 

[TheSkinsFan]

Originally posted by: StinkyPinky
http://www.boycottscotland.com/

The rednecks are out in force. Maybe they should boycott themselves for the following...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran_Air_Flight_655

Funny how that is never mentioned.

Again, how the fuck does one gross injustice relate to the other or excuse either?!

 

[jpeyton]

Originally posted by: TheSkinsFan

Originally posted by: StinkyPinky
http://www.boycottscotland.com/

The rednecks are out in force. Maybe they should boycott themselves for the following...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran_Air_Flight_655

Funny how that is never mentioned.

Again, how the fuck does one gross injustice relate to the other or excuse either?!

How stupid do you have to be to think 15 years in prison plus terminal cancer is equivalent to 0 years in prison?

Here's a hint: only Iran 655 was a gross injustice.

 

[IndyColtsFan]

Originally posted by: jpeyton

Originally posted by: TheSkinsFan

Originally posted by: StinkyPinky
http://www.boycottscotland.com/

The rednecks are out in force. Maybe they should boycott themselves for the following...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran_Air_Flight_655

Funny how that is never mentioned.

Again, how the fuck does one gross injustice relate to the other or excuse either?!

How stupid do you have to be to think 15 years in prison plus terminal cancer is equivalent to 0 years in prison?

Oh, so terminal cancer was part of his sentence?

 

[TheSkinsFan]

In your rush to loudly condemn America for a completely unrelated injustice, you somehow forgot to condemn the most recent injustice as well -- you know, the one that is the actual topic of this thread.

Why is that, I wonder?

 

[ZeGermans]

America fired the first shot and continues to do this, the retaliation is always considered to be less of an offense given the motive.

 

[IndyColtsFan]

Originally posted by: ZeGermans
America fired the first shot and continues to do this, the retaliation is always considered to be less of an offense given the motive.

EDIT: Nevermind, the following two posts get to the point faster than I would.

 

[EagleKeeper]

Originally posted by: ZeGermans
The military would never lie about war crimes.

Originally posted by: ZeGermans

Originally posted by: Common Courtesy
66 of 290 is not full of. This is probably the same ratio that US airliners have on non-business routes.

While an accident, the plane was flying a profile that Iranian military aircraft had used plenty of times before. that profile was similar to an attack profile on the USS Vincennes had it been a fighter.

The Vincennes had just coming out of a firefight with Iranian gunboats - weapons were hot and the crew on edge.

This is not a justification for what happened, but more of an explanation that combat fatigue existed and the airliner was not being deliberately targeted out of the blue.

Then after the fact, Iranians attempted to blow up US citizens in San Diego as revenge.

Well at least this is the official military version, sure

Let see - Iran was always flying Tomcats on the same course which is an attack profile.
Iran Tomcats would at times use civilian Mode 3 swaks in an attempt to confuse radar operators.
Iranian gunboats were in a running gunfight just before the incident.
The airliner did not respond when hailed on civilian and/or guard frequencies.

You have a bunch of mistakes, deliberate or otherwise that added up to an unfortunate accident.

So smartass - what is the unofficial military version that you seem to have inside information on.

Consider how you are completely anti military & anti government; ignoring the fact that they allow you to be the big prick that you pretend to act; your statements show how out of touch you are with the real world.

You can try to place the blame on others; ignoring that people have the option to suspend violence if they choose to. Once they choose not to; then the but they did it first no longer is viable.

And the moment any of your precious rights were to be violated; you would be begging the "hated/fascist,etc) government to protect you and stop the violations.

Why; because you are too big of a pussified wimp to accept the blame for your own actions - always trying to pawn off responsibility of actions on others.

 

[TheSkinsFan]

Originally posted by: ZeGermans
America fired the first shot and continues to do this, the retaliation is always considered to be less of an offense given the motive.

Does that shot, or any shot, excuse Libya's terrorist attack on Pan Am 103?

 

[Dari]

Originally posted by: TheSkinsFan

Originally posted by: ZeGermans
America fired the first shot and continues to do this, the retaliation is always considered to be less of an offense given the motive.

Does that shot, or any shot, excuse Libya's terrorist attack on Pan Am 103?

In the eyes of the Libyans, of course it does. Or, do you think only one opinion matters?

 

[Dari]

Originally posted by: TheSkinsFan

Originally posted by: Dari

Originally posted by: TheSkinsFan

Originally posted by: Dari
When we murdered 290 Iranians, flying to SA to perform the Hajj in 1988, with a Navy missile, nobody stood trial or apologized...

Deflections and the "Two wrongs" argument... always a joy to witness! :roll:

Damn right it's two wrongs. I see no reason to jump up and down over one when I remember the other.

This scumbag was found guilty of participating in the death of 270 people, including 180 of your fellow countrymen. That fact alone should anger everyone, regardless of other acts of murder, or alleged murder, that may or may not have occurred throughout history.

IOW, wtf does one have to do with the other? What exactly was your point when you referenced the Iranian incident? What exactly were you trying to say?

Why do you even use that avatar? Is it meant to be sarcastic?

I'm not allowed to criticize my own country? You are an idiot.