Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

You are here: MacNN Forums > Community > MacNN Lounge > Political/War Lounge > Cover ups in Iraqi torture cases?

Cover ups in Iraqi torture cases?
Thread Tools
angaq0k
Mac Elite
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Over there...
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 15, 2004, 12:08 PM
 
According to SpiegelTV

Iraqi In Custody Tortured To Death

After the shock of the abuse photos, there's a worse new allegation against US troops. Spiegel TV has acquired written and oral documentation indicating that a 47 year old Iraqi was tortured to death in American custody. The Americans are alleged to have attempted to cover the case up.
(...)
05/15/04 -- Berlin - The case of Asad Abdul Kareem Abdul Jaleel was pure routine for the American troops. After the 47 year old family father died on the US military base Al Asad west of the town of Khan al Baghdad in US custody on January 9th 2004, an American doctor filled out a death certificate. Apparently without doing an examination, and according to the documents, without performing an autopsy, the pathologist Luis A. Santiago wrote that the man had died in his sleep. The US troops handed the body, including the death certificate, over to the International Red Cross shortly thereafter._
Asad Abdul Kareem Abdul Jaleel died in US detention on January 9th of this year. However, there are grave doubts about the version that claims his death to have been from natural causes. An Iraqi forensic pathologist who took the body over from the US armed forces confirmed to Spiegel TV in Baghdad that he diagnosed definite torture marks on the body of the deceased. In addition, photos of the deceased confirm that contrary to the US documentation, an autopsy had been performed on the man. The scars on the torso indicate that Western doctors did the autopsy.
According to the research of Spiegel TV, the case of the family father Jaleel in occupied Iraq is not a rarity. Employees of the Forensic Pathology Institute in Baghdad confirm that among the bodies that the International Red Cross has handed over to them on behalf of the Americans there are always victims of torture. However, the Iraqi pathologists are forbidden to do their own investigation as long as there is an American death certificate - even if the information about the cause of death is obviously false.
Meanwhile in the case of the 47 year old Asad Abdul Kareem Abdul Jaleel, there appears to be an internal investigation of the US troops going on. Witnesses report that they have been questioned by US soldiers about the procedures on the American military base Al Asad. Spiegel TV has been attempting to get a statement from the responsible authorities of the army in Baghdad for several days. Up to now, however, all written as well as oral questions remain unanswered.
The article has one picture. while the original website of SpiegelTV shows same picture in a bigger format...
"******* politics is for the ******* moment. ******** equations are for ******** Eternity." ******** Albert Einstein
     
spacefreak
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: NJ, USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 15, 2004, 12:52 PM
 
Occasionally a prisoner dies in custody. It happens in all prisons.

If there were a cover-up (or if Saddam was in power), the prison guards would likely have buried the body without telling a soul.
     
Developer
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: europe
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 15, 2004, 01:31 PM
 
Originally posted by angaq0k:
The article has one picture. while the original website of SpiegelTV shows same picture in a bigger format...
Will have to see the report tomorrow evening, but the image on the SPIEGEL website it looks like regular death stains (or however you say Totenflecken in English) to me and that proofs nothing.
Nasrudin sat on a river bank when someone shouted to him from the opposite side: "Hey! how do I get across?" "You are across!" Nasrudin shouted back.
     
Orion27
Mac Elite
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Safe House
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 15, 2004, 04:11 PM
 
The article has one picture. while the original website of SpiegelTV shows same picture in a bigger format... [/B][/QUOTE]


Canadian cover up: They don't have a military and suckle off US teat.
     
dcolton
Banned
Join Date: Sep 2003
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 14, 2004, 12:21 AM
 
My name is Angq0k. I have nothing better to do than look for anti-American news and post it on MacNN so I can feel good about being a canuck
     
DBursey
Professional Poster
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Canada
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 14, 2004, 11:17 AM
 
Canadian cover up: They don't have a military and suckle off US teat.
The preceding quote spoken from a position of considerable ignorance. To elaborate:

From CanadianAlly.com:
  • Canada has deployed 11,000 military personnel in the War on Terror since October 2001.
  • Canada was the first US ally to deploy to the Northern Arabian Sea/Persian Gulf after 9/11.
  • A Canadian Lieutenant-General (Rick Hillier) commands NATO's 6,500 International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) troops in Kabul.
  • Canada supplies ISAF's largest contingent (approx 2,000 troops).
  • 18 Canadian Warships have been deployed to date in the War on Terror.
  • Canada has deployed UAVs, CC-150 Polaris Strategic Airlift, CC-130 Hercules Tactical Airlift, CP-140 Aurora Maritime Patrol aircraft, and CH-124 Sea King Maritime Helicopters to the War on Terror.
  • The United States Government has awarded 30 US Bronze Stars to Canadian service personnel in the War on Terror.
In addition:

WWII:
  • Canada had more than one million people in uniform during WWII - from a population of just 11 million.
  • 25% of the British Royal Air Force were Canadian flyers.
  • Royal Canadian Air Force Squadrons fought in the Battle of Britain.
  • Canada participated in WWII from September 1939 until victory in Europe and Japan in 1945
  • 14,000 Canadian troops stormed one of the D Day Beaches - Juno Beach.
  • Canadian troops invaded Sicily in 1943 along with US and British troops.
  • The Royal Canadian Navy played a crucial role in the Battle of the Atlantic.
  • At War's end the Canadian Navy was the 3rd largest Allied Navy; the Air Force was the 4th largest.
Korean War:
  • 26,791 Canadians fought in the Korean War.
  • 2 Battalion, Princess Patricia's Canadian Light Infantry was awarded a US Presidential Citation for valorous actions and exceptional meritorious conduct for actions at the Battle of Kapyong in April 1951 where despite being completely surrounded by enemy units for 48 hours, the Canadians along with 3rd Battalion, Royal Australian Regiment and Company A, 72nd Heavy Tank Battalion (US), held the front line to allow US and South Korean forces to re-establish defensive positions.
Gulf War One
  • 4,500 Canadians served during the 1990-1991 Gulf War (2,700 during combat).
  • Canada provided Three War ships, Strategic and Tactical Airlift, an Air to Air Re-fueler, a Field Hospital and Composite CF 18 Fighter Squadron.
  • Canadians were based in Saudi Arabia, Qatar and Bahrain
Balkans:
  • Canada has deployed 40,000 troops to the Balkans since 1991 with the European Community Monitoring Mission, United Nations and NATO.
Kosovo:
  • Canada carried out 10 percent of the NATO bombing raids during the 1999 Kosovo Campaign.
War on Terror:
  • Canada has deployed 18 Warships and 11,000 troops as part of the War on Terror. The ships are partiucipating in Operation Apollo, an interdiction operation in the Persian Gulf and the Arabian Sea. The troops are deployed in Afghanistan.
     
Orion27
Mac Elite
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Safe House
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 14, 2004, 12:06 PM
 
[QUOTE]Originally posted by DBursey:
[B]The preceding quote spoken from a position of considerable ignorance.......

Thanks for the link to an interesting site. I'm sure most Canadian citizens would be thrilled to learn we are such close allies. I know we appreciate what you do. True!
     
Troll
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Feb 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 15, 2004, 05:09 AM
 
Newsweek is running a similar story. Of note:

1) 2,000 pages are still missing from the Taguba Report;
2) No one above the rank of Colonel has been questioned about the torture;
3) Still unclear who ordered Maj. Gen. Geoffrey Miller (the guy in charge of Gitmo) to go to Iraq;
4) Douglas Feith, the Under Secretary in charge of setting policy on prisoners has banned discussion of the Taguba report and threatened criminal proceedings even though the report is in the public domain. Sgt Samuel Provance who has said that there is a cover up and that "There are so many soldiers directly involved who haven't been talked to," has been threatened with prosecution and disciplined.
5) The person in charge of the investigation, Maj. Gen. George Fay, is a two-star general. Under military doctrine, he can only hold people of lower rank accountable, so no one above the rank of a one star general can be held accountable. Fay was appointed by Lt. Gen Sanchez so the probe is effectively blocked from probing anything outside the field of Sanchez's command.

And people wonder why we question the military's ability to meter out justice!
     
Orion27
Mac Elite
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Safe House
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 15, 2004, 07:44 AM
 
Originally posted by Troll:
Newsweek is running a similar story. Of note:
2) No one above the rank of Colonel has been questioned about the torture;
And people wonder why we question the military's ability to meter out justice!
Who is characterizing what happened as torture? Is that a fact or an opinion?
I haved not seen any evidence or torture. I have seen some hazing and rough handling.
     
Logic
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: The northernmost capital of the world
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 15, 2004, 08:04 AM
 
Originally posted by Orion27:
Who is characterizing what happened as torture? Is that a fact or an opinion?
I haved not seen any evidence or torture. I have seen some hazing and rough handling.

"If Bush says we hate freedom, let him tell us why we didn't attack Sweden, for example. OBL 29th oct
     
spauldingg
Grizzled Veteran
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: Rochester NY
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 15, 2004, 08:08 AM
 
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Orion27:
Who is characterizing what happened as torture?

Pretty much all humans with a soul and don't listen to the cartoon politics of Lush Ribald...

Is that a fact or an opinion?

fact

"No physical or mental torture, nor any other form of coercion, may be inflicted on prisoners of war to secure from them information of any kind whatever. Prisoners of war who refuse to answer may not be threatened, insulted, or exposed to any unpleasant or disadvantageous treatment of any kind."

I haved not seen any evidence or torture. I have seen some hazing and rough handling.

hazing and rough handling
“The love of liberty is the love of others; the love of power is the love of ourselves.” -- William Hazlitt
     
Troll
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Feb 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 15, 2004, 08:35 AM
 
Originally posted by Orion27:
Who is characterizing what happened as torture? Is that a fact or an opinion?
I haved not seen any evidence or torture. I have seen some hazing and rough handling.
The mind boggles at a post like that. I'm absolutely astounded at the level of denial you're in!

Hazing is an Americanism. AFAIK it's not a word any other English speakers understand. I'm not going to even try to argue with you about what the distinction is for the same reason as I wouldn't get involved in an argument about the difference in German or Russian between whatever hazing means and torture.

There is no distinction in international law between rough treatment, cruel, inhuman or degrading punishment and torture. Rough treatment is abuse. Torture is abuse. You are perhaps aware of the fact that some of your "rough treatment" has resulted in death! If you haven't seen evidence of torture then you're completely blind. Maybe you want to go and read the Red Cross and Human Rights Watch reports. Here's a link http://hrw.org/reports/2004/usa0604/. Do a search for torture or abuse!
( Last edited by Troll; Jun 15, 2004 at 08:44 AM. )
     
Orion27
Mac Elite
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Safe House
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 15, 2004, 09:10 AM
 
You have convinced me you believe that any thing less than three square meals a day ( of course religious preferences obliged ) and a warm place to **** is "torture".

Originally posted by Troll:
The mind boggles at a post like that. I'm absolutely astounded at the level of denial you're in!

Hazing is an Americanism. AFAIK it's not a word any other English speakers understand. I'm not going to even try to argue with you about what the distinction is for the same reason as I wouldn't get involved in an argument about the difference in German or Russian between whatever hazing means and torture.

There is no distinction in international law between rough treatment, cruel, inhuman or degrading punishment and torture. Rough treatment is abuse. Torture is abuse. You are perhaps aware of the fact that some of your "rough treatment" has resulted in death! If you haven't seen evidence of torture then you're completely blind. Maybe you want to go and read the Red Cross and Human Rights Watch reports. Here's a link http://hrw.org/reports/2004/usa0604/. Do a search for torture or abuse!
     
lil'babykitten
Professional Poster
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Herzliya
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 15, 2004, 09:34 AM
 
Originally posted by Orion27:
You have convinced me you believe that any thing less than three square meals a day ( of course religious preferences obliged ) and a warm place to **** is "torture".
     
Orion27
Mac Elite
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Safe House
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 15, 2004, 09:55 AM
 
[QUOTE]Originally posted by spauldingg:
Originally posted by Orion27:
Who is characterizing what happened as torture?

hazing and rough handling
The above link from www.antiwar.com to keep the record straight. Looks like PhotoShop to me.
     
Troll
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Feb 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 15, 2004, 10:02 AM
 
Originally posted by Orion27:
You have convinced me you believe that any thing less than three square meals a day ( of course religious preferences obliged ) and a warm place to **** is "torture".
Almost actually. You see civilised people believe in values like innocent until proven guilty. Until you've proven someome guilty, civilised people do actually believe that they shouldn't have anything less than three square meals and a warm place to do whatever it is your vulgarity prevented us from seeing. Certainly, civilised people believe that handling awaiting trial prisoners "roughly" (you know like beating them to death) is immoral.

Of course, if you aren't able to see why what happened to these people amounts to torture then that probably explains why it happened in the first place.
     
Orion27
Mac Elite
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Safe House
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 15, 2004, 10:33 AM
 
What other civilized countries secure the rights of the accused with the concept of innocent until proven guilty besides the Untied States? What other fights for this concept other than the United States? Innocent until proven guilty is a concept unique to American
jurisprudence.

Originally posted by Troll:
Almost actually. You see civilised people believe in values like innocent until proven guilty. Until you've proven someome guilty, civilised people do actually believe that they shouldn't have anything less than three square meals and a warm place to do whatever it is your vulgarity prevented us from seeing. Certainly, civilised people believe that handling awaiting trial prisoners "roughly" (you know like beating them to death) is immoral.

Of course, if you aren't able to see why what happened to these people amounts to torture then that probably explains why it happened in the first place.
     
Troll
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Feb 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 15, 2004, 11:07 AM
 
Originally posted by Orion27:
Innocent until proven guilty is a concept unique to American
jurisprudence.
OMG! You have got to be kidding me!

Putting your complete ignorance aside for a second, most Americans would I think consider what happened in Abu Ghraib to be torture. Certainly the Administration and Congress have acknowledged that prisoners were abused. I wasn't accusing the US of being uncivilised. I was trying to show you why the majority of us see it as torture!
     
Orion27
Mac Elite
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Safe House
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 15, 2004, 11:20 AM
 
Show me where the majority of Americans think this was torture.

Originally posted by Troll:
OMG! You have got to be kidding me!

Putting your complete ignorance aside for a second, most Americans would I think consider what happened in Abu Ghraib to be torture. Certainly the Administration and Congress have acknowledged that prisoners were abused. I wasn't accusing the US of being uncivilised. I was trying to show you why the majority of us see it as torture!
     
Logic
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: The northernmost capital of the world
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 15, 2004, 11:23 AM
 













"If Bush says we hate freedom, let him tell us why we didn't attack Sweden, for example. OBL 29th oct
     
DBursey
Professional Poster
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Canada
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 15, 2004, 11:30 AM
 
Originally posted by Orion27:
What other civilized countries secure the rights of the accused with the concept of innocent until proven guilty besides the Untied States? What other fights for this concept other than the United States? Innocent until proven guilty is a concept unique to American
jurisprudence.
This is not the case. As the following link details, a majority of western countries practise similar forms of common law, which, while nuanced though local cultures, values & traditions, are based predominantly on English common law concepts and legal organizational methods.

World Legal Systems - Common Law

Click the Common Law header to see a list of countries who employ forms of common law, in which the presumption of innocence is precedent.
     
Troll
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Feb 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 15, 2004, 11:48 AM
 
Originally posted by DBursey:
This is not the case. As the following link details, a majority of western countries practise similar forms of common law, which, while nuanced though local cultures, values & traditions, are based predominantly on English common law concepts and legal organizational methods.

World Legal Systems - Common Law

Click the Common Law header to see a list of countries who employ forms of common law, in which the presumption of innocence is precedent.
Innocence until proven guilty is also the basis of civil law systems. It's was part of French civil law before US law existed. The vast majority of legal systems in the world accept the principle of innocence until proven guilty.
( Last edited by Troll; Jun 15, 2004 at 12:00 PM. )
     
Troll
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Feb 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 15, 2004, 11:59 AM
 
Originally posted by Orion27:
Show me where the majority of Americans think this was torture.
I said it was my opinion that most Americans would see this as torture. I say that because I consider most Americans to be civilised and because I have been listening to your leaders call it abuse and torture for the last few months. Your leaders represent you do they not? I think also that most Americans believe in their justice system. We take this for granted since America is a democracy. The American justice system considers it an abuse to "handle roughly" prisoners awaiting trial. Ergo, Americans who believe in their justice system would consider what happened to be immoral.

You know why? Because unlike you, the rest of us are a little concerned about being picked up by the cops having done nothing and then, even before we have had a chance to show that we haven't done anything wrong (not that it makes a difference) are made to perform fellatio on other prisoners, raped or beaten to a pulp by our armed guards. I don't believe that you would survive that sort of treatment and then come out and say it was anything but torture and abuse!
     
Orion27
Mac Elite
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Safe House
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 15, 2004, 12:06 PM
 
You are wrong in this case, the French have an inquisitional system where the accused must prove his innocence.

Establishing a separate, distinct judicial branch of government responsible for upholding the Constitution as the supreme law of the land is a unique American contribution to political theory. American practice regards the written Constitution itself as sovereign.
In criminal cases, the burden of proof rests upon the state, which by definition prosecutes them; the accused is presumed innocent until proven guilty "beyond a reasonable doubt."
In addition, those accused of wrongdoing enjoy several other protections including the right to be informed of the charge, the right to refuse to answer questions, the right to be represented by a lawyer and to question witnesses during a trial, and the right to a prompt, public trial by jury. All uniquely protected by the American Constitution.
Where else are these guarantees so protected? No where!

Originally posted by Troll:
Innocence until proven guilty is also the basis of most civil law systems. It's was part of French civil law before US law existed. The vast majority of legal systems in the world accept the principle of innocence until proven guilty.
     
DBursey
Professional Poster
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Canada
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 15, 2004, 12:19 PM
 
... Where else are these guarantees so protected? No where!
Again; incorrect! All of those guarantees and more are enshrined in the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

Do your homework prior to posting!
     
Logic
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: The northernmost capital of the world
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 15, 2004, 12:22 PM
 
Originally posted by Orion27:
.......blah blah blah.....Where else are these guarantees so protected? No where!
Here on Iceland and in Sweden as well. You were saying?

"If Bush says we hate freedom, let him tell us why we didn't attack Sweden, for example. OBL 29th oct
     
spauldingg
Grizzled Veteran
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: Rochester NY
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 15, 2004, 12:46 PM
 
Originally posted by Orion27:
The above link from www.antiwar.com to keep the record straight. Looks like PhotoShop to me.
Fine, , click on the slideshow link for a more reputable site with the same photo except lager. As for your photoshop statement, I agree, any image can be manipulated to serve a cause, but the amount of scrutiny these photos have been put through would have me believe otherwise.
“The love of liberty is the love of others; the love of power is the love of ourselves.” -- William Hazlitt
     
Troll
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Feb 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 15, 2004, 12:59 PM
 
Originally posted by Orion27:
You are wrong in this case, the French have an inquisitional system where the accused must prove his innocence.
This just gets better and better! France has an "inquisitional system." LOL ! What do the French courts conduct an inquisition every time a case is brought before them? Clearly you're a legal genius!

I think what you meant is that France has an INQUISITORIAL system. This has nothing to do with the presumption of innocence which does indeed exist in France. An inquisitorial system is the opposite of an adversarial system such as that found in the UK and other countries that followed their model (like the USA). In such a system, the court or a part of the court is actively involved in determining the facts of the case. In an adversarial system, the judge's role is that of an impartial referee although even in adversarial proceedings in some jurisdictions the judge may participate in the fact finding inquiry. Most systems in fact mix the two a bit. The point is that in France you are very much assured of being presumed innocent until proven guilty.
Originally posted by Orion27:
Establishing a separate, distinct judicial branch of government responsible for upholding the Constitution as the supreme law of the land is a unique American contribution to political theory. American practice regards the written Constitution itself as sovereign.
In criminal cases, the burden of proof rests upon the state, which by definition prosecutes them; the accused is presumed innocent until proven guilty "beyond a reasonable doubt."
In addition, those accused of wrongdoing enjoy several other protections including the right to be informed of the charge, the right to refuse to answer questions, the right to be represented by a lawyer and to question witnesses during a trial, and the right to a prompt, public trial by jury. All uniquely protected by the American Constitution.
Where else are these guarantees so protected? No where!
Uh no, actually they're so protected in very many jurisdictions. Maybe you need to start travelling a bit, or start going to the foreign law section of the library so you can get a clue, my friend. Many jurisdictions go FAR further in putting the principles you have expounded here into practice. Take for example Canada, Namibia, Germany or South Africa. In fact, let's look at South Africa where there is a Constitutional Court with the power to review legislation mero motu as well as legal disputes referred to it; where the Constitution applies vertically between the state and citizens as well as horizontally between citizens themselves and where the Bill of Rights grants South Africans rights that are only just beginning to be debated in the USA, like the right to a clean and healthy environment.
     
Ayelbourne
Mac Enthusiast
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Scandinavia
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 15, 2004, 01:08 PM
 
Originally posted by Troll:
This just gets better and better!
Even more mind-boggling is how one can crow loudly (and mistakenly) about how America alone enshrines "innocent until proven guilty" in a thread discussing how US military personnel trampled that concept into unrecognizability in Abu Ghraib.

Everyone else is way, way past the "is it torture?" part and have long since moved on to determining and punishing those who are guilty. Do try to keep up!
     
itai195
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Cupertino, CA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 15, 2004, 01:16 PM
 
Originally posted by Ayelbourne:
Everyone else is way, way past the "is it torture?" part and have long since moved on to determining and punishing those who are guilty. Do try to keep up!
Frankly, so is almost everyone in the USA except for Bush apologists who still cling to the fantasy that the administration can do no wrong.
     
Troll
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Feb 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 15, 2004, 01:45 PM
 
Originally posted by itai195:
Frankly, so is almost everyone in the USA except for Bush apologists who still cling to the fantasy that the administration can do no wrong.
Exactly my point. Move to ignore the ignoramus.
     
vmpaul
Professional Poster
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: always on the sunny side
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 15, 2004, 03:48 PM
 
Originally posted by Orion27:

I haved not seen any evidence or torture. I have seen some hazing and rough handling.
Oh, I get it. If you haven't seen it then it didn't happen.

Please tell me you saw the sunrise this morning. My tomato plants need the sunshine.
The only thing that I am reasonably sure of is that anybody who's got an ideology has stopped thinking. - Arthur Miller
     
Hugi
Grizzled Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2002
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 15, 2004, 03:48 PM
 
Wow. This thread. That guy. Wow. Just wow..
Sorry, I have nothing else to contribute, move right on.
( Last edited by Hugi; Jun 15, 2004 at 04:02 PM. )
     
Powerbook
Mac Elite
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: München, Deutschland
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 15, 2004, 05:08 PM
 
Originally posted by Orion27:
You are wrong in this case, the French have an inquisitional system where the accused must prove his innocence.
(...)
Where else are these guarantees so protected? No where!

Bwahaha! W000t! Not only do you not have a clue about other countries' legal systems (who would have thought), but also you seem to ignore the possible impact your w/hole/y american "War against terror" will have in the long term on your american "guaranteed rights". Better take the time to read the new fine prints!

PB.
Aut Caesar aut nihil.
     
   
Thread Tools
 
Forum Links
Forum Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Top
Privacy Policy
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 01:11 AM.
All contents of these forums © 1995-2017 MacNN. All rights reserved.
Branding + Design: www.gesamtbild.com
vBulletin v.3.8.8 © 2000-2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.,