***PetrinoInAlbany*** Posted April 22, 2005 Author Posted April 22, 2005 Apparently alot of people enjoyed watching you make a fool of yourself (again). But I'm sure lauding yourself instead helps you sleep better. I especially liked KRC's final response to your regular hypocrisy. Care to respond to it or will this be another of your patented "hit and run" wankerness? 313203[/snapback] If by "fool" you mean not condoning the shooting of injured, unarmed people, then I'll wear the badge proudly. By the way, being outnumbered doesn't make me wrong. So go ahead and insult me if that makes YOU feel better.
***PetrinoInAlbany*** Posted April 22, 2005 Author Posted April 22, 2005 You should know, after all this time here, that the posts that prompt the most views and responses are inevitably the dumbest ones... 313223[/snapback] What I've noticed is that the posts that generate the most and the nastiest responses are actually the ones where nobody seems to have a valid counter-argument against the poster. It's kind of hard to condone what I was railing against, so why not default to name calling. Hey, Darrin says I'm a "fool" and you say my post was "dumb". Where I come from, that does not constitute debate. Try again later ...
***PetrinoInAlbany*** Posted April 22, 2005 Author Posted April 22, 2005 So care to explain why this Marine was not only absolved of your crime but he and his unit was given one of the highest awards that can be bestowed upon them. Or are you going to go run away and hide again? Talk about a coward. 313221[/snapback] Again, "coward" is an insult. But while you don't deserve a response, I shall give one anyway ... The people making the decision to absolve and bestowing the medal answer directly to the Commander-In-Chief of the United States Armed Forces. Now, given that, did you really expect it to turn out any other way?
VABills Posted April 22, 2005 Posted April 22, 2005 If by "fool" you mean not condoning the shooting of injured, unarmed people, then I'll wear the badge proudly. By the way, being outnumbered doesn't make me wrong. So go ahead and insult me if that makes YOU feel better. 313236[/snapback] Who was under a blanket and in a position where he easily could have concealed a weapon, and you are not aware of whether he made a quick movement, etc under the blanket. The Marine was found innocent, get over it. It is better that he did the right things and the other guy died then have him or his fellow Marines come home in a body bag.
VABills Posted April 22, 2005 Posted April 22, 2005 Again, "coward" is an insult. But while you don't deserve a response, I shall give one anyway ... The people making the decision to absolve and bestowing the medal answer directly to the Commander-In-Chief of the United States Armed Forces. Now, given that, did you really expect it to turn out any other way? 313239[/snapback] Yes. We have convicted several people including one in Gitmo for killing and or torturing prisoners.
***PetrinoInAlbany*** Posted April 22, 2005 Author Posted April 22, 2005 Who cares? Either way, let the beating continue.... 313208[/snapback] ~ SilverNRed If you think that what the blow-hard, know-it-all, chatroom commandos in here are doing to me constitutes "beating", well... then you must've really loved the way our Bills "beat" the crap out of the Cowboys in the Super Bowl in Pasedena. Hell, we even gave them another beating again the next Super Bowl in Atlanta, but not as bad ... Let the beating continue indeed!
Crap Throwing Monkey Posted April 22, 2005 Posted April 22, 2005 What I've noticed is that the posts that generate the most and the nastiest responses are actually the ones where nobody seems to have a valid counter-argument against the poster. It's kind of hard to condone what I was railing against, so why not default to name calling. Hey, Darrin says I'm a "fool" and you say my post was "dumb". Where I come from, that does not constitute debate. Try again later ... 313237[/snapback] Debate? What !@#$ing debate???? What the hell is wrong with you? You started the thread, then disappeared, and are now bitching that we couldn't engage you in a debate??? Of course we couldn't, you crap throwing monkey...you weren't here to engage. If you want debate, shut the hell up, go back and READ the thread you started, and respond to the reasonable responses to your initial post. There were a few...
SilverNRed Posted April 22, 2005 Posted April 22, 2005 If you think that what the blow-hard, know-it-all, chatroom commandos in here are doing to me constitutes "beating", well... then you must've really loved the way our Bills "beat" the crap out of the Cowboys in the Super Bowl in Pasedena. Hell, we even gave them another beating again the next Super Bowl in Atlanta, but not as bad ... Let the beating continue indeed! 313243[/snapback] Yeah, you're....um....doing really well here....
Terry Tate Posted April 22, 2005 Posted April 22, 2005 The people making the decision to absolve and bestowing the medal answer directly to the Commander-In-Chief of the United States Armed Forces. Now, given that, did you really expect it to turn out any other way? Speaking as a former servicemember, FU too. People who do not support the war, but support the troops - next time you find yourself in an argument about your integrity on those two stances, you can thank the idiots who make retarded statements like the one above for enforcing the stereotype.
ExiledInIllinois Posted April 23, 2005 Posted April 23, 2005 Debate? What !@#$ing debate???? What the hell is wrong with you? You started the thread, then disappeared, and are now bitching that we couldn't engage you in a debate??? Of course we couldn't, you crap throwing monkey...you weren't here to engage. If you want debate, shut the hell up, go back and READ the thread you started, and respond to the reasonable responses to your initial post. There were a few... 313270[/snapback] ? Last time I looked it was pinned. How twisted is that? This is one twisted, perverted and vindictive site? God I love it! You related to DC Tom?
Crap Throwing Monkey Posted April 23, 2005 Posted April 23, 2005 ? Last time I looked it was pinned. How twisted is that? This is one twisted, perverted and vindictive site? God I love it! You related to DC Tom? 313649[/snapback] As everyone (except you, apparently) knows, I am (or was) DC Tom. It's not like you've tripped over a closely held secret...
ExiledInIllinois Posted April 23, 2005 Posted April 23, 2005 (edited) As everyone (except you, apparently) knows, I am (or was) DC Tom. It's not like you've tripped over a closely held secret... 313692[/snapback] Thanks! I wasn't sure since I don't view the board and keep up to date as much anymore... Picking and choosing stuff to view, respond, and follow up on. I just wasn't around for the change-over. A few posts ago... I asked who you were, got no response? I could really care less. It has been more a curiosity to me. You are the same supercilious, pedantic anal orifice as always. Your style shows through... Especially, when you back it with knowledge of history. It still doesn't explain why this vindicative stuff gets pinned? It is "ticky-tacky." Then again, I fully realize that is better left for another sub-forum, discussion. Again, ACCEPT my sincerest apology for indulging my curiosity. A pure LAMP (and lazy) move on my part not to PM you. Edited April 23, 2005 by ExiledInIllinois
Crap Throwing Monkey Posted April 23, 2005 Posted April 23, 2005 Thanks! I wasn't sure since I don't view the board and keep up to date as much anymore... Picking and choosing stuff to view, respond, and follow up on. I just wasn't around for the change-over. A few posts ago... I asked who you were, got no response? I could really care less. It has been more a curiosity to me. You are the same supercilious, pedantic anal orifice as always. Your style shows through... Especially, when you back it with knowledge of history. It still doesn't explain why this vindicative stuff gets pinned? It is "ticky-tacky." Then again, I fully realize that is better left for another sub-forum, discussion. Again, except my sincerest apology for indulging my curiosity. A pure LAMP (and lazy) move on my part not to PM you. 313768[/snapback] But now, posting as crap throwing monkey more accurately describes the general utility of this board. Everyone else acts like crap throwing monkeys here...at least I'm honest about it. What's really amusing is when people complain to the moderators "Help! I'm being picked on by a crap-throwing monkey!"
ExiledInIllinois Posted April 23, 2005 Posted April 23, 2005 But now, posting as crap throwing monkey more accurately describes the general utility of this board. Everyone else acts like crap throwing monkeys here...at least I'm honest about it. What's really amusing is when people complain to the moderators "Help! I'm being picked on by a crap-throwing monkey!" 313785[/snapback] I was just thinking as I was riding down the lock wall... AD's voice rang in my head... I DID IT AGAIN... I wrote EXCEPT for ACCEPT above. I guess people really write like they pronounce things! It is ACCEPT! Me bad!
KRC Posted April 24, 2005 Posted April 24, 2005 Wow. I didn't realize this was still up here. Apparently my opinion was SO weak that it prompted 2,436 views AND 137 responses. Must've struck quite a nerve with the "kill 'em all" crowd in here, huh? Oh, and the reason I declined to talk politics at the Lot 1 parties was ecaxtly that. Thank you anyway, though ... Oh, and to the name-calling idiots ... This strengthens your argument ... um ... HOW, again? 313196[/snapback] So, what you are saying is that you are a hypocrite. You tell people to show up at the tailgate, but when they show up at the tailgate you say that you will not talk to them. Ummm...OK. Way to strengthen your argument.
VABills Posted April 26, 2005 Posted April 26, 2005 I love lawyers and politics. The Marine was cleared returned to full duty, given a medal. Someone complained and now he is being investigated again. Doesn't this constitute double jeapordy? Different case but similar circumstances. http://www.cnn.com/2005/LAW/04/26/marine.i...h.ap/index.html
Campy Posted April 26, 2005 Posted April 26, 2005 Doesn't this constitute double jeapordy? 318968[/snapback] I think I read somewhere that double jeopardy doesn't apply to military proceedings, only civil/criminal proceedings. I could be wrong, but I'm fairly sure I do have that right.
Crap Throwing Monkey Posted April 26, 2005 Posted April 26, 2005 I love lawyers and politics. The Marine was cleared returned to full duty, given a medal. Someone complained and now he is being investigated again. Doesn't this constitute double jeapordy? Different case but similar circumstances. http://www.cnn.com/2005/LAW/04/26/marine.i...h.ap/index.html 318968[/snapback] And in addition to what Campy said...if it's a different case, it's not double jeopardy. If it were the SAME case, it would be...but different cases are different (duh); just because you're tried for one doesn't preclude being tried for the other. If that were the case, it would mean that Michael Jackson could never be tried again for any other molestation case after he's found innocent in this one.
VABills Posted April 26, 2005 Posted April 26, 2005 I think I read somewhere that double jeopardy doesn't apply to military proceedings, only civil/criminal proceedings. I could be wrong, but I'm fairly sure I do have that right. 319391[/snapback] Answering both you and the simian. This is the same case and hence double jeapordy. Also, the military does have protection against double jeapordy. Just we always found ways around it when you were convicted in civilian court, you would be charged with "Action unbecoming" etc... You cannot be brought up on the same offense.
Alaska Darin Posted April 26, 2005 Posted April 26, 2005 Answering both you and the simian. This is the same case and hence double jeapordy. Also, the military does have protection against double jeapordy. Just we always found ways around it when you were convicted in civilian court, you would be charged with "Action unbecoming" etc... You cannot be brought up on the same offense. 319527[/snapback] You can't be TRIED twice for the same offense. Big difference. There was no trial, simply a "not enough evidence" thing. Perhaps they got more evidence. To be honest, if he ordered their handcuffs removed and then had to cap them...
Recommended Posts