go bite self, junior. julie made substantive comment--which only one you able attract, by way--and not responsible for riff-raff who find her so fascinating. you have done much more to hijack than julie, so maybe you should move it somewhere else.
Quote from: Julie Fern on April 27, 2007, 05:29:58 PMgo bite self, junior. julie made substantive comment--which only one you able attract, by way--and not responsible for riff-raff who find her so fascinating. you have done much more to hijack than julie, so maybe you should move it somewhere else.You're right, I appologize. You made a substantive comment and the thread was hijacked. I stand corrected. Nevertheless, and nothing against you Julie but you seem to be received with vitriol and I would like a serious discussion on this topic. I have a solution, although not perfectly fair, it seems to be the most narrowly tailored to fit this situation.Do you think that you could create another account and weigh in on substantive threads using it?
chee-rist. do some reading, would ya? try archives of tpm muckracker.
Quote from: Julie Fern on April 27, 2007, 06:13:45 PMchee-rist. do some reading, would ya? try archives of tpm muckracker.I dont get it
It was pretty obvious at the time that he was not what they were saying he was. The British press, in particular, has long ago shown quite clearly that he was/is the victim of a prosecution so overzealous and flimsy as to constitute a frame-up. Do you know that he was convicted of "supporting the Taliban" (which was not a designated terrorist organization even though he was prosecuted under the 'material support to a terrorist organization' statute), and of "carrying explosives"? Carrying explosives? Hahaha. Dude was in Afghanistan. The same kinds of problems are apparent in the prosecution of the Lackawanna 6.Will he be pardoned? Not likely. Not by this or any future administration, notwithstanding the fact that he's innocent.
Quote from: Qui me alit me extinguit on April 27, 2007, 06:26:10 PMIt was pretty obvious at the time that he was not what they were saying he was. The British press, in particular, has long ago shown quite clearly that he was/is the victim of a prosecution so overzealous and flimsy as to constitute a frame-up. Do you know that he was convicted of "supporting the Taliban" (which was not a designated terrorist organization even though he was prosecuted under the 'material support to a terrorist organization' statute), and of "carrying explosives"? Carrying explosives? Hahaha. Dude was in Afghanistan. The same kinds of problems are apparent in the prosecution of the Lackawanna 6.Will he be pardoned? Not likely. Not by this or any future administration, notwithstanding the fact that he's innocent.would've helped if he not plead guilty.
mmmm...fascinating discussion really, for a bunch of dilettantes perhaps. has anyone here been to afghanistan recently? does anyone know what they do to dissenting views, women, homosexuals, non-muslims, addicts, artists, non-Pushtuns, unwanted children, etc. over there? has anyone on this thread read anything about the history of this godforsaken sh#thole? each of you defending this place would survive about 2 days over there. Julie, tu as besoin d'une feminine hygiene product feminine ma fille.