So they targetted those who looked different for death. How is tha not racism?
Are you serious? For death? The ones who were not German were either deported or moved from the country by themselves - the ones who were killed were sabotagers and communists.ZombieVampire! wrote:
So they targetted those who looked different for death. How is tha not racism?
Quick question: do you believe the Holocaust occurred?killcommies wrote:
Are you serious? For death? The ones who were not German were either deported or moved from the country by themselves - the ones who were killed were sabotagers and communists.ZombieVampire! wrote:
So they targetted those who looked different for death. How is tha not racism?
You knowing nothing has nothing to do with you not being in the military. In fact, I wouldn't say you know nothing...you just don't choose to examine both sides of an issue.Dilbert_X wrote:
No-one has been successfully prosecuted for wasting 24 totally blameless civilians - women, children and old men.So because someone was found not guilty, you think not enough is being done? Witch trials much?
The only prosecution pending is for manslaughter - I'm not sure how breaking into a house and shooting unarmed 3,4,5 yr old children in the head and chest with your assault rifle is manslaughter but then I'm not in the military and I know nothing.
Prosecution requires evidence beyond a reasonable doubt of the alleged intent and crime. That's how the court system works, and it works that way regardless of the rank or station of the individual. Good thing you're not on the jury, since you've pre-judged actions that you didn't witness and haven't heard court-worthy evidence regarding.
“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
So, the children were communists or sabotagers?killcommies wrote:
Are you serious? For death? The ones who were not German were either deported or moved from the country by themselves - the ones who were killed were sabotagers and communists.ZombieVampire! wrote:
So they targetted those who looked different for death. How is tha not racism?
What's that smell?
can you show proof of children being killed? and what age would you consider children? Id like to see evidence of them being killed without having died of diseases or starvation.ZombieVampire! wrote:
So, the children were communists or sabotagers?killcommies wrote:
Are you serious? For death? The ones who were not German were either deported or moved from the country by themselves - the ones who were killed were sabotagers and communists.ZombieVampire! wrote:
So they targetted those who looked different for death. How is tha not racism?
Last edited by killcommies (2008-06-08 02:52:05)
It's pretty easily available if you look for it. Where do you live (Italy?)?
What is the other side of the issue, where the issue is a 3 yr old, girls, women, old men being shot at point blank range in the head by US soldiers?You knowing nothing has nothing to do with you not being in the military. In fact, I wouldn't say you know nothing...you just don't choose to examine both sides of an issue.
Русский военный корабль, иди на хуй!
No... its not, point being is because children were not forcefully killed. There may be isolated incidents of soldiers killing children, but that happend with every army.ZombieVampire! wrote:
It's pretty easily available if you look for it. Where do you live (Italy?)?
There's always multiple sides to an issue. I'm not excusing what happened...it's absolutely horrendous. But you don't know what occurred and neither do I. While I recognize it was a horrible event, I will not automatically assume guilt without due process.Dilbert_X wrote:
What is the other side of the issue, where the issue is a 3 yr old, girls, women, old men being shot at point blank range in the head by US soldiers?You knowing nothing has nothing to do with you not being in the military. In fact, I wouldn't say you know nothing...you just don't choose to examine both sides of an issue.
It's what you keep saying everyone needs to apply to everyone else...except when you've pre-determined someone's guilt.
“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
Is that a David Irving quote?killcommies wrote:
Are you serious? For death? The ones who were not German were either deported or moved from the country by themselves - the ones who were killed were sabotagers and communists.ZombieVampire! wrote:
So they targetted those who looked different for death. How is tha not racism?
Yes, it is. There are a number of reputable sources.killcommies wrote:
No... its not, point being is because children were not forcefully killed. There may be isolated incidents of soldiers killing children, but that happend with every army.
FEOS wrote:
There's always multiple sides to an issue. ..... But you don't know what occurred and neither do I...... I will not automatically assume guilt without due process.
Seems your 'due process' is a bit one sided.FEOS wrote:
Know this: There is ZERO doubt that Iranian-made weapons are being provided to Shia insurgents. ZERO.
On the one hand, US soldiers are innocent until irrefutable proof is somehow provided, despite the evidence being overwhelming.
On the other hand, the Iranians are irrefutably guilty on the basis of no evidence at all being put before anyone outside secret briefings within the Pentagon.
I think you need to degauss something, your moral compass is off.
Русский военный корабль, иди на хуй!
I said nothing of the kind. The two cases here would be comparable if a videotape of the Haditha incident was made and every forensic test done pointed at the Marines on trial.Dilbert_X wrote:
FEOS wrote:
There's always multiple sides to an issue. ..... But you don't know what occurred and neither do I...... I will not automatically assume guilt without due process.Seems your 'due process' is a bit one sided.FEOS wrote:
Know this: There is ZERO doubt that Iranian-made weapons are being provided to Shia insurgents. ZERO.
On the one hand, US soldiers are innocent until irrefutable proof is somehow provided, despite the evidence being overwhelming.
On the other hand, the Iranians are irrefutably guilty on the basis of no evidence at all being put before anyone outside secret briefings within the Pentagon.
I think you need to degauss something, your moral compass is off.
You're saying hang the Marines before there is a trial. I've said nothing of the sort WRT Iran. There is no conflict in my views on due process.
“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
I haven't said 'hang the marines' I said the prosecution was feeble.
Do you have a videotape of Ahmadinajad instructing his Generals to supply Iraqi insurgents with weapons?
Are his fingerprints on any actual weapons found?
Crickets Chirping...
No you don't, see how you can't win either when you make the burden of proof ludicrously unrealistic.
There is evidence in both cases, you need a more balanced viewpoint.
Do you have a videotape of Ahmadinajad instructing his Generals to supply Iraqi insurgents with weapons?
Are his fingerprints on any actual weapons found?
Crickets Chirping...
No you don't, see how you can't win either when you make the burden of proof ludicrously unrealistic.
There is evidence in both cases, you need a more balanced viewpoint.
Русский военный корабль, иди на хуй!
Don't just say so. You gotta throw them out into the open nonetheless.ZombieVampire! wrote:
Yes, it is. There are a number of reputable sources.killcommies wrote:
No... its not, point being is because children were not forcefully killed. There may be isolated incidents of soldiers killing children, but that happend with every army.
For example: http://www.ushmm.org/wlc/article.php?la … d=10005142
What can I say, I'm lazy.
Do you believe the holocaust is all lies and that the nazis didn't kill jews intentionally ?killcommies wrote:
No... its not, point being is because children were not forcefully killed. There may be isolated incidents of soldiers killing children, but that happend with every army.ZombieVampire! wrote:
It's pretty easily available if you look for it. Where do you live (Italy?)?
Wait behind the line ..............................................................
So it only matters if the prosecution succeeds? That's the great thing about due process...both sides get a chance to convince the jury. One side usually does a better job. It's how the system works. If you don't like it, why don't you volunteer your massive legal brain to help the prosecution?Dilbert_X wrote:
I haven't said 'hang the marines' I said the prosecution was feeble.
Mr No Short Term Memory: Go back and read my posts in this exchange regarding Iranian weapons. I clearly stated that there isn't any evidence that Iranian leadership is behind the weapons transfers--only that newly-produced Iranian weapons are being found throughout Shia areas of Iraq.Dilbert_X wrote:
Do you have a videotape of Ahmadinajad instructing his Generals to supply Iraqi insurgents with weapons?
Are his fingerprints on any actual weapons found?
Yeah...I guess a lot of crickets can chirp in 50 minutes?Dilbert_X wrote:
Crickets Chirping...
What forensic evidence is there that points to the motivation or the detailed actions of the Marines? None. It's all circumstantial and based on witnesses from the group.Dilbert_X wrote:
No you don't, see how you can't win either when you make the burden of proof ludicrously unrealistic.
There is evidence in both cases, you need a more balanced viewpoint.
What forensic evidence is there that Iranian weapons are in Iraq? That would be the tons of weapons themselves.
You are operating under the false assumption that I'm defending the Marines. I'm not. I'm just arguing that you need to apply your standards for due process equally, which you don't.
“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
Ohhhh boy. This was one debate I thought I never would have.killcommies wrote:
Its never been proven he had any jewish blood in his ancestry... and honestly it cannot be proven. I strongly disagree jews in general were targeted - Hundreds of thousands supported the National Socialist party, fought in the ranks of the SS and Wehrmacht - even winning knights crosses and occupying general ranks. I believe the 'jew' in general was such a high target because the majority of them in Germany at the time were involved in communist activities.
Let's see.
Gee, they really loved Jews, didn't they?The Laws For the Protection of German Blood and Honour wrote:
Entirely convinced that the purity of German blood is essential to the further existence of the German people, and inspired by the uncompromising determination to safeguard the future of the German nation, the Reichstag has unanimously resolved upon the following law, which is promulgated herewith:
Section 1
Marriages between Jews and citizens of German or kindred blood are forbidden. Marriages concluded in defiance of this law are void, even if, for the purpose of evading this law, they were concluded abroad.
Proceedings for annulment may be initiated only by the Public Prosecutor.
Section 2
Extramarital intercourse between Jews and subjects of the state of Germany or related blood is forbidden.
(Supplementary decrees set Nazi definitions of racial Germans, Jews, and half-breeds or Mischlinge --- see the latter entry for details and citations. Jews could not vote or hold public office.)
Section 3
Jews will not be permitted to employ female citizens of German or kindred blood as domestic workers under the age of 45.
Section 4
Jews are forbidden to display the Reich and national flag or the national colours.
On the other hand they are permitted to display the Jewish colours. The exercise of this right is protected by the State.
Section 5
A person who acts contrary to the prohibition of Section 1 will be punished with hard labour.
A person who acts contrary to the prohibition of Section 2 will be punished with imprisonment or with hard labor.
A person who acts contrary to the provisions of Sections 3 or 4 will be punished with imprisonment up to a year and with a fine, or with one of these penalties.
Section 6
The Reich Minister of the Interior in agreement with the Deputy Fuhrer and the Reich Minister of Justice will issue the legal and administrative regulations required for the enforcement and supplementing of this law.
Section 7
The law will become effective on the day after its promulgation; Section 3, however, not until January 1, 1936.
That was the most major of the laws that essentially deprived Jews of all their rights as a citizen. No discrimination, eh?
Now this... worries me.I've seen McCain wearing a jew hat, so i serously doubt that.
To each his own as far as politics go, I disagree with communism, and people disagree with fascism.
Greatly.
Let's see. "Jew hat"... hmm. Using such cast-off, derogatory terms does hint towards intolerance of some description.
"I disagree with communism"... to the point where you make your name 'killcommies'? Hmmm.
"and people disagree with fascism." Once combined with the 'to each his own' statement, the implication is clear, and frightening. Fascism is nothign short of evil. No matter which way you spin it.
The paradox is only a conflict between reality and your feeling what reality ought to be.
~ Richard Feynman
~ Richard Feynman
How d'you figure?
*The Fascism is evil part, not the rest*
*The Fascism is evil part, not the rest*
Please explaaaainZombieVampire! wrote:
How d'you figure?
*The Fascism is evil part, not the rest*
The paradox is only a conflict between reality and your feeling what reality ought to be.
~ Richard Feynman
~ Richard Feynman
It matters if only one person is charged with manslaughter for wasting 24 civilians. Feeble IMO.So it only matters if the prosecution succeeds?
I don't know, could it be 24 bodies with US bullets in them? I guess thats why they didn't bother to collect any forensic evidence.What forensic evidence is there that points to the motivation or the detailed actions of the Marines? None. It's all circumstantial and based on witnesses from the group.
Still 'The New York Times reported that, "Investigators have also concluded that most of the victims in three houses died from well-aimed rifle shots, not shrapnel or random fire, according to military officials familiar with the initial findings." Many of those killed have wounds from close-range fire, and their death certificates record "well-aimed shots to the head and chest" as the cause of death.'
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haditha_ki … e_killings
I thought eyewitness testimony carried a bit more weight than circumstantial evidence.It's all circumstantial and based on witnesses from the group.
If its arranged so no witness testifies by holding the trial in the US and failing to bring any witnesses over I guess that solves the problem.
Carrying out trials in the US and failing to bring a single actual witness - feeble.
Due process needs to be followed, not a stagemanaged trial.
On the one hand you're saying there is cast iron proof Iranian made weapons are being found in Iraq, except nobody is apparently allowed to see the proof.
On the other you're saying eyewitness testimony to an event is of trivial value and we need detailed forensic evidence pointing to exactly what happened and what was going on in the minds of the soldiers.
Its one rule for the good ole white boys and one for the rest eh?
But thats how America has always been, I'm not sure why I'm surprised.
Русский военный корабль, иди на хуй!
Now you're putting words in my mouth. I never said (or implied) any of those things.Dilbert_X wrote:
It matters if only one person is charged with manslaughter for wasting 24 civilians. Feeble IMO.So it only matters if the prosecution succeeds?I don't know, could it be 24 bodies with US bullets in them? I guess thats why they didn't bother to collect any forensic evidence.What forensic evidence is there that points to the motivation or the detailed actions of the Marines? None. It's all circumstantial and based on witnesses from the group.
Still 'The New York Times reported that, "Investigators have also concluded that most of the victims in three houses died from well-aimed rifle shots, not shrapnel or random fire, according to military officials familiar with the initial findings." Many of those killed have wounds from close-range fire, and their death certificates record "well-aimed shots to the head and chest" as the cause of death.'
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haditha_ki … e_killingsI thought eyewitness testimony carried a bit more weight than circumstantial evidence.It's all circumstantial and based on witnesses from the group.
If its arranged so no witness testifies by holding the trial in the US and failing to bring any witnesses over I guess that solves the problem.
Carrying out trials in the US and failing to bring a single actual witness - feeble.
Due process needs to be followed, not a stagemanaged trial.
On the one hand you're saying there is cast iron proof Iranian made weapons are being found in Iraq, except nobody is apparently allowed to see the proof.
On the other you're saying eyewitness testimony to an event is of trivial value and we need detailed forensic evidence pointing to exactly what happened and what was going on in the minds of the soldiers.
Its one rule for the good ole white boys and one for the rest eh?
But thats how America has always been, I'm not sure why I'm surprised.
If you're going to say stupid shit, then attribute it properly to yourself, not me.
Have you seen the evidence against the Haditha Marines? No? Curious. You're willing to accept that without independent thought, but use the opposite logic to attempt to deny the evidence against Iran.
Curious.
At least you're consistent with your inconsistencies.
“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular