no not really. we have no idea why the guy is a "vet against the war" or whatever. could be for many many reasons. i like how the sheeple fall in line though and suck it right up.AussieReaper wrote:
Yeah eyewitness accounts have to be corroborated, but my point is that these accounts are infinitely more credible than the press coverage of Gitmo and the army's clearly defensive (understandable) response.
Pages: 1 2
- Index »
- Community »
- Debate and Serious Talk »
- No one, guilty or innocent, should be treated in the manner they have.
Maybe he wasn't happy with the lunch menu's and holds a grudge.usmarine wrote:
no not really. we have no idea why the guy is a "vet against the war" or whatever. could be for many many reasons. i like how the sheeple fall in line though and suck it right up.AussieReaper wrote:
Yeah eyewitness accounts have to be corroborated, but my point is that these accounts are infinitely more credible than the press coverage of Gitmo and the army's clearly defensive (understandable) response.
or maybe he was a POS and got passed over for rank, thinking he was better than he was? like i said. i will wait on this one.AussieReaper wrote:
Maybe he wasn't happy with the lunch menu's and holds a grudge.usmarine wrote:
no not really. we have no idea why the guy is a "vet against the war" or whatever. could be for many many reasons. i like how the sheeple fall in line though and suck it right up.AussieReaper wrote:
Yeah eyewitness accounts have to be corroborated, but my point is that these accounts are infinitely more credible than the press coverage of Gitmo and the army's clearly defensive (understandable) response.
Pages: 1 2
- Index »
- Community »
- Debate and Serious Talk »
- No one, guilty or innocent, should be treated in the manner they have.