Re: White House backed release of Lockerbie bomber
 

Peace is the ultimate goal of course. Maybe one day we will hear a version of this:

[QUOTE]"It is with great reluctance that I have agreed to this calling. I love democracy. I love the Republic. But I am mild by nature, and do not wish to see the destruction of democracy. The power you give me I will lay down when this crisis has abated. And as my first act with this new authority, I will create a Grand Army of the Republic to counter the increasing threats of the Separatists."[/QUOTE]

I have no doubt you will stand with him at that point

Re: White House backed release of Lockerbie bomber
 

[quote=CRedskinsRule;714214]Peace is the ultimate goal of course. Maybe one day we will hear a version of this:



I have no doubt you will stand with him at that point[/quote]

If the Scots aren't with us they're against us. Execute order 66.

Re: White House backed release of Lockerbie bomber
 

[quote=12thMan;714164]I did, but it's not the link I really have an issue with, it's the title of the thread and ensuing and misleading attacks.[/quote]

Well to be fair, Scud did create the thread title based directly on the article title and did later admit to maybe being a bit overzealous on the thread title.

Re: White House backed release of Lockerbie bomber
 

[quote=12thMan;714182]I don't know who you guys are, but you won't find one thread, and I dare say, one post by me bashing Bush. I'd be surprised if you could dig up one. Now I've disagreed with him, I've been angry with him, don't like him, but I can't recall starting a thread just to gin up bs.[/quote]

I think we all know there's one person here who digs up bs on one side and one who digs up bs on the other...for the sole purpose of digging up bs. This thread is hardly starting one just to gin up bs.

Now have others on occasion? Sure. And are political threads basically retarded? Absolutely. Does anyone actually say "hey, you know what. Even though I disagree with you fundamentally you actually make a good point? Almost never

Thank goodness training camp is just a couple of days away

Re: White House backed release of Lockerbie bomber
 

[quote=saden1;714217]If the Scots aren't with us they're against us. Execute order 66.[/quote]

Don't we need to amend the UN [URL="http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Security_Act_amendment"]Security Act[/URL] first to give LO full supremacy?

Re: White House backed release of Lockerbie bomber
 

[quote=SmootSmack;714223]Well to be fair, Scud did create the thread title based directly on the article title and did later admit to maybe being a bit overzealous on the thread title.[/quote]

Fair enough.

Yes, thank God for training camp.

Re: White House backed release of Lockerbie bomber
 

[quote=CRedskinsRule;714229]Don't we need to amend the UN [URL="http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Security_Act_amendment"]Security Act[/URL] first to give LO full supremacy?[/quote]

If Operation Iraqi Freedom and Enduring Freedom has taught us anything it is that the Security Council is easily swayed. With Lord Obama the Sith will reign once more... The Force is strong with him.

Re: White House backed release of Lockerbie bomber
 

BP wanted to get back into Libya. Libya wanted their "hero" out of the slammer. BP was a big contributor to President Hussein. Seems pretty cut and dry to me. I don't see why this would be a shock to anyone? It's just business!

Re: White House backed release of Lockerbie bomber
 

Ya know when Olie North was questioned by the Gov. he was asked why he purchased a $60,000 alarm system for his home and he basically said he had received death threats. They asked him who would scare him that much? And he said Osama Bin Laden. They asked what would he have them do about Osama and he said assassinate him.

I'll give you another nugget... The Senator who questioned Olie was Al Gore. Then during the Isreal/Palistine agreements on freeing political prisoners Palistine requested the release on one specific prisoner and Isreal said no cause he actually partook in a bombing. Pres. Clinton stepped in and talked Isreal into releasing the guy. Wouldn't you know he was the pilot of the second plane that hit the second tower.

This guy should not have been released. He didn't care about anyone on the plane that died so why should anyone care about his feelings or his families or whether he's comfortable? Let his but rot in prison. Our luck his old ass signs up for a suicide mission.

Re: White House backed release of Lockerbie bomber
 

[quote=SBXVII;714364]Ya know when Olie North was questioned by the Gov. he was asked why he purchased a $60,000 alarm system for his home and he basically said he had received death threats. They asked him who would scare him that much? And he said Osama Bin Laden. They asked what would he have them do about Osama and he said assassinate him.

I'll give you another nugget... The Senator who questioned Olie was Al Gore. Then during the Isreal/Palistine agreements on freeing political prisoners Palistine requested the release on one specific prisoner and Isreal said no cause he actually partook in a bombing. Pres. Clinton stepped in and talked Isreal into releasing the guy. Wouldn't you know he was the pilot of the second plane that hit the second tower.

This guy should not have been released. He didn't care about anyone on the plane that died so why should anyone care about his feelings or his families or whether he's comfortable? Let his but rot in prison. Our luck his old ass signs up for a suicide mission.[/quote]

You're a conspiracy theorist!

Re: White House backed release of Lockerbie bomber
 

[quote=Slingin Sammy 33;714113]I call flat out bullshit. Not Bush 1, Clinton, Bush 2, or Obama should be called mass murders or war criminals. If I honestly felt the last four presidents were mass murders, I would resign my citizenship and find another country.[/quote]

Sammy, both Gulf Wars were by the book unconstitutional, the second one was illegal under international law. Not to mention both started under false pretenses. Clinton and the Balkan tragedy was also based on hyped up BS that justified what we did. The "atrocities" committed by the Serbs were done after Bubba started the bombing, so what came first the chicken or the egg? Obama has turned the war machine up a notch in Pakistan and with the extrajudicial killings. Both are illegal nationally(constitutionally) and internationally. In 1945 we hung or shot a bunch of Germans and Japanese for the same crap. We set up these laws and now break them at our leisure. But if other nations do the same, we bomb the shit out of them. Well over a million Iraqis are dead(half by those wonderful Clinton/Albright sanctions). Who knows the body count in Afghanistan and Pakistan.

Re: White House backed release of Lockerbie bomber
 

For those who care to read further, the evidence against al-Megrahi was awfully thin, and many believe him to be [URL="http://newsquake.netscape.com/2007/06/28/libyan-convicted-in-lockerbie-trial-may-be-innocent/"]innocent.[/URL]

[quote]A former Libyan intelligence agent sentenced to life for the bombing of Pan Am Flight 103 may have been wrongly convicted, concluded a Scottish panel today. In its 800-page report, the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission (SCCRC) stated that Abdel Basset Ali al-Megrahi may have "suffered a miscarriage of justice" during his 2001 trial, reports the Associated Press. The panel recommended that al-Megrahi be granted a new appeal.

''The commission is of the view, based upon our lengthy investigations, new evidence we have found and other evidence which was not before the trial court, that the applicant may have suffered a miscarriage of justice,'' wrote the SCCRC.

[B]Specifically, SCCRC's report raised questions about the testimony of Tony Gauci, a store owner in Malta, notes the AP. During the trial, Gauci testified that a man resembling al-Megrahi purchased clothing at his store--apparel that was later linked to the bomb on the plane. . . [/B][/quote]

Re: White House backed release of Lockerbie bomber
 

[quote=GusFrerotte;715028]Sammy, both Gulf Wars were by the book unconstitutional, the second one was illegal under international law. Not to mention both started under false pretenses. Clinton and the Balkan tragedy was also based on hyped up BS that justified what we did. The "atrocities" committed by the Serbs were done after Bubba started the bombing, so what came first the chicken or the egg? Obama has turned the war machine up a notch in Pakistan and with the extrajudicial killings. Both are illegal nationally(constitutionally) and internationally. In 1945 we hung or shot a bunch of Germans and Japanese for the same crap. We set up these laws and now break them at our leisure. But if other nations do the same, we bomb the shit out of them. Well over a million Iraqis are dead([B]half by those wonderful Clinton/Albright sanctions[/B]). Who knows the body count in Afghanistan and Pakistan.[/quote]

They had money to build an army durn that time and he built palace after palace but he allowed his people to die because he did not care what happened to them. The sanctions had nothing to do with the death of Iraq's it was the actions a SH not caring about his people and spending their money on other stuff.

Re: White House backed release of Lockerbie bomber
 

[quote=firstdown;715373]They had money to build an army durn that time and he built palace after palace but he allowed his people to die because he did not care what happened to them. The sanctions had nothing to do with the death of Iraq's it was the actions a SH not caring about his people and spending their money on other stuff.[/quote]

Ok so where is the part where it was any of our business? Thousands of people die everyday because of some asshole dictator. Why should we pay for their freedom with our blood and treasure? All they do is spit in our faces, just like those GD Haitians! Meanwhile, we're on the edge of insolvency.