Senior Member
Originally Posted by gabosaurus
Dude you SERIOUSLY do not have a clue. Are you Virgil taking us for a ride? Or perhaps Pale Rider on a complete bender.
Do us all a favor. Either step up your game and talk intelligently, or go troll at Democratic Underground. Your childish comments and ignorant responses are totally embarrassing you here.
Thank you Gabby
This guy is a certifiable nut case
How do you tell a communist? Well, it's someone who reads Marx and Lenin. And how do you tell an anti-Communist? It's someone who understands Marx and Lenin.
Ronald Reagan
Banned
If cry baby don't like a bit of abuse he shouldn't have started the fray!
Dude you SERIOUSLY do not have a clue. Are you Virgil taking us for a ride? Or perhaps Pale Rider on a complete bender.
Do us all a favor. Either step up your game and talk intelligently, or go troll at Democratic Underground. Your childish comments and ignorant responses are totally embarrassing you here.
your inability to see this is an embarrassment to you!
Banned
Article 4 of the Geneva convention.
http://usmilitary.about.com/library/...on/blart-4.htm
No murder was comitted, there was no pow, Taliban combattents do not meet the 4 criteria to have earned the title "pow"!
Banned
You remind me of Roy Orbison!
still crying, crying, cry y y ing!
Banned
Read article 4.
It should clear things up for you.
Banned
Where was the execution, was an exocution ever mentioned?
your use of emotive language to imply that a violent act occored is frankly disgusting.
no murder, no execution, just cowardice and appeasement by liberals.
Ignored by the alt-right
A. Prisoners of war, in the sense of the present Convention, are persons belonging to one of the following categories, who have fallen into the power of the enemy:1. Members of the armed forces of a Party to the conflict as well as members of militias or volunteer corps forming part of such armed forces.
3. Members of regular armed forces who profess allegiance to a government or an authority not recognized by the Detaining Power.
6. Inhabitants of a non-occupied territory, who on the approach of the enemy spontaneously take up arms to resist the invading forces, without having had time to form themselves into regular armed units, provided they carry arms openly and respect the laws and customs of war.
B. The following shall likewise be treated as prisoners of war under the present Convention:
1. Persons belonging, or having belonged, to the armed forces of the occupied country, if the occupying Power considers it necessary by reason of such allegiance to intern them, even though it has originally liberated them while hostilities were going on outside the territory it occupies, in particular where such persons have made an unsuccessful attempt to rejoin the armed forces to which they belong and which are engaged in combat, or where they fail to comply with a summons made to them with a view to internment.
2. The persons belonging to one of the categories enumerated in the present Article, who have been received by neutral or non-belligerent Powers on their territory and whom these Powers are required to intern under international law, without prejudice to any more favourable treatment which these Powers may choose to give and with the exception of Articles 8, 10, 15, 30, fifth paragraph, 58-67, 92, 126 and, where diplomatic relations exist between the Parties to the conflict and the neutral or non-belligerent Power concerned, those Articles concerning the Protecting Power. Where such diplomatic relations exist, the Parties to a conflict on whom these persons depend shall be allowed to perform towards them the functions of a Protecting Power as provided in the present Convention, without prejudice to the functions which these Parties normally exercise in conformity with diplomatic and consular usage and treaties.
Or just breaking their own rules:
allegedly breaking the military's strict rules of engagement.
Read more: http://www.theweek.co.uk/crime/afgha...#ixzz29Mzo9us0
Let's hope it's not true, we should expect higher of our side.
"when socialism fails, blame capitalism and demand more socialism." - A friend
"You know the difference between libs and right-wingers? Libs STFU when evidence refutes their false beliefs." - Another friend
“Don't waste your time with explanations: people only hear what they want to hear.” - Paulo Coelho
Ignored by the alt-right
Did you read the story? All I did was find an article that suggests that your version is incorrect and alleges an execution.
"when socialism fails, blame capitalism and demand more socialism." - A friend
"You know the difference between libs and right-wingers? Libs STFU when evidence refutes their false beliefs." - Another friend
“Don't waste your time with explanations: people only hear what they want to hear.” - Paulo Coelho
Banned
No it didn't, it says the marines discussed what to do with the illegal combattent who had been injured.
no evidence or mention of an execution has been presented!
This is a case if some retarded civvy cop with a social work degree no liking a video he saw.
Its a cowardly military police being pressured by an appeasement minded government run by a turncoat bastard.
Its about an ongoing hatred of the armed forces by a soft society of tree huggers, wimps and childishly out of touch civvies!
Ignored by the alt-right
Orly?
You got issues.
"when socialism fails, blame capitalism and demand more socialism." - A friend
"You know the difference between libs and right-wingers? Libs STFU when evidence refutes their false beliefs." - Another friend
“Don't waste your time with explanations: people only hear what they want to hear.” - Paulo Coelho
Banned
Suspected, is not proven, but again, there was no prisoner, there was no execution!
your liberal civvy mindset has built in hate for the military, that your choice!!
Banned
Daily mail, a reliable news source!!
british police and newspapers, towers of truth!
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...hotograph.html
ive known the lad in this story for 30 years, his real crime was to believe that as a divorced man he still had rights!!
His ASBO ( anti social behaviour order) was applied illegally because his trial for breaking and entering, theft and domestic violence collapsed!
opening his own front door with a key was not B+E, taking his clothes was not theft, going back to an empty house after marital separation is not domestic violence!
The police, the cps and the press were made fools of by the defense. This made him a target!
Thats the daily mail!
the case against these marines is the same kind of shit!
Ignored by the alt-right
Who said it was proven? Your bias is clear.
Why don't we try to keep one deranged lunacy per thread please. Why don't you show me the bias in this case from the DM as I asked before.
"when socialism fails, blame capitalism and demand more socialism." - A friend
"You know the difference between libs and right-wingers? Libs STFU when evidence refutes their false beliefs." - Another friend
“Don't waste your time with explanations: people only hear what they want to hear.” - Paulo Coelho
Banned
I made no allegation of bias, just an allegation of dishonest reporting by the daily mail.Who said it was proven? Your bias is clear.
Why don't we try to keep one deranged lunacy per thread please. Why don't you show me the bias in this case from the DM as I asked before.
they make mountains out of molehills to sell papers.
Ignored by the alt-right
Orly?
Besides, your "allegation of dishonest reporting" is bias.
"when socialism fails, blame capitalism and demand more socialism." - A friend
"You know the difference between libs and right-wingers? Libs STFU when evidence refutes their false beliefs." - Another friend
“Don't waste your time with explanations: people only hear what they want to hear.” - Paulo Coelho
Posting Permissions
