Getbig.com: American Bodybuilding, Fitness and Figure

Getbig Main Boards => Politics and Political Issues Board => Topic started by: ribonucleic on April 11, 2007, 05:09:41 PM

Title: That Iranian journalist we released to get the British back? We tortured him.
Post by: ribonucleic on April 11, 2007, 05:09:41 PM
(http://media.farsnews.com/Media/8601/ImageReports/8601220617/21_8601220617_L600.jpg)

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/6544055.stm

http://www.farsnews.com/imgrep.php?nn=8601220617
Title: Re: That Iranian journalist we released to get the British back? We tortured him.
Post by: Thin Lizzy on April 11, 2007, 06:02:46 PM
First, there's absolutely no evidence that Americans were in any way involved in this guy's abduction.

Second, He says that an American was present after he was tortured, but only found this out through one of his captors. So, it's basically the word of the kidnappers who abducted that you're relying upon, or the word of an Iranian journalist with an axe to grind.

Of course, when it comes to indicting America, that whole innocent until proven guilty thing goes out the window, doesn't it?

Title: Re: That Iranian journalist we released to get the British back? We tortured him
Post by: ribonucleic on April 11, 2007, 06:48:44 PM
Quote from: Thin Lizzy on April 11, 2007, 06:02:46 PM
First, there's absolutely no evidence that Americans were in any way involved in this guy's abduction.

Second, He says that an American was present after he was tortured, but only found this out through one of his captors. So, it's basically the word of the kidnappers who abducted that you're relying upon, or the word of an Iranian journalist with an axe to grind.

Of course, when it comes to indicting America, that whole innocent until proven guilty thing goes out the window, doesn't it?

Well argued.

But to answer your question: Yes, when it comes to allegations of torture by American agents of Arab captives, we have long since forfeited the presumption of innocence.

If you don't like it, go yell at Donald Rumsfeld. I used to think we were the good guys too.  :(
Title: Re: That Iranian journalist we released to get the British back? We tortured him.
Post by: Camel Jockey on April 11, 2007, 08:43:12 PM
A sad say when America resorts to actions normally attributed to the enemy.  :-\
Title: Re: That Iranian journalist we released to get the British back? We tortured him.
Post by: militarymuscle69 on April 12, 2007, 10:30:56 PM
only Ribo would take an Iranians word over America's. The military sayd they never had him in their custody
Title: Re: That Iranian journalist we released to get the British back? We tortured him.
Post by: 24KT on April 12, 2007, 10:33:36 PM
Quote from: militarymuscle69 on April 12, 2007, 10:30:56 PM
only Ribo would take an Iranians word over America's. The military sayd they never had him in their custody

They also said there were WMDs, that they'd be greeted as liberators, and mission accomplished.
Title: Re: That Iranian journalist we released to get the British back? We tortured him
Post by: ribonucleic on April 12, 2007, 10:40:23 PM
Quote from: militarymuscle69 on April 12, 2007, 10:30:56 PM
The military sayd they never had him in their custody

For some reason, this reminds me of The Waterboy when it's suggested he play football.

"But Momma... Momma said... Momma... Momma said..."
Title: Re: That Iranian journalist we released to get the British back? We tortured him.
Post by: 240 is Back on April 12, 2007, 10:41:23 PM
Quote from: jaguarenterprises on April 12, 2007, 10:33:36 PM
They also said there were WMDs, that they'd be greeted as liberators, and mission accomplished.

anyone, please tell her she's wrong and why.







anyone?
Title: Re: That Iranian journalist we released to get the British back? We tortured him
Post by: Thin Lizzy on April 12, 2007, 11:19:48 PM
Quote from: ribonucleic on April 11, 2007, 06:48:44 PM
Well argued.

But to answer your question: Yes, when it comes to allegations of torture by American agents of Arab captives, we have long since forfeited the presumption of innocence.


Let's take this idiotic logic and apply it to a different situation:

Since many young black males have been convicted of violent crimes, we should invert the legal process so that, in court, young black males are guilty until proven innocent.

(And save the predictable "That's already happening.")