Jump to content
Accelerated Evolution

Blackwater granted Immunity


Recommended Posts

Which is why I'm totally trying to get into the local police department, myself. :headbang: This bitch passed the polygraph, yeaaaah. Now, to apply for top security clearance. :hardgay:

I was talking about officers in the military. They no longer take responsibility for the actions of the men under their command, instead they get desk jobs while the soldiers that were under them are court marshaled.

Link to comment

How could this be a good idea?

Everything is backwards when we have a Republican president.

Lying about a blow job is worthy of impeachment, but not lying about reasons for going to war.

Murder is excuseable so long as you've built your business on it.

Oranges are bananas.

Good is bad.

You get it.

Link to comment

I was talking about officers in the military. They no longer take responsibility for the actions of the men under their command, instead they get desk jobs while the soldiers that were under them are court marshaled.

court marshal goes as high as there is proof of wrong doing. Much less gets swept under the rug than the old days. Read about WWII, for instance. Petraeus isn't going to be court marshaled if a a private opens fire on his unit, for instance. Discipline needs to be fair and there will always be bad people. That's what cooperations have accountants.

Lying about a blow job is worthy of impeachment, but not lying about reasons for going to war.

Murder is excuseable so long as you've built your business on it.

Lying about a blow job is fine, not grounds for impeachment. But lying under Oath is grounds for impeachment. Do you see the difference? It doesn't matter if he was testifying that the name of his dog was sparky and it was sam.

on the subject of lying about reasons to go to war- which, separate debate. Repeating what you believe to be true to the best of your understanding isn't lying. If several doctors told me I had O+ blood and it turned out I had AB-, I can't really be held accountable for believing expert opinion.

Link to comment

court marshal goes as high as there is proof of wrong doing. Much less gets swept under the rug than the old days. Read about WWII, for instance. Petraeus isn't going to be court marshaled if a a private opens fire on his unit, for instance. Discipline needs to be fair and there will always be bad people. That's what cooperations have accountants.

You missed my point, which was that today officers are not held responsible for the actions of their men. We see news of soldiers in Iraq being accused of murder, inhuman acts, and suspicious friendly fire but the officers in charge rarely take responsibility and almost never under go any investigations for their actions, orders, or whereabouts even when there are accusations or evidences that the officers may have ordered their soldiers to do committ these acts.

Having an officer's title in today's military seems to grant you immunity and a desk job for being a deplorable human being.

Lying about a blow job is fine, not grounds for impeachment. But lying under Oath is grounds for impeachment. Do you see the difference? It doesn't matter if he was testifying that the name of his dog was sparky and it was sam.

on the subject of lying about reasons to go to war- which, separate debate. Repeating what you believe to be true to the best of your understanding isn't lying. If several doctors told me I had O+ blood and it turned out I had AB-, I can't really be held accountable for believing expert opinion.

Regardless of whether or not he was under oath, it still pales in comparison to lying about reasons for starting a war that's killed a lot of people.

I don't think Clinton's blow job killed anyone.

Link to comment

Regardless of whether or not he was under oath, it still pales in comparison to lying about reasons for starting a war that's killed a lot of people.

I don't think Clinton's blow job killed anyone.

I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.

(UNKNOWN): Mr. President, would you raise your right hand, please? Do you solemnly swear that the testimony you're about to give in this matter will be the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth, so help you God?

CLINTON: I do.

Both Oaths! Breaking an oath is serious business, since oaths are the foundation of a contract oriented legal system. For the most part, no one cares about a blowjob. The Seriousness of the lie is not at issue, it's the seriousness of the context.

as for President Bush, I would ask for proof of willful deceit. Heck, I would ask for proof of deceit. In any case, as much as we'd like our politicians to be honest with us, there is no constitutional onus to do so, so long as they fulfill their oaths of office. I doubt the president was under any besides the presidential oath when he was on camera. The presidential oath itself has no truthfulness clause. Not even a truthyness clause.

Link to comment

Both Oaths! Breaking an oath is serious business, since oaths are the foundation of a contract oriented legal system. For the most part, no one cares about a blowjob. The Seriousness of the lie is not at issue, it's the seriousness of the context.

as for President Bush, I would ask for proof of willful deceit. Heck, I would ask for proof of deceit. In any case, as much as we'd like our politicians to be honest with us, there is no constitutional onus to do so, so long as they fulfill their oaths of office. I doubt the president was under any besides the presidential oath when he was on camera. The presidential oath itself has no truthfulness clause. Not even a truthyness clause.

Way to defend meaningless death and destruction fella.

Not worth arguing with someone who thinks lying under oath about a blow job is worse than lying about reasons for going to war.

Link to comment

on the subject of lying about reasons to go to war- which, separate debate. Repeating what you believe to be true to the best of your understanding isn't lying. If several doctors told me I had O+ blood and it turned out I had AB-, I can't really be held accountable for believing expert opinion.

Too bad that's not at all what happened.

As many experts as there were before the war who said that going to war with Iraq was a great and justified idea, I'm sure there were many, many more who thought it was a terrible idea with no real political or moral basis. Mostly because they were right.

Again, I agree with Brenton. Sure, Clinton may have lied under oath and George Bush might not have. Doesn't change the facts. Clinton lies under oath, no one gets hurt. George Bush lies, not under oath to tell the truth, but still under oath to defend the American people, which this pointless war is not doing. So, the argument could easily be made, though I admit it isn't quite as clear-cut or absolutist.

Link to comment

Way to defend meaningless death and destruction fella.

Not worth arguing with someone who thinks lying under oath about a blow job is worse than lying about reasons for going to war.

I obviously didn't say that. I challenged that lack of evidence of what Bush said as either being a lie, or if untrue, a lie supported by willful intent, and I additionally challenged that even if it were a lie, a like under oath is a matter of criminal law, regardless of what you lie about. I thought the entire thing was pretty stupid to have gotten that far, personally.

Too bad that's not at all what happened.

As many experts as there were before the war who said that going to war with Iraq was a great and justified idea, I'm sure there were many, many more who thought it was a terrible idea with no real political or moral basis. Mostly because they were right.

what is the basis of that claim? Feeling?

George Bush lies, not under oath to tell the truth, but still under oath to defend the American people, which this pointless war is not doing.

I don't really want to make this argument, but the president's oath is two parts

A) I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the office of President of the United States,

B) and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.

as for the loss of life due to this action, in the US, the suicide rate averages out to about thirty-thousand people a year. So far in four years slightly less than three-thousand-nine-hundred people have died. Every death is a tragedy, but have some perspective. In any case, that's either slightly higher or slightly lower than the number of US soldiers who died on D Day in the invasion of Normandy. Iraq has an elected government, it's police and armed forces are starting to act like police and armed forces, and they are in the beginnings of the process of founding a new nation out of the ashes of a dictator state. Additionally, post war fighting is not uncommon, we suffered the same in the aftermath of post war Germany.. years of resistance from the last national socialists hold backs before reaching a period of relative calm and explosive growth. The US will leave Iraq, and it will be fairly soon, for the most part, but it will leave a (reasonably) stable democracy, not a broken country or one under a despotic dictator.

Link to comment

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...