Obama prosecutes 3 navy seals who captured terrorist

[CMike]

Why is it that liberals are consistently on the side of the worst and most vicious enemies of the United States?

 

[Coyote]

Why is it that liberals are consistently on the side of the worst and most vicious enemies of the United States?

Because you're delusional.

 

[Dr Gregg]

If they are charged for a punch, like the article says, that' bullshit. But I'm betting its a lot more than that, as I don't see anybody punishing a miltary person for roughing up a prisoner a little bit who mutiltated people or maybe even killed their friends.

 

[xotoxi]

Why is it that liberals are consistently on the side of the worst and most vicious enemies of the United States?

Show me where a liberal sided with the enemy?

It seems that you fail to differentiate between protecting the enemy and upholding the law.

 

[SpidermanTuba]

Once again the liberals rush to defend their terrorist friends and once again america is the bad guys in the liberals' screwed up mind.

The seals deserve medals for capturing this vicious terrorist.

Once again, the right winger nutbags don't think the law should be enforced.

 

[Dr Gregg]

and like the typical dishonest hack that the OP is, haqs to put "obama prosecutes" when that is not true

 

[Dr Gregg]

Why is it that liberals are consistently on the side of the worst and most vicious enemies of the United States?

so you condone being just as worse and viscous in responses? that's why there is so much violence in the world that never ends, jackasses like you that believe its ok to stoop to the despicable level of the enemy because "hey, they did it"

 

[SpidermanTuba]

Why is it that liberals are consistently on the side of the worst and most vicious enemies of the United States?

I had no idea I was siding with the enemy for suggesting U.S. soldiers be punished for making false official statements.

 

[SpidermanTuba]

Why is it that liberals are consistently on the side of the worst and most vicious enemies of the United States?

so you condone being just as worse and viscous in responses? that's why there is so much violence in the world that never ends, jackasses like you that believe its ok to stoop to the despicable level of the enemy because "hey, they did it"

Its not even that complicated. They simply don't think that U.S. law should apply to them. That's all.

 

[SpidermanTuba]

If they are charged for a punch, like the article says, that' bullshit..

No it isn't. If it was done to a detained prisoner who was not at the time of the altercation behaving violently, its assault. That's what the law says. You can't just walk up to a prisoner and sucker punch him in the gut because you think he's a bad guy and you've got God on your side.

From Title 10 US CODE: Title 10,928. Art. 128. Assault

(a) Any person subject to this chapter who attempts or offers with unlawful force or violence to do bodily harm to another person, whether or not the attempt or offer is consummated, is guilty of assault and shall be punished as a court-martial may direct.

I would bet that if they hadn't lied in their statements and were only charged with simple assault, they'd be a lot better off.

 

[Munin]

What moron believes that Obama himself is prosecuting these guys? If you have a bit of a brain and had an education you should know about the separation of powers:

executive, legislative and judicial branches of government are kept distinct, to prevent abuse of power

And if you use a news source, at least TRY to take one that is credible: FOX is not a credible news source, "FOX NEWS" is "ENTERTAINMENT" not news.


Anyone who beats the crap out of a man who can't defend himself (in chains) is a disgrace to the uniform. Yes he is a terrorist, but how would you like it if US soldiers in custody of another country were beaten the same way? And for those who will probably misunderstand what I just said: I m not comparing US soldiers with terrorists, I m comparing the treatment of the US army with that of other nations.

Beating the crap out of someone because he doesn't coöperate is something entirely different and in that case the circumstances should be taken into account.

 

[CrimsonWhite]

If they are charged for a punch, like the article says, that' bullshit..

No it isn't. If it was done to a detained prisoner who was not at the time of the altercation behaving violently, its assault. That's what the law says. You can't just walk up to a prisoner and sucker punch him in the gut because you think he's a bad guy and you've got God on your side.

From Title 10 US CODE: Title 10,928. Art. 128. Assault

(a) Any person subject to this chapter who attempts or offers with unlawful force or violence to do bodily harm to another person, whether or not the attempt or offer is consummated, is guilty of assault and shall be punished as a court-martial may direct.

I would bet that if they hadn't lied in their statements and were only charged with simple assault, they'd be a lot better off.

Your inability to comprehend amazes me.

 

[Coyote]

If they are charged for a punch, like the article says, that' bullshit..

No it isn't. If it was done to a detained prisoner who was not at the time of the altercation behaving violently, its assault. That's what the law says. You can't just walk up to a prisoner and sucker punch him in the gut because you think he's a bad guy and you've got God on your side.

From Title 10 US CODE: Title 10,928. Art. 128. Assault

(a) Any person subject to this chapter who attempts or offers with unlawful force or violence to do bodily harm to another person, whether or not the attempt or offer is consummated, is guilty of assault and shall be punished as a court-martial may direct.

I would bet that if they hadn't lied in their statements and were only charged with simple assault, they'd be a lot better off.

You're probably right about that - covering it up is the crux of the issue.

 

[Dr Gregg]

If they are charged for a punch, like the article says, that' bullshit..

No it isn't. If it was done to a detained prisoner who was not at the time of the altercation behaving violently, its assault. That's what the law says. You can't just walk up to a prisoner and sucker punch him in the gut because you think he's a bad guy and you've got God on your side.

From Title 10 US CODE: Title 10,928. Art. 128. Assault

(a) Any person subject to this chapter who attempts or offers with unlawful force or violence to do bodily harm to another person, whether or not the attempt or offer is consummated, is guilty of assault and shall be punished as a court-martial may direct.

I would bet that if they hadn't lied in their statements and were only charged with simple assault, they'd be a lot better off.

I don't condone torture but you have some asshole that may have killed friends, I think a punch in the face is harmless in war. Torture and excessive beating is an entirely different thing.

they can shoot and kill people, but can't punch someone?

 

[CrimsonWhite]

Everyone is assuming that he hit this guy for shits and giggles. There was probably a reason. SEALs don't just go around knocking people around for the fun of it. They have their shit together. I'm willing to give these guys the benefit of the doubt and chalk it up to the shit stain had it coming.

 

[Gunny]

If they are charged for a punch, like the article says, that' bullshit..

No it isn't. If it was done to a detained prisoner who was not at the time of the altercation behaving violently, its assault. That's what the law says. You can't just walk up to a prisoner and sucker punch him in the gut because you think he's a bad guy and you've got God on your side.

From Title 10 US CODE: Title 10,928. Art. 128. Assault

(a) Any person subject to this chapter who attempts or offers with unlawful force or violence to do bodily harm to another person, whether or not the attempt or offer is consummated, is guilty of assault and shall be punished as a court-martial may direct.

I would bet that if they hadn't lied in their statements and were only charged with simple assault, they'd be a lot better off.

Your inability to comprehend amazes me.

Not me. Dude's a 'tard. Kinda simplifies stuff.

Too bad we didn't set home and let all these know it all's go to war, huh? Little bit different when those rounds are impacting a couple of inches away than having one's butt melded to the sofa ....

 

[mal]

Well, Eric Holder has appointed 9 lawyers who defended Gitmo detainees to the Justice Dept. What do you expect from these people? And, they're so damned scared, they won't even name 7 of them.

Yep...



peace...

 

[CrimsonWhite]

No it isn't. If it was done to a detained prisoner who was not at the time of the altercation behaving violently, its assault. That's what the law says. You can't just walk up to a prisoner and sucker punch him in the gut because you think he's a bad guy and you've got God on your side.

From Title 10 US CODE: Title 10,928. Art. 128. Assault




I would bet that if they hadn't lied in their statements and were only charged with simple assault, they'd be a lot better off.

Your inability to comprehend amazes me.

Not me. Dude's a 'tard. Kinda simplifies stuff.

Too bad we didn't set home and let all these know it all's go to war, huh? Little bit different when those rounds are impacting a couple of inches away than having one's butt melded to the sofa ....

Guess this one of those things that you will never understand until you hear the zippers.

 

[SpidermanTuba]

If they are charged for a punch, like the article says, that' bullshit..

No it isn't. If it was done to a detained prisoner who was not at the time of the altercation behaving violently, its assault. That's what the law says. You can't just walk up to a prisoner and sucker punch him in the gut because you think he's a bad guy and you've got God on your side.

From Title 10 US CODE: Title 10,928. Art. 128. Assault

(a) Any person subject to this chapter who attempts or offers with unlawful force or violence to do bodily harm to another person, whether or not the attempt or offer is consummated, is guilty of assault and shall be punished as a court-martial may direct.

I would bet that if they hadn't lied in their statements and were only charged with simple assault, they'd be a lot better off.

You're probably right about that - covering it up is the crux of the issue.

Its the same with the Danziger bridge murders in New Orleans.

Everyone would have been very willing to believe that 7 police officers, receiving a phony call of an officer down, arriving on the scene in the middle of Katrina, the worst disaster in the city since at least 1927, stressed out, afraid for their lives, worried for their own families - would F up and shoot innocent people without meaning to. And maybe they didn't mean to. Maybe it was an honest mistake. But they actively covered up the truth of the incident for 4+ years - so at this point, who cares what their original intentions were?

 

[CrimsonWhite]

No it isn't. If it was done to a detained prisoner who was not at the time of the altercation behaving violently, its assault. That's what the law says. You can't just walk up to a prisoner and sucker punch him in the gut because you think he's a bad guy and you've got God on your side.

From Title 10 US CODE: Title 10,928. Art. 128. Assault




I would bet that if they hadn't lied in their statements and were only charged with simple assault, they'd be a lot better off.

You're probably right about that - covering it up is the crux of the issue.

Its the same with the Danziger bridge murders in New Orleans.

Everyone would have been very willing to believe that 7 police officers, receiving a phony call of an officer down, arriving on the scene in the middle of Katrina, the worst disaster in the city since at least 1927, stressed out, afraid for their lives, worried for their own families - would F up and shoot innocent people without meaning to. And maybe they didn't mean to. Maybe it was an honest mistake. But they actively covered up the truth of the incident for 4+ years - so at this point, who cares what their original intentions were?

Soldiers are not police officers. Two different missions and a completely different set of rules. Therefore your comparison does not apply.