.:.:.:.:
RTTP
.
Mobile
:.:.:.:.
[
<--back
] [
Home
][
Pics
][
News
][
Ads
][
Events
][
Forum
][
Band
][
Search
]
full forum
|
bottom
jump pages:[
all
|
1
|
2
|
3
|
4
]
jump pages:[
all
|
1
|
2
|
3
|
4
]
Reply
[
login
]
SPAM Filter:
re-type this
(values are 0,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,A,B,C,D,E, or F)
you are quoting a heck of a lot there.
[QUOTE]blah blah blah[/QUOTE] to reply to PatMeebles.
Please remove excess text as not to re-post tons
message
[QUOTE="PatMeebles:496943"]This thread didn't get retarded; it always was because of the stupidity of the question that started it. Just some obvious points. 1) Unless you're stupid (which, HTL, you are), you would notice that for the past 200 years we've had arguments over the constitution because the language, read with our modern perspective on grammar, became more vague. Do we really want to have court cases charging soldiers with an affront to human dignity because they let a female guard in the same room with a detainee? Is that grounds for warcrimes? Because of the new, and very specific, criteria for applying common article 3 we are able to effectively conduct ourselves in front of detainees while knowing exactly what is allowed and what isn't. 2) "other Muslims may have committed terrorist acts inthe past." MAY HAVE?!?!?! hahahahahaha 3) "Islam is no worse than Judaism." haha [/QUOTE]
top
[
Vers. 0.12
][ 0.005 secs/8 queries][
refresh
][