In any case I was referring NOT to the JAGS but to the Freeper Arm Chair moralizers who know NOTHING about this case but have all ready appointed them selves Judge and Jury. You were not there, you have seen NO evidence but what the some highly questionable sources are claiming. Might want to keep in mind these are the SAME sources that claimed the Libby case was going to produce "25 indictments reaching into the highest levels of the White House". Pure BS.
This is the new prosecutor spin game. GO out and try to sell the guilty verdict by leaking all these "facts" to the Junk Media. They know they can counted on the usual assumption from the Public "Well gee why were they charged if they are innocent then"?
If they had a solid case they would keep it under wraps. All they are trying, and apprently succeeding, is poisoning the PR pool by trial by accusation in the Junk Media. And is seems to be working for those who WANT to believe. Which raises the question. WHY are some "Freepers" so anxious to see these Marines hung out to dry without even a trial?
I accuse you both of being DNC Activists. Prove your innocence. -
-
-
Understand now why trial by accusation is a bad idea? Anyone can make an accusation about anything. An accusation is NOT proof.
Good night.
Find one. I want them hung out to dry at a trial.
This is the new prosecutor spin game. GO out and try to sell the guilty verdict by leaking all these "facts" to the Junk Media.
Stories like this are too explosive not to be released to the media. The military cannot afford to be accused of a coverup.
Being deployed to a Combat Zone and being in Combat are two completely different things. Claim a JAG would have "Combat experience" is utter nonsense.
I didn't. It was alleged that JAGs wouldn't understand the pressures on servicemen because they were armchair lawyers, not in combat zones. I rebutted that with the fact that they are deployed to combat zones. I was not asked if they had "combat experience."
Freeper Arm Chair moralizers who know NOTHING about this case but have all ready appointed them selves Judge and Jury.
Only in the hypothetical, and pending the outcome of a real trial.
ok, for a discussion forum like FR, what would constitute a permissible discussion of the implications of there actually being a real problem here with the incident in question?