No, I have not. I am commenting on stories coming out about this incident. I don't say the same things you say, or the things you want me to say, so you put words in my mouth.
I've read many of your posts on this subject for a while now, and you sure better hope you are absolutely %100 correct in every aspect of your conclusions, or you will be sporting a fresh cornhole courtesy of many posters on FR.
You are now in MNJohnnie territory, making bullying threats. I don't give a damn about your threats. I've been here much longer than you and put up with stuff you'll never even imagine. So don't threaten me, sonny.
Once again, Innocent until proved Guilty, or have you decided that isn't good enough for you?
Innocent until proven guilty is the standard for a court of law. If no one could as much as comment or speculate until a verdict is rendered in every single court case in this country, there'd have been no discussion about OJ or any discussion now about the Duke LaCrosse case.
Did you have this same attitude when Lyndie England and her disgusting boyfriend brought shame on the US Army with her antics at Abu Ghraib? Were you defending her, saying everybody should back off until we have a trial?
Please tell me that you weren't giving that little trollop the benefit of the doubt until the very end.
Well now, isn't that interesting. The thread that held the example that proved I was correct and you are wrong in post 118 of this thread has now disappeared.
Do you happen to also be a moderator/admin?