Bin Laden is dead
- Thread starter Archie Moses
- Start date
SaltyDawg
Well-Known Member
Of course I know nobody claimed they put Hitler on trial. I was pointing out that they did not put Hitler on trial because he kept saying over and over that they put Nazis on trial.
Well the USA put several terrorists on trial too. So shut up about the Nazis being put on trial. That is what I was trying to find a polite way to say.
Actually I call it justice with a bullet.
DutchJazzer
Banned
flag waving really?
whats up with flag waving and flag burning its just a piece of cloth
DutchJazzer
Banned
exactly i was using Eichman(Adolf Otto Eichmann : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eichman) as an example. nice job twisting my words salty. same first name. different guy.
DutchJazzer
Banned
they put NAzis on trial is hitler the only nazi?
eg eicham
John Demjanju
Rudolf Kastner
to name a few. so if i say nazis where put on trail it automatically means all of them from top to bottom. from hittler to a lowly soldier?
seriously how do you come up with this stuf
DutchJazzer
Banned
lol thats a polite way of shutting me up? hahahaha
LogGrad98
Well-Known Member
Contributor
20-21 Award Winner
2022 Award Winner
2023 Award Winner
2024 Award Winner
You seriously need to learn to either say what you mean or stop trying to change the meaning after you say it. To me if you literally type:
That says you are claiming someone said that. That is neither subtle nor symbolic or ironic or whatever you think it meant. Dutch pointed out a specific Nazi he was referring to that was put on trial, the historic record shows many Nazis being put on trial, and you brought out that it was news that Hitler was put on trial, assuming we would "get" that you didn't really mean Hitler or something? Assuming it would come across as what? Ironic or sarcastic or something? As a direct response to what Dutch said it is taken that way...AS A DIRECT RESPONSE.
If you mean to imply that not every single Nazi that was guilty of war crimes was put on trial as a rebuttal as to why not every terrrorist is put on trial, try just saying that. Your attempts at sacasm or irony or whatever to make your vague point are just failing left and right.
Oh, and besides that, it is an invalid point. Just because some of the Nazis may have escaped trial (by being dead, or escaping or whatever) does not excuse us from giving someone a valid trial as required by the GC. Your basic logic is faulty and your attempts to gussy it up as something pretty are failing miserably.
They also did not execute Hitler without a trial. So, bringing him up was completely pointless.
SaltyDawg
Well-Known Member
Explain to me what any of those guys has to do with Bin Laden? Where do YOU come up with this stuff? I'm sure Israel has put plenty of burglars, car thiefs, etc on trial before too. What do any of them have to do with Bin Laden?
If you are can't see the connection I made between Bin Laden and Hitler, then it's your own fault. Please explain to me what any of those Nazis has to do with Bin Laden.
Hitler would be the leader of the Nazis, correct? I better ask, so you don't think I am actually quoting you and claiming you said it. Wait, I asked before and you still claimed I was quoting someone...
Bin Laden was the leader of Al Qaeda, correct? Again, I am not claiming you said this.
So putting some lower level Nazis on trial who just went to court and said "Yeah I did it. I was only following orders." Is about the same thing as the USA putting a lower level terrorist on trial, correct? And again, I am not claiming you said this.
So now, I ask again, what the heck does Israel putting some lower level Nazis on trial have to do with Bin Laden?
SaltyDawg
Well-Known Member
You don't know that. What really happened to Hitler is nothing more than a theory. Similar to what really happened to Bin Laden.
We know Hitler was not captured by US troops and then executed. I don't know how Genghis Khan died, but I'm sure it was not by a bullet.
SaltyDawg
Well-Known Member
No, we don't know what happened to Hitler. We know the Soviets lied about what happened to him, and that is it. So no, we can't say that we know for sure he wasn't executed. I'm not saying he was, but I don't think anyone is saying Bin Laden was definitely executed either.
And I don't care about Genghis Khan. Nobody brought up his army getting tried by Israel like it was somehow related to Bin Laden.
DutchJazzer
Banned
someone mentioned that putting bin laden on trial would be a logistic nightmare. it would not be a cakewalk. so it would be illogical to attempt to put obl on trial. so as a response i said if the managed to put eichman on trial(albeit in a bulletproof glass booth to protect his life no less) the man who is responsible for about 430.000 deaths. why cant america put obl on trial. since israel managed to put not 1 but several nazis on trial without it being a impossible task. why cant OBL be put on trail( the man who is repsonsible for 3000 death.
also what was mentioned is that ebcause obl commited 3000 murders he did not deserve a trial. so there is a magci number for when people deserv trials obviously 3000 does not falll in that range.
but 430.000 does. so does 1 3 5 10 30 and 300).
it's jkust an example of that a trail can be done and if nazis deserved the trial so does OBL
also note that while the nazis where put on trial they where assumed innocent isn't that what AMERICA stands for innocent until proven guilty. israel guaranteed the nazis safety while they where put on trial there where agents protecting the Nazis with their life.
wouldn't it send a greater message to the world (morraly and ethically) if a obl was put to trial and showing compassion. seeing americans guard obls life with their own until he is proven guilty(doesn't America stand for that?)
it would be a wonderful thing if obl was put to trial and he was treated like a human being during that trial. and if found guilty hanged or whatever. cremated and burried at sea.
this "war on terror" damaged the USA's reputation abroad.
my brother in law has a kinda Muslim name ending on ali. but he is no Muslim yet every time he goes to America he is treated unfairly.(treated like he is guilty)
another example another friend of mine(lives in Holland) who is from Afghanistan(and he is no terrorist of that i'm sure he married a jew) send money(from his dutch bank account) to his uncle to give to his. not a large amount somewhere between 1000-2000 erous. yet the next day his accounts where frozen under orders of some ******** patriot act from a land of the free and the brave. he had to hire a lawyer to sort this **** out.
Thats the way America is treating innocent people by treating them as criminals. so if they could have put obl on trial it would send a message to the world that truly innocent until proven guilty. it would change the view foreigners have on America. if they gave obl the decency of being innocent until proven guilty. ordinary citizens who look like osama who have a beard. who have a strange name. who is helping out family in a Muslim country will get the message he America is morally and ethically correct, they have decency, humanity and whatnot.
instead by being this arrogant all they create is more hate.
it would have been a wonderful thing to put osama on trial.
again i state they might have not had the option to capture osama alive because he was resisting.
DutchJazzer
Banned
it is a possibilty some countries do it all the time
but why is their no public record of it. why is it not been in the news. or wait it happened at area 51.
if they come out with yeah we held a trail 1 week afgtyer his death you know its a sham
DutchJazzer
Banned
also the patriot act is the most idiotic name for crap ever.
seriously by calling it the patriot act. you cant disagree with it cus that means you hate your country. and if you are a true patriot why would you agree with some act that goes against the principles of the country. by agreeing tot he patriot act you are just the opposite.
calling it the patriot act reminds me of something that happened in the 40's. but cant blame this administration for the patriot act.
also i havnt read the patriot act in its whole. but from what i've read their is some stupid "unpatriotic stuff" in there
seriously by calling it the patriot act. you cant disagree with it cus that means you hate your country. and if you are a true patriot why would you agree with some act that goes against the principles of the country. by agreeing tot he patriot act you are just the opposite.
calling it the patriot act reminds me of something that happened in the 40's. but cant blame this administration for the patriot act.
also i havnt read the patriot act in its whole. but from what i've read their is some stupid "unpatriotic stuff" in there
Dammit, this is like the third time I've agreed with you in this thread. Enough is enough.
We need to start calling you Mini-Dutch.