That explains why the lassie getting into her car was looking a bit nervous. I really need a lurker/stalker refresher course.
Interesting juxtaposition here, as some lurkers may prefer the less discreet lurk as described above, which in itself may transcend the description of lurk but is in fact just that.
This man is a hero [video=youtube;EwSX4mmK9TE]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EwSX4mmK9TE&feature=related[/video]
Oh deary deary me, one thread gets closed down so he starts another on the same subject, this is absolutely desperate stuff. What point is he trying to make? Who knows? Who cares?
obviously you numb nuts was wondering how long it would take you Have you heard about the cases that have won the right to go to court?
I've a feeling i'm about to. But first please indulge me, you say they have won the right to go to court? Does that mean the alleged perpetrators are already guilty? What is your purpose in sharing this information? Is this how you get your kicks, dredging up the same boring tirades all the live long day? No one cares and if you have not noticed that by now then you are as bereft of intelligence as I have long suspected. Do yourself a favour and go have a lie down in a dark room, or head down your local social club and bore your chum (singular) senseless with this turgid garbage.
"Does that mean the alleged perpetrators are already guilty? " The brits thought internment without trial was cool over here.
It would suprise me due to the fact that in only a handful of cases where the strategy of denial and cover-up has failed has it resulted in the accused facing prosecution in the British Courts - and even if the accused is found guilty the British Army refuses to regard a British Soldier who is convicted of murder or manslaughter as sufficient grounds for dismissal from the British Army. The spectacle of British Army servicemen convicted of murder or manslaughter continuing to receive their full British Army pay, and being reinstated by their regiment after serving on average just over two years imprisonment not only makes a complete mockery of justice, but simply confirms the mind-set of the British Army when it comes the value it places on the illegal killing of civilians.
Had the British Army not been such a recidivist and psychopathic organisation, it would have responded positively to the Bloody Sunday findings by taking the initiative to support an impartial and transparent investigation into such killings. It does not do so because there is a deep rooted culture within the British Army that refuses to acknowledge that it has any legal or moral duty towards civilians - if civilians are shot, tortured to death, or abused it is simply an inevitable consequence of war, regrettable but inevitable. Such an attitude may have been the norm when the British Army was founded but in an age when our society expects, at the very minimum, that the British Army adheres to national and international law - not least the Geneva Convention - the British Army's attitude is not only socially unacceptable, but it undermines the very values that it claims to uphold, and as with similar behaviour of the psychopathic the British Army seems to not only lack the capacity for regret or remorse, but it appears to also lack the ability to learn from past mistakes.
So in essence according to you, Innocent = Guilty, Guilty = Guilty. What is your point? You seem awfully concerned with the activities with individual members of the Army, because some are bad does that mean they are all bad? Or would I be as stupid as you are for suggesting that all Muslims support terrorism and condone the activities of the Taliban?
http://www.britisharmykillings.org.uk/page/113/The-Issuess Copy and paste away to your hearts content but don't insult my intelligence by pretending to have written that.
Apparently not Guilty = innocent if the accused is found guilty the British Army refuses to regard a British Soldier who is convicted of murder or manslaughter as sufficient grounds for dismissal from the British Army.
