Afghan POW Freed After Five Years

GoIrish41

GoIrish41

Paterfamilius
Messages
9,929
Reaction score
2,119
kmoose said:
Who are you to question his intent? The legality of him carrying a concealed weapon was NEVER in question.
Click to expand...

I did not question his intent ... just his actions. Who questioned his right to carry a concealed weapon? You are making my point. The black panther did not use the bat, he just carried it and who are you to question this legal right? Zimmerman shot a kid not just carried a weapon. Big difference.
 
kmoose

kmoose

Banned
Messages
10,298
Reaction score
1,181
GoIrish41 said:
I did not question his intent ... just his actions. Who questioned his right to carry a concealed weapon? You are making my point. The black panther did not use the bat, he just carried it and who are you to question this legal right? Zimmerman shot a kid not just carried a weapon. Big difference.
Click to expand...

So Zimmerman's past is relevant, but the Black Panther Party's past is not?

And he may, or may not, have the right to hold a baseball bat at a polling place. Many states have laws against possession of weapons at polling places.
 
GoIrish41

GoIrish41

Paterfamilius
Messages
9,929
Reaction score
2,119
kmoose said:
So Zimmerman's past is relevant, but the Black Panther Party's past is not?

And he may, or may not, have the right to hold a baseball bat at a polling place. Many states have laws against possession of weapons at polling places.
Click to expand...

I am not sure I am following your train of thought. I assumed we were talking about Zimmerman the night he shot Trayvon Martin. Now it appears you are talking about now -- post trial. So he was found not guilty in that incident and his right to carry was restored. He has had a couple of incidents since then in which he allegedly threatened to use his gun on people. If he is found to be a threat perhaps he should have that right revoked. I think there is a high liklihood that he will find his way into court again just looking at his individual track record. That said the new black panthers are not the same organization as the black panthers from th 60s and 70s Ido not think. So the guy holding the bat or club or whatever should not be filtered through the actions of the old group. Zimmermans personal actions have made people watch him closer, not because of some affiliation.
 
kmoose

kmoose

Banned
Messages
10,298
Reaction score
1,181
GoIrish41 said:
I am not sure I am following your train of thought. I assumed we were talking about Zimmerman the night he shot Trayvon Martin. Now it appears you are talking about now -- post trial. So he was found not guilty in that incident and his right to carry was restored. He has had a couple of incidents since then in which he allegedly threatened to use his gun on people. If he is found to be a threat perhaps he should have that right revoked. I think there is a high liklihood that he will find his way into court again just looking at his individual track record. That said the new black panthers are not the same organization as the black panthers from th 60s and 70s Ido not think. So the guy holding the bat or club or whatever should not be filtered through the actions of the old group. Zimmermans personal actions have made people watch him closer, not because of some affiliation.
Click to expand...

My train of thought is that you seem to think that the Black Panthers should be allowed to brandish what most people would consider intimidating weapons, and no one should question them. No one should be concerned about their violent history, because they didn't do anything illegal, today. And the fact that witnesses reported that they were harassing people is no evidence of anything, in your mind. BUT, when it comes to George Zimmerman..................

Someone said he threatened them with a gun, so he is likely to break the law. Witness reported threats are nothing, in the case of the Black Panthers, but are substantial, in the case of George Zimmerman. Your bias in this debate could not be more obvious, and that really impugns the integrity, and effectiveness, of your argument.
 
GoIrish41

GoIrish41

Paterfamilius
Messages
9,929
Reaction score
2,119
kmoose said:
My train of thought is that you seem to think that the Black Panthers should be allowed to brandish what most people would consider intimidating weapons, and no one should question them. No one should be concerned about their violent history, because they didn't do anything illegal, today. And the fact that witnesses reported that they were harassing people is no evidence of anything, in your mind. BUT, when it comes to George Zimmerman..................

Someone said he threatened them with a gun, so he is likely to break the law. Witness reported threats are nothing, in the case of the Black Panthers, but are substantial, in the case of George Zimmerman. Your bias in this debate could not be more obvious, and that really impugns the integrity, and effectiveness, of your argument.
Click to expand...

I am not calling for GM to have his weapons taken away. You brought him onto the discussion for some reason i am sure you thoughy was relevant. The new black panthers do not have a violent histotu that i am aware of. They are not the same org from the 60s.

Ther was not enough evidence to convict the nee black panthers so them carrying bats is no morr intimidating than people carrying guns around and that you refuse to acknowlede that betrays your own bias.
 
kmoose

kmoose

Banned
Messages
10,298
Reaction score
1,181
GoIrish41 said:
I am not calling for GM to have his weapons taken away. You brought him onto the discussion for some reason i am sure you thoughy was relevant. The new black panthers do not have a violent histotu that i am aware of. They are not the same org from the 60s.

Ther was not enough evidence to convict the nee black panthers so them carrying bats is no morr intimidating than people carrying guns around and that you refuse to acknowlede that betrays your own bias.
Click to expand...

I certainly think that people carrying guns and espousing a specific political agenda , at a polling place, would be considered intimidating. I brought George Zimmerman into it because I was taken aback by your comment about how we shouldn't question people's intent, as long as they are not breaking the law. I was taken aback by it, because I remember that you were one of those who argued that Zimmerman was obviously out for trouble, the night he shot Trayvon Martin. So, I figured I would point out your hypocrisy. As for the New Black Panther Party, and their mission of peace?

Over the weekend, members of the New Black Panther Party showed just how tense the situation in the Trayvon Martin shooting has gotten: They offered a $10,000 bounty for the capture of George Zimmerman, who shot and killed the unarmed teenager.

The Orlando Sentinel reports that Mikhail Muhammad announced the reward during a protest on Saturday, and when a Sentinel reporter asked if he was inciting violence, Muhammad said, "An eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth."
Click to expand...

That sounds pretty non-violent to me. I can totally see what you are saying. I'm convinced!
 
B

Bogtrotter07

Guest
RDU Irish said:
No irony in what is blowing up in Iraq while the prez swaps for our last POW b/c that's what you do when the war is over.
Click to expand...

Two wars, Afghanistan and Iraq, prisoner from Afghanistan, blowing up in Iraq, cuts the irony there.


But never fear, the weight of the realization being delivered is more than irony enough; we nearly bankrupted ourselves fighting these wars, now we are getting a chance to see what the true cost will be, and that we may never get out.

All this after we saw the Soviet Union bankrupt themselves in Afghanistan! Truly ironic indeed.
 
phgreek

phgreek

New member
Messages
6,956
Reaction score
433
I honestly think this kid has some serious mental issues, and had them before he went in.

I don't know what set him off, but there is zero room for this kind of conduct from a soldier, and whatever comes of his punishment...it is what it is.

Hope someone comes up with some improvements to screening tools for these guys on the way in...because I can't think of a worse thing to do to a group of our soldiers...give them a guy they MUST depend on that folds up on them...
 
connor_in

connor_in

Oh Yeeaah!!!
Messages
11,433
Reaction score
1,006
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" lang="en data-scribe-reduced-action-queue="><p>WHAT??? This is from the New York Times just now. I mean, Good Lord. The stupidity, it burns. <a href="http://t.co/oga5TdPLBg">pic.twitter.com/oga5TdPLBg</a></p>— John Podhoretz (@jpodhoretz) <a href="https://twitter.com/jpodhoretz/status/580813987656425473">March 25, 2015</a></blockquote>
<script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
 
B

BGIF

Varsity Club
Messages
43,946
Reaction score
2,922
B

BGIF

Varsity Club
Messages
43,946
Reaction score
2,922
Bowe Bergdahl to Face Court-Martial on Desertion Charges

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/12/15/u...-court-martial-on-desertion-charges.html?_r=0

By RICHARD A. OPPEL Jr.DEC. 14, 2015


A top Army commander on Monday ordered that Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl face a court-martial on charges of desertion and endangering troops stemming from his decision to leave his outpost in 2009, prompting a huge manhunt in the wilds of eastern Afghanistan and landing him in nearly five years of harsh Taliban captivity.

The decision by Gen. Robert B. Abrams, head of Army Forces Command at Fort Bragg, N.C., means that Sergeant Bergdahl, 29, faces a possible life sentence, a far more serious penalty than had been recommended by the Army’s own investigating officer, who had testified that a jail sentence would be “inappropriate.”

...
Click to expand...
 
B

BGIF

Varsity Club
Messages
43,946
Reaction score
2,922
Bowe Bergdahl expected to plead guilty to deserting his post | Fox News
By Kathleen Joyce, Fox News


Army Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl is expected to plead guilty later this month to desertion and misbehavior before the enemy rather than face trial for leaving his Afghanistan post in 2009, The Associated Press reported.

Two sources said the Idaho native would submit the plea later this month and sentencing would start Oct. 23. The AP did not name the sources.

Bergdahl's lawyer declined to comment when contacted by Fox News. He faces up to five years in prison on the desertion charge and a life sentence for misbehavior.

Bergdahl, 31, who was serving with an Alaska-based infantry regiment, deserted his Afghanistan post in 2009, when he was 23 years old, and was held captive by the Taliban for about five years. The Taliban posted a video online showing Bergdahl saying he was "scared" he would not be able to go home.

...
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top