« Previous 1 2 Next »

Reply To Thread

Your Million Dollar Movie IdeaFollow

#27 Mar 11 2004 at 10:57 AM Rating: Default

__DEL__1591799280781

955 posts

tarv wrote:

3 will rot in Jail for a very very long time since they will be charged with treason and terrorism charges the forth will be deported back to Morocco

BBC NEWS 11th March 2004

Here are the last lines:

9 March 2004 - Mr Blunkett confirms that the five Britons have been released by the US government . They arrive back in London later in the day to be questioned, though Jamal Udeen is soon released without charge.

10 March 2004 - Tarek Dergoul, Shafiq Rasul, Ruhal Ahmed, and Asif Iqbal are released without charge.

So you just made a perfect fool of yourself who has no idea whats going on in his own(?) country

tarv wrote:

Personally i would take them all into a dark room and execute every last one of them without publicity and without notification to anyone and let the B*stards rot.

Wishing to kill 5 innocent people for no reason changes you from fool to psychopatic @sshole - but thats not the worst you can be I am sure....

Edited, Thu Mar 11 12:41:20 2004 by Leiany

#28 Mar 11 2004 at 11:43 AM Rating: Decent

__DEL__1670199487804

Scholar

8,619 posts

Quote:

Wishing to kill 5 innocent people for no reason changes you from fool to psychopatic @sshole - but thats not the worst you can be I am sure....

those 3 people are innocent ?????? yeah right whatever, those 3 people where terrorists and would have gladly killed you without a second glance. What innocent person would travel to Afganistan at the moment in time? the only reason to travel there would be to fight against the US and Uk forces. If that is the case they can get the **** out of my country.

as far as knowing what is going on in my own country is conserned, i can only judge that on what the media in my counrty reports and they said what i posted <almost word for word since i had the paper in front of me. I think if you took a poll in Britain right now they would be charged with treason.

#29 Mar 11 2004 at 12:40 PM Rating: Default

__DEL__1591799280781

955 posts

So you want to give up the jury for public polls?

You are clearly mad - next thing you ask for legalizing the return of the lynch mob.......

#30 Mar 11 2004 at 5:31 PM Rating: Excellent

View User Forum

Leet Haxör

29,919 posts

Oldest trick in the intel book. Release some of the small fish, and see where they run. You would be suprised how often that actually works.

#31 Mar 11 2004 at 7:57 PM Rating: Default

__DEL__1591799280781

955 posts

....release some small fish after two years of imprisonment?...If we are really talking about terrorists you believe that
a) the interrogation in cuba did NOT dig up every name or adress they know of? Then the US has by far the most crappy interrogators you can imagine....
b) their possible contacts waited 2 years for these 5 brits to lead the secret services on their trail? then the "terrorists" are only dangerous to themselves is they are SO stupid.

Sorry DLK - thats just bullsh!t and a sad excuse to cling to your opoinion they are NOT innocent peaople.

But i seem to get your kindreds logic: If the US detains someone for 2 years he HAS TO BE guilty- otherwise you would have to admit that a bunch of @ssholes made some terrible mistakes.....

#32 Mar 11 2004 at 8:32 PM Rating: Excellent

View User Forum

Leet Haxör

29,919 posts

Leiany wrote:

....release some small fish after two years of imprisonment?...If we are really talking about terrorists you believe that
a) the interrogation in cuba did NOT dig up every name or adress they know of? Then the US has by far the most crappy interrogators you can imagine....

Well, you do realise that the U.S. doesn't allow the use of torture? Sodium penthol can only dig up so much.

/em waits to see if she goes for the obvious there...

Show me you have even the slightest comprehension of interrogation techniques and modern methods, then we'll talk. Do you even know how a cell works? And no, i'm not talking mitochondria

Quote:

b) their possible contacts waited 2 years for these 5 brits to lead the secret services on their trail? then the "terrorists" are only dangerous to themselves is they are SO stupid.

riiiiighht. "no really, we're just tourists! honest! AK-47's? what AK-47's? Nonono the'se are paperweights! See? it doesn't even shoo <bang>...
Oh ****..."

Quote:

Sorry DLK - thats just bullsh!t and a sad excuse to cling to your opoinion they are NOT innocent peaople.

But i seem to get your kindreds logic: If the US detains someone for 2 years he HAS TO BE guilty- otherwise you would have to admit that a bunch of @ssholes made some terrible mistakes.....

maybe a bunch of ***[b][/b]holes did make a mistake, I don't know. I sure as hell know that those brits were running with a Taliban offensive when they were picked up, did shoot at U.S. forces, and basically told everyone in the U.K and the U.S. to **** off. If nothing else they were guilty of violating existing immigration sanctions against Iraq at the time, which given their purpose could very well have led to a sentance of 2 years.

Defending these people as innocent is not going to get you anywhere. Sure, maybe 1, 2 hell, I'll even give you 5 of them are, but the rest of them are hardline islamic fundamentalists with an avowed purpose of strikeing the U.S.

You show me evidence that the majority of the detainees, I'll listen, but until then, quit wasteing my time. We all know you think the u.s. is a bully and that we shouldn't have been in Iraq. I can deal with that, and respect your right to that viewpoint. I happen to think that France and the alligned european Union Countries were wrong in their assessment. Nothing I say to you is going to change your viewpoint, and I doubt you have anything available to change mine, so this is all rather pointless don't you think?

#33 Mar 11 2004 at 8:38 PM Rating: Decent

__DEL__1592760166202

Scholar

4,563 posts

I think Sean Connery should at least be brought back as a James Bond villan.

More on the topic I want to see Dean Koontz's Twilight Eyes made into a movie.

#34 Mar 11 2004 at 8:46 PM Rating: Default

__DEL__1591799280781

955 posts

Dread Lord Kaolian wrote:

Well, you do realise that the U.S. doesn't allow the use of torture?

having prisoners blindfolded and deafened is something not allowed either

1:0

Dread Lord Kaolian wrote:

Show me you have even the slightest comprehension of interrogation techniques and modern methods, then we'll talk. Do you even know how a cell works?

With a degree in psychology (and you know nothing about the field I work in *lol*] I do know about. And yes I know what the cell does to a man for the same reason.

2:0

Dread Lord Kaolian wrote:

riiiiighht. "no really, we're just tourists! honest! AK-47's? what AK-47's? Nonono the'se are paperweights! See? it doesn't even shoo <bang>...
Oh ****..."

So "everyone is innocent until his guilt is proven" does work only on television? I thought the land of the free and the home of the brave was founded on princples like that?

3:0

Dread Lord Kaolian wrote:

I sure as hell know that those brits were running with a Taliban offensive when they were picked up, did shoot at U.S. forces, and basically told everyone in the U.K and the U.S. to **** off. If nothing else they were guilty of violating existing immigration sanctions against Iraq at the time, which given their purpose could very well have led to a sentance of 2 years.

but they had not even the status as POWs not to think about ANY civil rights they would have had in case of "violating existing immigration sanctions against Iraq"

4:0

But I understand that telling everyone in the US to fu*k off is an offense so big that someone obviously loses his human rights the moment he does so....

5....ah f*ck - I#m getting tired of it...

Edited, Thu Mar 11 20:46:20 2004 by Leiany

#35 Mar 11 2004 at 9:22 PM Rating: Excellent

View User Forum

Leet Haxör

29,919 posts

Leiany wrote:

having prisoners blindfolded and deafened is something not allowed either

So by that statement, you are claiming that the U.S. did in fact resort to torture? (she went for it, yay!)

Dread Lord Kaolian wrote:

Show me you have even the slightest comprehension of interrogation techniques and modern methods, then we'll talk. Do you even know how a cell works?

Quote:

With a degree in psychology

that explains a lot…

Quote:

(and you know nothing about the field I work in *lol* I do know about.

Alright, you tell me. Why would the U.S. government keep 5 people for 2 years, knowing that it was angering the rest of the world, knowing that they knew nothing and were innocent? You are either assuming that everyone down there at guantanamo is an idiot, or you have to concede that maybe, just maybe there is a reason the public has not been informed about. What branch of psychology are you in? please also submit a synopsis of your specific knowledge relating to interrogation techniques. An outline will be fine, or some course sylibi. Auf deutsch sind auch gut.

Quote:

And yes I know what the cell does to a man for the same reason.

I’m going to go ahead and assume that was a language translation issue, because that didn’t make sense.

Oh and by the way, keeping score like that, especially when you are the only one that thinks you took the point, is really lame.

Quote:

So "everyone is innocent until his guilt is proven, however if we catch the bastards shooting at U.S. troops while in the company of wanted terrorists, we’re probably going to lock them up for a while" does work only on television? I thought the land of the free and the home of the brave was founded on principles like that?

I fixed that for you

Quote:

but they had not even the status as POWs not to think about ANY civil rights they would have had in case of "violating existing immigration sanctions against Iraq"

So are you just dense, or did you miss the part where I agreed that there were some legal irregularities that needed to be addressed…..

Rational debate doesn’t seem to be working here. Anyone have any suggestions? I was thinking just posting a big “U R dumz LOLOL Poopy” over and over in a thread, but that might be too complex. I’m open to suggestions.

#36 Mar 12 2004 at 5:00 AM Rating: Default

__DEL__1591799280781

955 posts

arrogant
selfrighteous
stubborn
narrowminded
............

you can choose if this is adressed to you personally, your people, your government, your country or whatever - if the shoe fits, just put it on.

Otherwise we will let history judge about Guantanamo Bay - I am sure more than one of your fellow americans will be glad to assist some of the imprisoned to sue the US-government and I am looking forward to the trials =)

#37 Mar 12 2004 at 5:09 AM Rating: Default

__DEL__1591799280781

955 posts

This one is TOO GOOD to pass

Dread Lord Kaolian wrote:

Alright, you tell me. Why would the U.S. government keep 5 people for 2 years, knowing that it was angering the rest of the world, knowing that they knew nothing and were innocent?

So you really want too tell me the US gives a piece of owlbear dung about was the rest of the world says?

ROFL

Please dear DLK tell me the last time (since WWII) the US did give in to the UN or any other country when they had opposite goals.....

#38 Mar 12 2004 at 7:48 AM Rating: Decent

__DEL__1613953020893

Scholar

2,453 posts

Deathwysh wrote:

Quote:

In the sequel, another big country from far across the sea has to come restore order, but then all the other countries start ******** and whining like art-school girls about how the big country is all insenstive and arrogant.

Not to pat myself on the back too much, but I think I really hit the nail on the head with that one.

#39 Mar 12 2004 at 9:18 AM Rating: Decent

__DEL__1591794649934

Scholar

93 posts

Quote:

arrogant
selfrighteous
stubborn
narrowminded
............

you can choose if this is adressed to you personally, your people, your government, your country or whatever - if the shoe fits, just put it on.

How about:

Cowardly
Misguided
Unwilling to step up and do something about a psycopath
Lemmings

Feel free to decide if this is addressed to you personally, your people, your government, your country or whatever - if the shoe fits (*cough*Leiany*cough*) just put it on.

#40 Mar 12 2004 at 10:17 AM Rating: Default

__DEL__1591799280781

955 posts

How did the animal get on the list?

and @Deathwysh - whats wrong with Art-school girls???? Is Art some second-class education? Does everyone has to go to a military academy?? And girls on the whole - being a girl=whining??? Have you got no respect for the female gender????

Deathpyss wrote:

Not to pat myself on the back too much....

Seems you just write down every crap that comes across your mind and you are even proud of it - a pick in your back is what you rather deserve!

I strongly advise you to get your notebook out of the toilet and your head out of the pile of **** its obviously stuck in......

Edited, Fri Mar 12 10:21:16 2004 by Leiany

#41 Mar 12 2004 at 12:51 PM Rating: Excellent

View User Forum

Leet Haxör

29,919 posts

L wrote:

Please dear DLK tell me the last time (since WWII) the US did give in to the UN or any other country when they had opposite goals.....

If by opposite goals you mean the communists, well, not recently, but if you mean "when did the U.S. defer to another soverign nation over the iraq issue" there was Turkey, The whole weaons inspector thing, the stoping Israel from literally nuking Iraq thing. There are pleny others.

Go do some research for yourselves instead of following the propaganda.

#42 Mar 12 2004 at 2:14 PM Rating: Good

__DEL__1593362789725

Scholar

8,507 posts

Is there a single thread in this forum that actually discusses the thread subject. Seems like almost every thread gets highjacked. It's definitely interesting though, like the prize you get out of a crackerjack box.

#43 Mar 12 2004 at 3:31 PM Rating: Good

__DEL__1690762604546

Sage

16,160 posts

My $1,000,000 movie idea is already used up. It got ganked by Hollywood some time back with the Spy Kids movie series. I used to tell my kids those kind of tales as bedtime stories back in the day.

My wife is still mad at me for not getting the jump on that earlier.

:(

Totem

#44 Mar 12 2004 at 3:57 PM Rating: Decent

__DEL__1638750157445

View User Forum

Scholar

1,122 posts

Quote:

Alright, you tell me. Why would the U.S. government keep 5 people for 2 years, knowing that it was angering the rest of the world, knowing that they knew nothing and were innocent?

Dunno, Kao I would give her this one. I dont really know much about this and I bet most of the world doesn't either and probably as a result doesnt care.

Honestly if the US were to just grab 5 people randomly and hold them would anybody know or care besides their immeadiate relations, unless they happened to snag somebody important like one of Bush' daughters, etc, probably not.

My million dollar movie idea would be to capture another old TV show and remake it as a movie, I think Knight Rider would be cool, and A Team would be another cool one.

« Previous 1 2 Next »

Reply To Thread

Recent Visitors: 238 All times are in CST

Barudin314, Anonymous Guests (237)

© 2024 Fanbyte LLC