That piss poor judgement is spreading

[sirs]

Someone who isn't a cop killer gets to be called a cop killer because it's close enough for you and O'Reilly....Here's a clue, justice in this country should not be a game of horseshoe

Here's a more accurate clue...Not quite what I said, and not quite the facts presented to the jurors.  This wasn't some innocent bystander who happened to be in the wrong place at the wrong time, which your above sentence would reference

Nice try though

[sirs]

Look, Plane, ............very different directions.

So, that's my story, and I'm sticking to it. Further, I almost fell asleep writing it, so I won't be writing another one.

BSB

You write very well, this is a great post and you are often very thought provoking. I don't need to agree to benefit , sometimes a deeper understandig of my own thoughts results from trying to justiofy them or even figure out why I do think the way I do so that I can explain it.

     I understand what you mean about Religion being deeply rooted and how most people have a lot of resistance to change, I don't think this is really bad but self examination requires knowing it is there whether you are trying to keep it or not. I am not worried that anything you or I might say could destroy God , people who get defensive are not defending God himself but only their idea of him which can't amount to a perfect understanding in any human being.

And ....  You wrote that sleepy?

I am impressed.

Yes it was good but I was a little disappointed with this part though: BTW, Sirs, you're a moron.

Perhaps it's just his SOP.  Thanks though, Kramer

[BT]

Nice try though

Perhaps you can explain how someone shot through the arms, while surrendering can then turn around and shoot a cop when according to medical evidense that the prosecution did not refute, she would not have been able to pull the trigger.

And then perhaps you can explain how a person, medically incapable of pulling a trigger, still pull the trigger and somehow avoid gunshot residue on the hands nor leave fingerprints on the weapon.

And then perhaps you can explain how the accusing officer recanted his original testimony and state that this person did not shoot anyone.


And then tell me in what universe does a non cop killer become a cop killer.

Oh yeah, where justice is horseshoes and close enough counts.

[sirs]

Perhaps I and you already did......an accomplice to murder.....just as guilty as the person pulling the trigger.  I could be inclined to sentence the person to life in prison vs the death penalty.  A far cry to that of some innocent bystander you were trying to infer, however

But at least we're off the nonsense about this being a free speech issue

[BT]

Perhaps I and you already did......an accomplice to murder.....just as guilty as the person pulling the trigger.  I could be inclined to sentence the person to life in prison vs the death penalty.  A far cry to that of some innocent bystander you were trying to infer, however

But at least we're off the nonsense about this being a free speech issue

Never claimed her to be an innocent bystander. But I'm sure, in order to protect your reputation for honesty, you can show where i did.

What i did say, according to the information gleaned from the wiki link, she certainly wasn't a trigger puller, and therefore not a cop killer.
And if i recall that seems to be what O' Reilly claimed she was. You concurring with O'Reilly on that.

As for Common, his song and lyrics are posted. I don't see where they glorify a cop killer, because Assata and the evidence attest that she is not. What it does do is tell her story from a particular perspective. And for that this artist should be shunned? Bob Dylan did the same thing with Billy the Kid. And I know he's been invited to the Whitehouse.

As i said at the beginning. This is much ado about nada. And the more i dig into it, the more that rings true.

[BSB]

I wonder why some people have such a knack for being on the wrong side of an issue?  In the particular case on display in this thread it seems to involve rights or self-precieved moral issues more often than not. The removal of rights, that is, from one group of people or another, or this or that individual. Or wagging their moral finger at one person or another. This First Lady shouldn't invite that person to the White House. We can remove the rights of this individual, guaranteed him under the Geneva Convention, and torture him.

Guard your freedoms well because there are those who would take them away in a second. You may think, oh, this doesn't apply to me, but the removal of anyone's freedom is a removal of yours. The older I get the more I realize how true that is.   


BSB

[Kramer]

Yes it was good but I was a little disappointed with this part though: BTW, Sirs, you're a moron.

I know what you mean .
One thing at a time .
First keep BsB then improve BsB.

I learned my lesson and will be civil at all times, lest I make BT mad at me.

How will we know it is you?

that was mean.

[Plane]

Yes it was good but I was a little disappointed with this part though: BTW, Sirs, you're a moron.

I know what you mean .
One thing at a time .
First keep BsB then improve BsB.

I learned my lesson and will be civil at all times, lest I make BT mad at me.

How will we know it is you?

that was mean.

Ok , I admit that it was.
I shouldn't have done that.

[sirs]

Perhaps I and you already did......an accomplice to murder.....just as guilty as the person pulling the trigger.  I could be inclined to sentence the person to life in prison vs the death penalty.  A far cry to that of some innocent bystander you were trying to infer, however

But at least we're off the nonsense about this being a free speech issue

Never claimed her to be an innocent bystander. But I'm sure, in order to protect your reputation for honesty, you can show where i did.

The implication by way of horseshoes was pretty clear.  But thanks, my reputation for honesty is just fine, thank you very much

What i did say, according to the information gleaned from the wiki link, she certainly wasn't a trigger puller, and therefore not a cop killer.

And as an accomplice, JUST AS GUILTY, as anyone who did pull the trigger, and therefor JUST as much a cop killer          Judge & Jury appearing to corroborate that position




(and BsB will certainly let us know what rights are supposedly being stripped)

[BSB]

It's difficult to be an American. The ideas that gave birth to this country were revolutionary. So revolutionary that even today some find them impossible to get ahold of, never mind apply. Effort, though, can take you a long way. But, you have to be willing to make the effort. For some, it's just too much. They just don't have it.


This might help though:

Radical Honesty: How To Transform Your Life By Telling The Truth

By Brad Blanton

http://www.amazon.com/Radical-Honesty-Transform-Telling-Truth/dp/0440507545





BSB

[BT]

What O'Reilly said.

After being stopped on the New Jersey Turnpike, Chesimard and two accomplices opened fire on Foerster and his partner, James Harper, who was wounded.

Which is not what was determined to be true at the trial.

[sirs]

For BsB....thanks for the non answer, as to which rights Common was being stripped of

For Bt....Convicted by a Judge & Jury, for murder, at trial.  Accomplice being JUST AS GUILTY as anyone pulling the trigger

[BT]

For BsB....thanks for the non answer, as to which rights Common was being stripped of

For Bt....Convicted by a Judge & Jury, for murder, at trial.  Accomplice being JUST AS GUILTY as anyone pulling the trigger

That isn't what O'Reilly claimed. His representation of the facts was misleading.

[sirs]

Convicted by a Judge & Jury, for murder, at trial.  Accomplice being JUST AS GUILTY as anyone pulling the trigger

[Xavier_Onassis]

This is a legal fiction.
It might be the law, but it is a fiction.
The one who pulls the trigger is more responsible.