Death Penalty

I think life in prison is a much worse fate then death. You did bring up the fact that the offenders do fight the death penalty, but the only reason for this is fear of the unknown, etc. For whatever reason humans as a race have an innate fear of death, but after death the punishment ends. So the worst part of the punishment is the waiting from the time the sentence is finalized to the date of the execution. I personally would much rather be sentenced to death and be "worried" for a small period of time then spend 30-70 whatever years in a state prison.

Even with DNA testing, there still is a very SMALL chance they will make a mistake, but there is still that chance. Nobody here brought up the fact that people can be corrupted to go either way on a case, sometimes DNA can even be "planted" on the scene of the crime.

About the death penalty being expensive only because of large number of appeals causing legal fees, though that may be true, this process of the death penalty will always be there, so it IS more expensive.

Indeed :thumb:

I think someone here has used Bin Laden as an example. The last thing that should be done to him if he is ever caught is be executed. This would make a martyr out of him and it's frankly what he wants as he believes it will provide him access to paradise.

What SHOULD happen is that they get life inprisonment with NO chance of release. They will live and die in the most toughest and hardest prison of them all, whichever tit may be.

You and I may fear life in prison more than death, but what about the guy who's been in and out of prison since his early teens. It's his home, he's got no problem being in prison. Being dead, on the other hand...

The longer you've been in prison, the more you want to get out. (At least until your spirit is crushed.) Death is still the easy way out regardless of how long you've been in prison.

So by your argument, why not be merciful and humane to a heinous criminal and let him die?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Urza

I think life in prison is a much worse fate then death. You did bring up the fact that the offenders do fight the death penalty, but the only reason for this is fear of the unknown, etc. For whatever reason humans as a race have an innate fear of death, but after death the punishment ends. So the worst part of the punishment is the waiting from the time the sentence is finalized to the date of the execution. I personally would much rather be sentenced to death and be "worried" for a small period of time then spend 30-70 whatever years in a state prison.

Even with DNA testing, there still is a very SMALL chance they will make a mistake, but there is still that chance. Nobody here brought up the fact that people can be corrupted to go either way on a case, sometimes DNA can even be "planted" on the scene of the crime.

About the death penalty being expensive only because of large number of appeals causing legal fees, though that may be true, this process of the death penalty will always be there, so it IS more expensive.

---

That's the point. These people performed the most horrendous of acts and do not deserve any mercy.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by demotivater

You and I may fear life in prison more than death, but what about the guy who's been in and out of prison since his early teens. It's his home, he's got no problem being in prison. Being dead, on the other hand...

---

Gee, that's a point I might make....in my occasional contratian moods. However, that very concept has been enshrined in some movies such as Shawshank Redemption.

I wonder, though. Death and life in prison both sound kind of bad to us, but there are things that sound worse. People have come up with all kinds of fanciful concepts of hell other than the fire and brimstone visions. Nobody has suggested nothingness, and few have suggested current concepts of prison. Maybe there is something worse?

I think I stand alone as the only person (on this forum) who has worked directly with the convicted offenders within the UK Prison System (NOMS)

I think that all your posturing is absolute nonsense: the vast majority of these people have real problems, and real needs.

It's a shame that the pigeon hole fits all too well to the middle-class, morally adjusted classes.

It's a shame on the lot of you.

So by that logic, would you support life in prison and torture?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Urza

That's the point. These people performed the most horrendous of acts and do not deserve any mercy.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by capsulecorpjx

So by that logic, would you support life in prison and torture?

---

Convenience of ignoring is a luxury; not a right

:confused:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by yrwyddfa

Convenience of ignoring is a luxury; not a right

---

I'm just saying that it's his opinion that Life is worse then Death.
An opinion not held by prisoners.

In my time as an OSG (part-time prison officer) I met a murderer, Chris, who had a life tariff, and a life sentence.

I read his report, and the court transcript - like you have too - and he basically pulled his wife's lover off his wife during the horizontal shuffle; the guy fell badly, hit his head, and died, and Chris was convicted of his murder. (BTW - this is a very very common story)

Under the pro-death-sentence lobby you would have this guy killed.

He served 18 years of a life sentence and is still subject to his tariff (any offence minor, or otherwise and it's back to the nick to serve out the remaining sentence)

He left prison 5 years ago (whilst I was there) He has since gained his psychology degree and is now a trained (and volunteer) counseller. I presume he is a volunteer because the short sightedness of the society at large will never ever give him a second chance - ever - I guess for the same militant 'morality' claims of the pro-death sentence lobby.

He currently is working with the prison chaplain (even though he has no religious thoughts, and basis) and is back in the prison working to prevent inmates from committing suicide, taking overdoses, and generally self harming. In his spare time he's on the other side of the 'phone at the samaritans helping people like you and I - who 'think' life gets hard - to solve our problems.

You may be surprised but the self-harming rates in UK prisons is extremely high; when I was there it ran at about 60%. This is a sign of mental instability, of depression, and of anxiety - these are fixable diseases. These is not the wayward moral temperaments that your so called 'hardcore' offenders 'must have' trait.

Killing whether sanctioned by the state, or war, or by an individual is always abhorrent. I believe that the sanctity of human life is the basis of all human morality.

. . . and for your information so did the Magna Carta, and its derivation the US Constitution.

Well I'm certainly not saying all murderer's be executed.
I agree, with that person's situation, he shouldn't recieve the death penalty.

I'm just saying that the death penalty itself should be more efficiently carried ... i.e. no 20 year wait on death row.

Also the penalty itself is not bad. Its appropriate for murderers who had the intention to kill to get death. In Chris' case, it is reasonable to suggest that he did not intend for that guy to die.

Now if Chris shot the guy, well that is very probable intent, and assuming there are no other mitigating circumstances, I have no problem with him getting death.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by yrwyddfa

In my time as an OSG (part-time prison officer) I met a murderer, Chris, who had a life tariff, and a life sentence.

I read his report, and the court transcript - like you have too - and he basically pulled his wife's lover off his wife during the horizontal shuffle; the guy fell badly, hit his head, and died, and Chris was convicted of his murder. (BTW - this is a very very common story)

Under the pro-death-sentence lobby you would have this guy killed.

He served 18 years of a life sentence and is still subject to his tariff (any offence minor, or otherwise and it's back to the nick to serve out the remaining sentence)

He left prison 5 years ago (whilst I was there) He has since gained his psychology degree and is now a trained (and volunteer) counseller. I presume he is a volunteer because the short sightedness of the society at large will never ever give him a second chance - ever - I guess for the same militant 'morality' claims of the pro-death sentence lobby.

He currently is working with the prison chaplain (even though he has no religious thoughts, and basis) and is back in the prison working to prevent inmates from committing suicide, taking overdoses, and generally self harming. In his spare time he's on the other side of the 'phone at the samaritans helping people like you and I - who 'think' life gets hard - to solve our problems.

You may be surprised but the self-harming rates in UK prisons is extremely high; when I was there it ran at about 60%. This is a sign of mental instability, of depression, and of anxiety - these are fixable diseases. These is not the wayward moral temperaments that your so called 'hardcore' offenders 'must have' trait.

Killing whether sanctioned by the state, or war, or by an individual is always abhorrent. I believe that the sanctity of human life is the basis of all human morality.

. . . and for your information so did the Magna Carta, and its derivation the US Constitution.

---

Hang on a minute. This guy was convicted in a Crown court (the Old Bailey - the highest court in England) of murder by fair trial and due process; this is the legal process.

What mitigating circumstances are there where you can discern the difference between a sentence of life or a sentence of death. Chris was convicted by a jury of his peers. He was found guilty of the murder of an innocent individual.

I have no doubt that without the foresight of the benefit he now gives to society you would have hanged him on the spot.

My example - which is true, btw - serves to illustrate that no-one can ever tell what the future holds; no-one knows what contribution to society any offender may ultimately give. For all I know he has saved many countless lives by talking fathers, and mothers out of suicide on the other end of the telephone.

You are prepared to sanction death regardless; you backtrack now only on the basis of 20/20 hindsight. Such hindsight is not available when you kill on conviction.

I really don't give a damn what he does for society in the future. That has nothing to do with a current case. I would hold the same opinion of his judgement if instead of being a conselor he ran an Adult Book store or lived off of the government.

In this particular case, Chris accidently killed a man in a scuffle. He shows that it is reasonable he had no intent to kill the man. Therefore, he does not deserve the death penalty, and I even agree with the sentence he did recieve (which is apparently not Life) because of the circumstances. What he does after his judgement is a non-issue.

NOW if it were the same scenario, except Chris killed the man by shooting him, then Chris deserves the death penalty because there is reasonable intent. Again, this judgment is passed out with no consideration of what he can do for the future, that is IRRELEVANT, and too depedent on a person or society's subjective views.

Who's to say the Adult Book store operator of the future is any worse or less contributing to society than a Minister, except through a subjective view of morality.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by yrwyddfa

Hang on a minute. This guy was convicted in a Crown court (the Old Bailey - the highest court in England) of murder by fair trial and due process; this is the legal process.

What mitigating circumstances are there where you can discern the difference between a sentence of life or a sentence of death. Chris was convicted by a jury of his peers. He was found guilty of the murder of an innocent individual.

I have no doubt that without the foresight of the benefit he now gives to society you would have hanged him on the spot.

My example - which is true, btw - serves to illustrate that no-one can ever tell what the future holds; no-one knows what contribution to society any offender may ultimately give. For all I know he has saved many countless lives by talking fathers, and mothers out of suicide on the other end of the telephone.

You are prepared to sanction death regardless; you backtrack now only on the basis of 20/20 hindsight.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by capsulecorpjx

I really don't give a damn what he does for society in the future.

---

Well I think that this is a point that we will always disagree on. I'll call it quits and I think we should just agree to disagree.

Actually, I believe under US law, that wouldn't count as a capital crime. It's murder two at the worst. Only murder one is a capital offence. I don't even think use of a gun would do in this case. Murder one generally requires premeditation.

What do you do with a one-off? A father who's wife or daughter has been raped or killed (or both) and takes the law in his own hands (shoots the perpetrator).

Strictly, this is premeditated murder and should get capital punishment but I'm willing to bet you'll claim mitigating circumstances whilst it is pure revenge.

I wholly agree with Valleyetc... (;)). Prisons should not be a holiday inn. 3 by 4 room, shared with one or two others, a locker, a double bed and three (sober) meals a day. A common 'community' room (indoors and outdoors) to keep them occupied and a common bathroom facility. And -most important- life sentence really means life sentence i.e. the only way out is in a casket.

Try living that way for 20 years and you'll be begging for someone to put the needle in.

Here in the Netherlands and I know in the UK as well people have been found quilty for serious crimes loike multiple murder etc.. and after many years have been cleared. One of the reasons is for these mis trails is police holding back information.
These men would be executed if there was a death penalty at the time of the trail.
What would you tell their wives, mothers, fathers and children at the time it became clear the was killed due to a mistrail.
Could you look the relatives in the face and tell them well it's a bummer for you but he was killed for something he didn't do, live with it?
If you can... there's something terribly wrong with your compassion for others.

(Amongst other cases I'm thinking about wrongly convicted groups of men for IRA bombings)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Valleysboy1978

What is right and what is wrong? This is a question that is impossible to answer because it would depend on the point of view of the individual and their ethics.

---

Again a misunderstanding. When you have a law, it's not the point of view of an individual, it's the point of view of the whole society you live in, the society which has constituted the law. So what you perceive as impossible to answer is actually pretty simple. The law defines what is right and what is wrong. Or do you say your law doesn't? Or that you don't agree with your law? In the latter case you wouldn't be living in the society then ;)

I guess today the laws are so sophisticated, you would rarely find an act that has not been described by the law as right or wrong. And if at all you had a situation where the law couldn't assist you, you always have the option of not giving death sentence. So where you have a doubt as to whether the convicted person really is the perpetrator of the said crime, or if the crime really is worth a capital punishment, you can always defer the death sentence. However where the crime has been proven beyond doubt (and if you have a system where it's "impossible to determine 100% of the guilt of a person", then your system is obviously flawed) and is serious enough to attract a death penalty, it shouldn't be held back just on some humanitarian grounds.

To those who say death is irreversible: Consider the Guantanamo Bay suspects. They are being held without trial for three years and more. There is no end to their so-called detention. A few of them have already been released without charges and have gone back to their respective countries. What do you tell them?? Do you give them back their life which they wasted in prison? Do you give them back their social status which they lost when they were captured? Do you give them back their peace of mind which they have lost because of the torture? You simply can't. Even when a person is tried for a charge and prosecuted, even if he doesn't actually go to jail, he suffers. And nobody can give it back to him. So why such a big hue and cry about the death penalty. I have already made clear it should be awarded where the crime and its seriousness have been proven beyond doubt. There is no point in holding it back just to make up a good humanitarian record at the cost of taxpayers and risking many other innocent lives.

To conclude: All those who have said the judicial systems (including jury trials) are unable to establish guilt without doubt, your statements explain the problem. The problem is not capital punishment, the problem is your systems are flawed. It's sort of like nuclear technology. Do you simply discard all nuclear technology and wipe it out because there is a chance it may be dangerous to the human race? I would think everybody here would say we should ensure it is better used and better controlled. Same principle goes for the death sentence. It's pretty effective as a tool, when used judiciously. When your system is incompetent, you can't expect it to deliver justice. In that case, any sentences handed over by these systems are potentially flawed.

To prove my point, read the reaction to the recent execution of a Vietnamese Australian by the Singapore government for drug trafficking.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/asi...ic/4505572.stm

quote from the article:

Quote:

---

But Mr Howard rejected calls for trade and military boycotts against Singapore, one of Australia's strongest allies in Asia.

He added that the execution should serve as a warning to other young Australians.

"Don't imagine for a moment that you can risk carrying drugs anywhere in Asia without suffering the most severe consequences," he said.

---

Read further down, the guy was carrying around 26,000 doses of drugs. If he was let go with a lesser sentence, you would soon have Singapore as yet another hub of drug trafficking. Because you now know you won't get any mercy, you are less likely to be carrying drugs in Singapore. And please please don't claim you did it by mistake if you got caught. There really isn't no justification for such acts.

.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by honeybee

Again a misunderstanding. When you have a law, it's not the point of view of an individual, it's the point of view of the whole society you live in, the society which has constituted the law. So what you perceive as impossible to answer is actually pretty simple. The law defines what is right and what is wrong. Or do you say your law doesn't? Or that you don't agree with your law? In the latter case you wouldn't be living in the society then ;).

---

So you argue that whatever is enshrined in law is synonymous with morality? I don't subsscribe to that rather philosophically limiting point of view. Not one iota.

Same here. Laws are written by humans and all humans make mistakes. Besides, each society will have its own opinions on what is right and what is wrong. In some societies it is fine for a man to beat his woman to death because she slept with another man. In the developed world that man would get life for murder. You are trying to simplify things honeybee and the question of "What is right and what is wrong?" is never going to be simple.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Valleysboy1978

Indeed :thumb:

I think someone here has used Bin Laden as an example. The last thing that should be done to him if he is ever caught is be executed. This would make a martyr out of him and it's frankly what he wants as he believes it will provide him access to paradise.

---

You living on earth? its 3rd rock from the sun, that earth. Havent you heard the Bin laden Conspiracy? Check out a Video off Kazaa or Filetopia or Ares Called 911 - In plane Site.
or Buy the DVD
http://www.thepowerhour.com/911_articles.htm

What I learned from that Vid:
No Commerical plane hit the WTC, it was Military.
No plane at all hit the Pentagon.
No terrorist passports can survive when the black box can't even be found. Slowmo CNN vids show a missile attached to the 2nd plane that hit the WTC.

So Walker Bush is taking revenge on Middle east countries for the deaths of people who never actually die on those planes. Oil or whatever his reason and then making up tales of WMD and Nukes in Iraq which everyone Still wants to find.

Money(oil) speaks all languages.
****, who are the terrorists again?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Codehammer

You living on earth? its 3rd rock from the sun, that earth. Havent you heard the Bin laden Conspiracy? Check out a Video off Kazaa or Filetopia or Ares Called 911 - In plane Site.
or Buy the DVD
http://www.thepowerhour.com/911_articles.htm

What I learned from that Vid:
No Commerical plane hit the WTC, it was Military.
No plane at all hit the Pentagon.
No terrorist passports can survive when the black box can't even be found. Slowmo CNN vids show a missile attached to the 2nd plane that hit the WTC.

So Walker Bush is taking revenge on Middle east countries for the deaths of people who never actually die on those planes. Oil or whatever his reason and then making up tales of WMD and Nukes in Iraq which everyone Still wants to find.

Money(oil) speaks all languages.
****, who are the terrorists again?

---

Just for the record; I am now absolutely positive that you are loon.

Ditto.

Just about to say that.

Watch the Vid First, then Judge. Did you watch it? Evidence is there, everybody saw 9-11 and the 2nd plane which hit the WTC.
I too believed what CNN/America said at first.
The front page of our local news showed the 2nd plane before impact, which I Looked at, yet didnt see the Missile attached, after checking the Vid, I looked at the 3 year old paper again and then there it was.
You hear your wife say by milk while you watching the Game, but you still dont buy the Milk cause you did not Listen . Same with this, you all saw it but never notice

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Codehammer

Watch the Vid First, then Judge. Did you watch it? Evidence is there, everybody saw 9-11 and the 2nd plane which hit the WTC.
I too believed what CNN/America said at first.
The front page of or local news showed the 2nd plane before impact, which I Looked at, yet didnt see the Missile attached, after checking the Vid, I looked at the 3 year old paper again and then there it was.
You hear your wife say by milk while you watching the Game, but you still dont buy the Milk cause you did not Listen. Same with this, you all saw it but never notice

---

Hey fool. Has it ever occured to you that you are 'convinced' by the same mis-direction that you think everyone else is being fooled by?

I didn't think so. You know what they say? They say that people who are mad are never quite aware exactly how far their madness stretches.

Why don't you go and babble and dribble in some corner elsewhere.

:thumb:

Tell me why I'm wrong about Iraq, at least. Bring the Troops home, their fighting for Bush's phantoms

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Codehammer

Tell me why I'm wrong about Iraq, at least. Bring the Troops home, their fighting for Bush's phantoms

---

Some time ago we agreed to start at the beginning. I questioned you on the big-bang. You have failed to respond - are we still waiting for an email from someone else that you need to justify your beliefs?

We can't even get past the first paragraph of your drivel, let alone the nth!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Codehammer

Watch the Vid First, then Judge. Did you watch it? Evidence is there, everybody saw 9-11 and the 2nd plane which hit the WTC.
I too believed what CNN/America said at first.
The front page of our local news showed the 2nd plane before impact, which I Looked at, yet didnt see the Missile attached, after checking the Vid, I looked at the 3 year old paper again and then there it was.
You hear your wife say by milk while you watching the Game, but you still dont buy the Milk cause you did not Listen . Same with this, you all saw it but never notice

---

Believe what you like, but don't you dare turn what happened on September 11 2001 into some sort of madman science fiction fantasy/conspirarcy bull****. Real people died that day, thousands of them, and you are insulting their memories and their families with this crap. You and anyone else that believes that nonsense is just jumping to insane conclusions without applying rational logic. So no black boxes were found - who cares? Half the time they are destroyed, they are not indestructible like people want to believe they are. So keep that lunatic rubbish to yourself and spare us the drivel.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by yrwyddfa

Hey fool. Has it ever occured to you that you are 'convinced' by the same mis-direction that you think everyone else is being fooled by?

---

No, it never occur since I have both the mis-directions to consider compared to the single baised one view you got. Courts Exist cause you cant hear 1 side of a story and pass judgement. So out there we've got both views on the events of the world, hear everything then you make your mind up.
In CSI you can see that the Smallest evidence proves otherwise. If a event occured like 9-11 then all the evidence must be convincing.
Its not, especially how we attacked a country based on passports we found from a crash site where you could not find the black box.

You sound like someone that believes everthing the media throws at you, like some spunge. Media is make up of people which can be Mislead.
At least D/L the Vid and hear whats it got to say.(the same way I need to learn about astronomy to discuss evolution with you, remember)

Then we can talk facts.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by penagate

Believe what you like, but don't you dare turn what happened on September 11 2001 into some sort of madman science fiction fantasy/conspirarcy bull****. Real people died that day, thousands of them, and you are insulting their memories and their families with this crap. You and anyone else that believes that nonsense is just jumping to insane conclusions without applying rational logic. So no black boxes were found - who cares? Half the time they are destroyed, they are not indestructible like people want to believe they are. So keep that lunatic rubbish to yourself and spare us the drivel.

---

O' I believe in Justice, those people who Died are Innocent People. But the events of 9-11 like the CNN vid with the Missile, come-on. Not to mention the jumping to conclusions to attack some other country who's citizens are also innocent, instilling hatred throughout the world.
I Believe that justice must be met to those who are responsible, though the responsible are those in the US who can organise Military planes and Missles attached to them.

How available is a CNN vid. How can you deny that.

I think I've found another candidate to ignore :)

AAAAAAHHHH!!!!! This reminds me of a quote:

Arguing on the internet is like the special Olympics, even if you win, your still retarded.
//^_\\\

Anyways, I watched a flash arguing that the Pentagon was hit by a missile instead of a plane (Like we were told). The evidence seemed more convincing than anything I'd heard otherwise, so my opinion is that the government did have some type of cover-up going on at least for that. Even with that though, and unlike some people here, I'm still open-minded and if I heard substantial evidence pointing the other way I would reconsider. If Codehammer's conclusion - based on the information he has - is that the whole thing was a conspiracy, your really not helping your point if all you do is say, "That's aload of bullcrap" or "Just for the record; I am now absolutely positive that you are loon." Those are just blanket statements and maybe if both parties put forth some evidence supporting either clame, then maybe a civil and intelligent arguement could be formed. Sometimes it just sickens me how closed minded people are.

Btw, the fact that you saw it on the news is not substantial evidence.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Urza

AAAAAAHHHH!!!!! This reminds me of a quote:

Arguing on the internet is like the special Olympics, even if you win, your still retarded.
//^_\\\

Anyways, I watched a flash arguing that the Pentagon was hit by a missile instead of a plane (Like we were told). The evidence seemed more convincing than anything I'd heard otherwise, so my opinion is that the government did have some type of cover-up going on at least for that. Even with that though, and unlike some people here, I'm still open-minded and if I heard substantial evidence pointing the other way I would reconsider. If Codehammer's conclusion - based on the information he has - is that the whole thing was a conspiracy, your really not helping your point if all you do is say, "That's aload of bullcrap" or "Just for the record; I am now absolutely positive that you are loon." Those are just blanket statements and maybe if both parties put forth some evidence supporting either clame, then maybe a civil and intelligent arguement could be formed. Sometimes it just sickens me how closed minded people are.

Btw, the fact that you saw it on the news is not substantial evidence.

---

Btw: the fact that macromedia flash showed you pretty graphics is not substantial, either: nor is uncorroborated 'evidence' from spurious websites.

Quote:

---

Btw: the fact that macromedia flash showed you pretty graphics is not substantial, either: nor is uncorroborated 'evidence' from spurious websites.

---

For one, it was a very informative flash. And two, I'm not saying anyone in particular is "wrong", all I'm saying is that I've seen more evidence supporting that is was a missile strike than evidence supporting it was a plane that crashed into the Pentagon. This is exactly what I'm talking about, people not open-minded dismissing my opinion just because it doesn't coincide with yours while you, "O, it was just a pretty flash", provide no actual information of your own. I'll listen to any reasons you actually have for believing I'm wrong, but until then your opinion means nothing.

Penn and Teller did a show on Conspiricy theories. They worked at debunking many of the theories, including the idea that there was more than one shooter in the JFK killing, and the 9/11 Conspiricy theory.

Anyway, there will always be morons who will blame 9/11 on the government or even blame it on the Jews (its amazing how creative crackpots can be).

So whatever the issue or event, you can trust fanatics will spin it around to support their agenda. For example, the Chechen Terrorist who masterminded the Beslan attack actually blamed the death of the kids on the Russian police.
The Nazis through consipricy theories, blamed the Jews for Germany loosing WW I.

I mean come on...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Urza

AAAAAAHHHH!!!!! This reminds me of a quote:

Arguing on the internet is like the special Olympics, even if you win, your still retarded.
//^_\\\

Anyways, I watched a flash arguing that the Pentagon was hit by a missile instead of a plane (Like we were told). The evidence seemed more convincing than anything I'd heard otherwise, so my opinion is that the government did have some type of cover-up going on at least for that. Even with that though, and unlike some people here, I'm still open-minded and if I heard substantial evidence pointing the other way I would reconsider. If Codehammer's conclusion - based on the information he has - is that the whole thing was a conspiracy, your really not helping your point if all you do is say, "That's aload of bullcrap" or "Just for the record; I am now absolutely positive that you are loon." Those are just blanket statements and maybe if both parties put forth some evidence supporting either clame, then maybe a civil and intelligent arguement could be formed. Sometimes it just sickens me how closed minded people are.

Btw, the fact that you saw it on the news is not substantial evidence.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Urza

For one, it was a very informative flash.

---

:lol: :thumb: :rolleyes: