BS: J'Accuse! (US Indictment of Lynn Stuart)

Subject: RE: J'Accuse! (US Indictment of Lynn Stuart)
From: Hrothgar
Date: 13 Apr 02 - 10:18 PM

"I can't imagine why anyone would want to bomb his office..."

Nobody could imagine why anybody wanted to bug the Democrats in the Watergate building, either.

But I digress.

More importantly, where would John Adams stand now if he wanted to defend the British soldiers involved in the Boston Massacre?

And just to take the names a little further, would anybody like to compare the Bush presidents, father and son, with the Adams presidents? Thread is startting to creep a bit, isn't it? Sorry about that.

Subject: RE: J'Accuse! (US Indictment of Lynn Stuart)
From: Grab
Date: 14 Apr 02 - 05:51 PM

Larry, on what you've said I doubt it too. If her translator is getting instructions from the terrorist but she's not in on it, she should be OK.

Your example is incredible - who'd let themselves go down for that? If the ppl concerned knew they hadn't gone round saying that, why didn't they get the evidence checked? I mean, anyone half awake could sort that out - translators aren't that expensive to hire, the tapes are freely available to the defence and the ppl on trial know they didn't say that so the original translation must be an error. Either the lawyer or the ppl convicted or both must have been utter cretins.

Graham.

Subject: RE: J'Accuse! (US Indictment of Lynn Stuart)
From: Amos
Date: 14 Apr 02 - 10:46 PM

I would suggest it would have been a lot smarter to try the bugger under military tribunal rules, since they were accusing him of acts of war. If you propose to use the American system of civilian justice, you make an ass of yourself when you simultaneously use military tactics inside the process.

In anycase if Lynn was not aware of the conversation contained, why the hell is she even being accused of anything.

A

Subject: RE: J'Accuse! (US Indictment of Lynn Stuart)
From: Barry Finn
Date: 15 Apr 02 - 12:53 AM

Nothing is that scared or beyond the means that are used in this country to manipulate the system if the ends are deemed justifiable. Question athority! In Boston, as it turns out many yrs after, a few agents of the FBI have had their hands in the pockets of some of the local gangland bosses (or is the term now Warlord). They fed information that knowingly caused the murders (at least 20 known) of some of the competion & of others who fell from favor while at the same time they helped to set up others who took took the fall for these serial killers. One of these men was just cleared for one of these murders after serving 30 yrs (do only the guilty go to prison?) There's our system at work. Does anyone know for sure that our civil rights won't get trampled on when the justifiable need comes about. Or that it's not happening now? Look at our voting rights (or is it privilige), our freedom to speak (when spoken to?). As it stands now the military is getting unquestionable amounts of money & power, they're going the world over as the saviour & defender of all that's holy, it seems as if we're more than willing to start World War III. All this & if we, the public, question or ask for an explantion we're suspect of treason or at the least of being a danger to ourself &/or society,(a jailable or hospital offense). Where the hell did our right to question go? Opps, was that ever a right? I guess I got side tracked. Goodnight & sleep securely, the Lord Bush is watching over us all. Barry

Subject: RE: J'Accuse! (US Indictment of Lynn Stuart)
From: Troll
Date: 15 Apr 02 - 01:35 AM

I suppose that nothing of this sort ever happened under a Democrat President, eh? Maybe Congress needs to pass a law banning the Republican Party and THEN we'd all be OK.
Larry, I hope that Lynn gets this cleared up quickly. Cases of this type can drag on for years.

troll

Subject: RE: J'Accuse! (US Indictment of Lynn Stuart)
From: toadfrog
Date: 15 Apr 02 - 11:24 PM

Troll: With all due respect, the proper usage is "Democratic president." The use of conscious linguistic slurs lowers the tone of things, and makes people mad. Do you want a response, or are you just tossing out insults? Has anyone yet said anything about "Republicans" in this thread?

I don't think it is about Republicans and Democrats; its about being against authority. Troll, I take it you are a Libertarian, and theoretically hate authority just as much as Barry Finn, and all the people on this thread who assume, on the basis of ideology and without any evidence, that of course Ms. Stuart is being framed. So why don't you agree with them? Aren't you the one who thinks we all have to have guns to defend ourselves from tyranny? Doesn't Ashcroft work for the government? Isn't government, in your philosophy, always evil?

And folks, why pick on Lynn Stuart? If the cops are always wrong, shouldn't everybody now in prison be let lose?