Human Shield Group is Shameful

UberLord

Your argument implies that you should be responsible for what you know.
In respect to the law I agree (I found out what jay-walking was in the US )

But in respect to this forum, I disagree. No-one can know every bit of history, law or such. Given that, people will post with what they currently know. Not everyone wants or can do a websearch to find links to backup their argument.

But I agree that everyone is responsible for what they say - for example if you post links to puka sources (CNN, BBC News, historical archives) that prove me wrong then I will always backdown from my current position.

However, to assume that everyone will go to the same lengths is not fair. Not everyone who posts here knows how to use a search engine as well as you or me.

Politcians arguing day to day can't give links in their argument - they HAVE to know. We aren't politcians - we're debaters.

UberLord

[SIZE=X-LARGE]BINGO! WE HAVE A WINNER !!![/size]

Most justice systems in the western world have variable sentances which are decided by the presiding judge.

Damn lawyer

I was trying to make JavaFox think about the volunteers for the Iraqi human shield.
The point I was making was that if a law or similar encourages revolt or treason (confederates vs union as a prime example) then is it a just law? If its not just law then are they traitors?

Example (extreme but follow me through).
It's treason to run non-american software. THAT'S THE LAW IN THIS EXAMPLE
UK software house makes a software product that allows patients to be monitered without staff present.
US goes into a recession. Software Cost < Staff Cost so company buys and uses the software so they can treat their patients.
Is this company a traitor?

But wait - according to the law they are a traitor but they are also trying to save the lives of their patients.
Extreme example? Maybe - the company I work for works in this field and we only have one direct competitor - and they aren't US based either. So the only infactual thing about my above example is the law about only running US software.

Here's a better example

DAD - Bitch Wife! Get in that kitchen and cook! You boys - cut those damn logs. Girls - start making those clothes for maket!

DAD- Hold up there sweet thing - let's "party"

In this example DAD makes the law. If anyone does anything against DAD then their a traitor.

The "sweet thing" kills DAD when he isn't expecting it.
Is she a traitor or a heroine?

You choose.

Dmac43

You've answered your own question... YES whether or not the law is just in the eyes of the accused, it is still the law until it is repealed... you want a prime example ... Roe v Wade

Many people find it an unjust law, but it is still the law until such time as it is either repealed, or changed...

In this case, any American citizen who attempts to block our troops should be considered a traitor, and is subject to trial by jury and whatever verdict is handed down...

In the case of the Civil war, the confederate soldiers were given unilateral pardon by the President of the United States. Thus very few went to trial for treason although there were some "spys" who did go to trial, and were executed for their crimes.

BTW .. Sweet Thig gets arrested, goes to trial for murder (not treason), loses and ends up on death row for 20 years waiting for her appeals to end

Smoothdrive

Sweet thing pleads self-defense and temprorarily insanity and goes free by the sympathetic Jury..unless sweet thing is black, foreign, poor or low-educated of course..than she'll go to death-row that B1tch.

Why are we even talking about sweet thing or is sweet thing in Iraq posing as a HS

The US would not stop bombing because of Iraqi civilians who do not have a choice..so why stop for US or European civilians who willingly go there and put themselves in that situation ??

HS is people who found a wrong solution but do believe in it and one must admire them for acting on their believes..

What their believe is ?? beats me...they're not helping anyone except Saddam who gets another popularity boost by those western folks helping out Saddam. If they are there to help the Iraqi civilians they should have gone to help reconstruct houses or help in the medical sector or something.