CIA agent accused of raping Muslim woman

A free-wheeling forum for discussion of Christian issues.

Moderators: Pastor Gary, The J2 Mod Squad

one love
Woohoo!
Posts: 3082
Joined: October 23rd, 2007, 12:48 pm
Location: USA,Virginia

CIA agent accused of raping Muslim woman

Postby one love » January 28th, 2009, 6:11 pm

The CIA's station chief at its sensitive post in Algeria is under investigation by the U.S. Justice Department for allegedly raping at least two Muslim women who claim he laced their drinks with a knock-out drug, U.S. law enforcement sources tell ABC News.


http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/Story?id=6750266&page=1
Last edited by one love on January 29th, 2009, 2:10 am, edited 1 time in total.

Gerald Creasy

Postby Gerald Creasy » January 28th, 2009, 10:48 pm

If the words "accused" and "allegedly" are used in the story should not your post title reflect that rather than stating it as FACT?

I mean...lets give the CIA the same benefit as the gullable hand wringing nabobs of intellectualism give Gitmo terrorists.

one love
Woohoo!
Posts: 3082
Joined: October 23rd, 2007, 12:48 pm
Location: USA,Virginia

Postby one love » January 29th, 2009, 2:14 am

Gerald Creasy wrote:If the words "accused" and "allegedly" are used in the story should not your post title reflect that rather than stating it as FACT?

I mean...lets give the CIA the same benefit as the gullable hand wringing nabobs of intellectualism give Gitmo terrorists.


Changed it, good point. I wonder if this will cause more hate america or any terrorist attacks. I remember Abu Ghraib the media played it over and over that we would have more attacks etc....

User avatar
Tim Elston
Woohoo!
Posts: 1300
Joined: August 7th, 2003, 8:45 pm
Location: Juneau Alaska, USA
Contact:

Postby Tim Elston » January 29th, 2009, 3:48 am

Gerald Creasy wrote:Gitmo terrorists.


innocent men alleged to be terrorists who were held for up to seven years without charge and on the basis of federal judicial review were deemed to have been held without due cause

Gerald Creasy

Postby Gerald Creasy » January 29th, 2009, 4:04 am

Tim Elston wrote:innocent men alleged to be terrorists who were held for up to seven years without charge and on the basis of federal judicial review were deemed to have been held without due cause


Now that you can quit wringing your hands, what WILL BE your response when it is proven they go back to beheading non-Islamists?

I doubt you even have the cajones to face the possibility.

User avatar
Tim Elston
Woohoo!
Posts: 1300
Joined: August 7th, 2003, 8:45 pm
Location: Juneau Alaska, USA
Contact:

Postby Tim Elston » January 29th, 2009, 4:24 am

Gerald Creasy wrote:Now that you can quit wringing your hands, what WILL BE your response when it is proven they go back to beheading non-Islamists?


The men I'm talking about were innocent. Terrorists should be tried, proven guilty and sentenced to execution or imprisonment for their crimes based on evidence. Innocent men should not be arbitrarily incarcerated.

Gerald Creasy

Postby Gerald Creasy » January 29th, 2009, 4:56 am

Tim Elston wrote:
Gerald Creasy wrote:Now that you can quit wringing your hands, what WILL BE your response when it is proven they go back to beheading non-Islamists?


The men I'm talking about were innocent. Terrorists should be tried, proven guilty and sentenced to execution or imprisonment for their crimes based on evidence. Innocent men should not be arbitrarily incarcerated.



You avoided my question; What heappens in YOUR MIND if it were to be proven (I would say WHEN it will be proven) they are NOT innocent before and return to their evil ways??

Will you cut the Bush Administration slack?
Will you you admit you had been gulled?
Will you voluntarily undergo waterboarding to pay for your intellectual naivete??

User avatar
Tim Elston
Woohoo!
Posts: 1300
Joined: August 7th, 2003, 8:45 pm
Location: Juneau Alaska, USA
Contact:

Postby Tim Elston » January 29th, 2009, 5:11 am

Gerald Creasy wrote:You avoided my question; What heappens in YOUR MIND if it were to be proven (I would say WHEN it will be proven) they are NOT innocent before and return to their evil ways???


That's why we have due process: to determine guilt or innocence. All men should be tried. Guilty men should be sentenced. Innocent men should be let go. If through due process a man were to be determined by evidence to be guilty, then he should be sentenced. Difficult concept for some people, apparently.

Gerald Creasy

Postby Gerald Creasy » January 29th, 2009, 5:14 am

Tim Elston wrote:
Gerald Creasy wrote:You avoided my question; What heappens in YOUR MIND if it were to be proven (I would say WHEN it will be proven) they are NOT innocent before and return to their evil ways???


That's why we have due process: to determine guilt or innocence. All men should be tried. Guilty men should be sentenced. Innocent men should be let go. If through due process a man were to be determined by evidence to be guilty, then he should be sentenced. Difficult concept for some people, apparently.


It would be more difficult to have a liberal actually answer the question put to him.

User avatar
RamboPreacher
RamboPreacher
Posts: 12355
Joined: July 17th, 2004, 5:41 pm
Location: USA, Texas

Postby RamboPreacher » January 29th, 2009, 5:14 am

I have a set of paintball guns that are single-load and shoot, that are for dueling.

you guys wanna borrow them?
:roll: :twisted:
Thanks, Brent "RamboPreacher" Hoefling

User avatar
Tim Elston
Woohoo!
Posts: 1300
Joined: August 7th, 2003, 8:45 pm
Location: Juneau Alaska, USA
Contact:

Postby Tim Elston » January 29th, 2009, 5:28 am

Gerald Creasy wrote:
Tim Elston wrote:That's why we have due process: to determine guilt or innocence. All men should be tried. Guilty men should be sentenced. Innocent men should be let go. If through due process a man were to be determined by evidence to be guilty, then he should be sentenced. Difficult concept for some people, apparently.


It would be more difficult to have a liberal actually answer the question put to him.


That was a direct answer to your question, even though your question falsely implied your respect for due process. You have consistently presumed guilt and expressed contempt for due process.

Gerald Creasy

Postby Gerald Creasy » January 29th, 2009, 5:31 am

Tim Elston wrote:That was a direct answer to your question, even though your question falsely implied your respect for due process. You have consistently presumed guilt and expressed contempt for due process.


Odd. I see no answer whatsoever to my question. I see your attempt to hide within insults but it does you no good.

User avatar
Tim Elston
Woohoo!
Posts: 1300
Joined: August 7th, 2003, 8:45 pm
Location: Juneau Alaska, USA
Contact:

Postby Tim Elston » January 29th, 2009, 5:35 am

Gerald Creasy wrote:Odd. I see no answer whatsoever to my question.


Odd indeed.

User avatar
Pastor Gary
Kahu Gary, Benevolent Dictator
Posts: 10475
Joined: January 28th, 2003, 9:03 pm
Location: USA,Hawaii
Contact:

Rewrite the headline?

Postby Pastor Gary » January 29th, 2009, 9:21 am

May I rewrite that headline?

"Muslim convert accused of raping fellow Muslim women."

How would that play in the international press?
"God is excited to show you mercy. He rises to give you His compassion." (Isaiah 30:18)

"For surely, O LORD, you bless the righteous;
you surround them with your favor as with a shield." (Psalm 5:12)

one love
Woohoo!
Posts: 3082
Joined: October 23rd, 2007, 12:48 pm
Location: USA,Virginia

Re: Rewrite the headline?

Postby one love » January 29th, 2009, 9:23 am

Pastor Gary wrote:May I rewrite that headline?

"Muslim convert accused of raping fellow Muslim women."

How would that play in the international press?


good point but the fact that he is CIA still is horrible... I read that he was a convert,unreal


Return to “Jude 2 General Discussion Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 16 guests

Login  •  Register