GenghisTheHun 04/17/2006
Well if we can't pre-judge Osama after listening to his several statements, whom can we judge? Beam me up, Howard!
Helpful
Funny
Agree
Disagree
Drummond 03/22/2006
I absolutely agree with him. Everyone is entitled to a fair trial, even a mass killer. Our system and our ethics don't distinguish between the severity of crimes. It's about us - who we are - not whether somebody "deserves" these rights. Bin Laden has these rights because they are natural rights - to which every human being is entitled.
sfalconer 03/22/2006
This got five stars as soon as I saw it was Howard, does this guy say any thing that makes any sense?
JohnSpina 03/21/2006
2 steps: 1.Open mouth 2.Insert foot
Redoedo 02/04/2006
Well, he is indeed correct, but I think the reference to Osama should have been omitted. I'd say 3,000 dead Americans and his immediate eagerness to claim responsibility and boast of his "accomplishment" is sufficient grounds to "prejudge."
EschewObfuscat ion 06/17/2005
Quite right, James, or Tom Delay.
James76255 06/17/2005
I still have this old-fashioned notion that even with people like Osama, who is very likely to be found guilty, we should do our best not to, in positions of executive power, not to prejudge jury trials. -- Where are these kind of priorities when talking about the President?
7 reviews! « Previous | Page of 1 | Next »
Sort by Newest Oldest Most helpful Least helpful Highest rated Lowest rated