You are viewing an obsolete version of the DU website which is no longer supported by the Administrators. Visit The New DU.
Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Reply #4: Ummmm, Ok. Yayyyyy For You! [View All]

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) Donate to DU
OPERATIONMINDCRIME Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-17-06 12:27 AM
Response to Original message
4. Ummmm, Ok. Yayyyyy For You!
:toast:

(No idea of the context or why you failed to provide any)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
  -I will never, EVER apologize for defending a rape victim FredScuttle  Dec-17-06 12:24 AM   #0 
  - What if the person wasn't a victim at all?  kiahzero   Dec-17-06 12:26 AM   #1 
  - Has there been a trial yet that I'm unaware of?  FredScuttle   Dec-17-06 12:26 AM   #2 
  - That's what we're asking. n/t  LoZoccolo   Dec-17-06 12:28 AM   #7 
  - Do you think all accusations merit a trial? (n/t)  kiahzero   Dec-17-06 12:30 AM   #11 
     - do you think only certain people are entitled to justice? n/t  FredScuttle   Dec-17-06 12:32 AM   #13 
        - I think it should take more than a bare accusation to get to trial.  kiahzero   Dec-17-06 12:38 AM   #16 
           - I agree  FredScuttle   Dec-17-06 12:44 AM   #21 
              - I think there was severe prosecutorial misconduct.  kiahzero   Dec-17-06 12:45 AM   #22 
              - Of course she didn't engineer a false rape case "all on her own."  pnwmom   Dec-17-06 01:09 AM   #32 
  - remember as NancyGrace said on SNL tonight  RGBolen   Dec-17-06 12:27 AM   #5 
  - In those 1-3% of cases, I guess I would apologise  alittlelark   Dec-17-06 12:28 AM   #6 
     - It appears that the Duke Lacrosse case is one of those cases. (n/t)  kiahzero   Dec-17-06 12:32 AM   #14 
        - I know little to nothing about it......  alittlelark   Dec-17-06 12:40 AM   #18 
           - The reason you should waste your brain cells on it (you're not  pnwmom   Dec-17-06 01:11 AM   #33 
              - Fortunately, they don't seem to be that typical  kiahzero   Dec-17-06 01:12 AM   #34 
  - Glad to hear it.  last1standing   Dec-17-06 12:27 AM   #3 
  - Duke lacrosse case  FredScuttle   Dec-17-06 12:28 AM   #8 
     - Ahhh! A textbook case on why not to try alleged criminals in the press.  last1standing   Dec-17-06 12:35 AM   #15 
        - This is a textbook case on why some cases SHOULD be tried in the press.  pnwmom   Dec-17-06 12:56 AM   #24 
           - But she made the accusation, isn't that enough for you?  kiahzero   Dec-17-06 12:59 AM   #26 
           - Delete  last1standing   Dec-17-06 01:07 AM   #31 
           - It is undisputed  FredScuttle   Dec-17-06 01:02 AM   #28 
           - No. Some of us will read the primary documents, which the prosecutor  pnwmom   Dec-17-06 01:13 AM   #35 
           - ummm.....ok.  last1standing   Dec-17-06 01:06 AM   #30 
              - The prosecutor used the excuse of privacy to try to convince  pnwmom   Dec-17-06 01:18 AM   #39 
                 - Then, for the second time, the courts should sort it out.  last1standing   Dec-17-06 01:27 AM   #43 
  - Ummmm, Ok. Yayyyyy For You!  OPERATIONMINDCRIME   Dec-17-06 12:27 AM   #4 
  - Duke lacrosse case  FredScuttle   Dec-17-06 12:29 AM   #9 
     - That Doesn't Mean Anything To Anybody.  OPERATIONMINDCRIME   Dec-17-06 12:38 AM   #17 
        - Didn't feel like posting in 15 separate threads  FredScuttle   Dec-17-06 12:42 AM   #20 
           - Why Would It Be? You Still Didn't Provide Anything.  OPERATIONMINDCRIME   Dec-17-06 12:55 AM   #23 
              - Yet you keep digging  FredScuttle   Dec-17-06 12:58 AM   #25 
              - Who was it directed at? (n/t)  kiahzero   Dec-17-06 01:00 AM   #27 
              - They know who they are  FredScuttle   Dec-17-06 01:03 AM   #29 
              - Here's A Newsflash Back: If Your Thread Was For One Or Two Posters, You Should've Posted It Either  OPERATIONMINDCRIME   Dec-17-06 01:17 AM   #38 
                 - I should "provide the info necessary to warrant this thread meaningful"?  FredScuttle   Dec-17-06 01:22 AM   #40 
                    - Ummm, Yes. You Should. Makes Pretty Logical Sense Don't It? I Mean, It's Not Too Much To Ask,  OPERATIONMINDCRIME   Dec-17-06 01:28 AM   #45 
              - Deleted message  Name removed   Dec-17-06 01:15 AM   #36 
                 - What In The Friggin World Are You Talking About? Holy Delusional Batman.  OPERATIONMINDCRIME   Dec-17-06 01:24 AM   #41 
                    - Right back at ya  JetCityLiberal   Dec-17-06 01:27 AM   #44 
  - Yes, I will never forget the exact words you used. Last spring yet.  Bluebear   Dec-17-06 12:29 AM   #10 
  - Don't worry I dont remember a word you said this past spring.  aikoaiko   Dec-17-06 12:32 AM   #12 
  - To quote from my avatar... What's Going On?  Montauk6   Dec-17-06 12:41 AM   #19 
  - Strongly Agree  JetCityLiberal   Dec-17-06 01:17 AM   #37 
  - Deleted message  Name removed   Dec-17-06 01:27 AM   #42 
  - Locking  petersond   Dec-17-06 01:29 AM   #46 
 

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC