Thread: Innocents?
View Single Post
Unread 10 Jul 2005, 22:27   #56
acropolis
Vermin Supreme
 
acropolis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Pittsburgh
Posts: 3,280
acropolis single handedly makes these forums a better placeacropolis single handedly makes these forums a better placeacropolis single handedly makes these forums a better placeacropolis single handedly makes these forums a better placeacropolis single handedly makes these forums a better placeacropolis single handedly makes these forums a better placeacropolis single handedly makes these forums a better placeacropolis single handedly makes these forums a better placeacropolis single handedly makes these forums a better placeacropolis single handedly makes these forums a better placeacropolis single handedly makes these forums a better place
Re: Innocents?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nodrog
I meant whose definition of 'guilty'. You're using the word in a strange way if you want to equate it with 'everyone of voting age in a democracy'.
ah.

i tried to keep little 'quoties' around both it and 'innocent' every time i used them.

from the original post, we make the assumption that we are viewing from the terrorist perspective, from which it appears that the UK has committed a crime, and so the question is, when the UK government commits a crime, who is guilty?

the original post implied that the guilty parties consisted of tony blair, the queen, etc.

but if the government is the people, and the government committed a crime, then the people committed a crime.
acropolis is offline   Reply With Quote