chorba Posted December 7, 2011 Share Posted December 7, 2011 ............... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrMoran Posted December 7, 2011 Share Posted December 7, 2011 The fact that they are using religion as a mean of defense and the judge fell for it. But they did and he did. Dont you think thats wrong? Will you be sending an email to ask for a review of the case? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrMoran Posted December 7, 2011 Share Posted December 7, 2011 LOL the BBC is complaining about censorship in the Russian media, the BBC aren't biased are they! The russian media could learn a thing or 20 from the BBC when it comes to propoganda and censorship. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spooky3 Posted December 7, 2011 Share Posted December 7, 2011 The fact that they are using religion as a mean of defense and the judge fell for it. He was biased by it because it's a racial stigma he didn't want to be branded with. That is where this country is today! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alex3659 Posted December 7, 2011 Share Posted December 7, 2011 Do you not see a difference? We are all subject to the same rules, etc. But there is a difference between a child who was born and raised here in comparison to one who was born and raised in a country ruled by a religious dictatorship and a constant war zone, never mind droughts, disease and all the other factors which disturb people. Not actually a great excuse for getting drunk and viciously attacking the people who's country have taken you in and sheltered you from the things you describe. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spooky3 Posted December 7, 2011 Share Posted December 7, 2011 Not actually a great excuse for getting drunk and viciously attacking the people who's country have taken you in and sheltered you from the things you describe. No, an act of racist animals pure and simple... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrMoran Posted December 7, 2011 Share Posted December 7, 2011 No, an act of racist animals pure and simple... Ah, ah, ah. Its been proved in a court of law it was NOT racially motivated. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chorba Posted December 7, 2011 Share Posted December 7, 2011 .................. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spooky3 Posted December 7, 2011 Share Posted December 7, 2011 Ah, ah, ah. Its been proved in a court of law it was NOT racially motivated. I didn't say motivated! However there is evidence that there was racial abuse during the attack! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrMoran Posted December 7, 2011 Share Posted December 7, 2011 I didn't say motivated! However there is evidence that there was racial abuse during the attack! So if there was evidence then why didnt they get convicted of the racial part of the assault? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.