Decided to check on who these "Top" 20 lawyers were. First on list from article named "Zakir Mir". Went to linkedin, confirmed it was him via his work for Allegiance International. The man graduated law school 3 years ago (2015). I'm sorry but 3 years of experience is not a "Top" lawyer.
You sir are arguing utilizing a well debunked trope. Palestinians can be antisemitic as this term is properly understood as meaning "being prejudiced against jews." Therefore it is not a "dumb" accusation. If this is due to your ignorance, than okay, now you know better, however, it is more likely that you are an apologist and for that there is no cure.
"Our Constitution" - assume you mean the U.S.A. Federal Constitution. I'll bite as I will be taking the NY State Bar Exam later this summer... The Constitution and specifically the Bill of Rights does not enumerate all inherent rights, it just states some of them explicitly, see IX Amendment. Expressing yourself however you chose is not listed as an inherent right, "freedom of speech" is (per 1st Amendment), and "sharing" works is not necessarily speech as understood by and interpreted by the Supreme Court of the US.
You can criticize the government as much as you want under the 1st amendment and not get sent to Guantanamo. Those that are being held there were captured in a war, on the field of combat, and committed or were planning to commit physical acts of violence. Please don't try to sell your hysterical version of the "sky is falling," the Government will start sending to Gitmo everyone who disagrees with them.
Just to refute a few "facts."
The US government did not kill millions of civilians using a "weapon of mass destruction."
see "During World War II, for the official purpose of forcing the Japanese to surrender unconditionally, the United States military dropped atomic bombs on the cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, Japan on August 6 and August 9, 1945 respectively, killing at least 120,000 people, about 95% of which were civilian, outright, and around twice as many over time." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atomic_bombings_of_Hi roshima_and_Nagasaki
Also, to call US the biggest state sponsor of terrorism during the last several decades is so beyond the pale of rational reasoned fact based reality, that it does not even require a refutation.
Your other side of the story is just as incorrect. The moral equivalency of the Hagannah attacking the British police/military installation in the King David Hotel to the repeated suiced bombings targetting civilians (men, women, children) is shocking. Your various other comments are not worthy of repudiating based on your obvious anti-semitic vitriol which equates a military conflict with the deaths of civilian jewish lives.
IANAL yet, but the government does not conclude that someone is "guilty" before executing him/her, at least in the United States. A jury of his peers votes unanimously (a requirement in capital punishment cases) on the guilt or innocence of said individual. Please keep your anti-capital punishment rhetoric somewhat logical/factual.
Slashdot Mirror
Decided to check on who these "Top" 20 lawyers were. First on list from article named "Zakir Mir". Went to linkedin, confirmed it was him via his work for Allegiance International. The man graduated law school 3 years ago (2015). I'm sorry but 3 years of experience is not a "Top" lawyer.
You sir are arguing utilizing a well debunked trope. Palestinians can be antisemitic as this term is properly understood as meaning "being prejudiced against jews." Therefore it is not a "dumb" accusation. If this is due to your ignorance, than okay, now you know better, however, it is more likely that you are an apologist and for that there is no cure.
"Our Constitution" - assume you mean the U.S.A. Federal Constitution. I'll bite as I will be taking the NY State Bar Exam later this summer... The Constitution and specifically the Bill of Rights does not enumerate all inherent rights, it just states some of them explicitly, see IX Amendment. Expressing yourself however you chose is not listed as an inherent right, "freedom of speech" is (per 1st Amendment), and "sharing" works is not necessarily speech as understood by and interpreted by the Supreme Court of the US.
You can criticize the government as much as you want under the 1st amendment and not get sent to Guantanamo. Those that are being held there were captured in a war, on the field of combat, and committed or were planning to commit physical acts of violence. Please don't try to sell your hysterical version of the "sky is falling," the Government will start sending to Gitmo everyone who disagrees with them.
Just to refute a few "facts." The US government did not kill millions of civilians using a "weapon of mass destruction." see "During World War II, for the official purpose of forcing the Japanese to surrender unconditionally, the United States military dropped atomic bombs on the cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, Japan on August 6 and August 9, 1945 respectively, killing at least 120,000 people, about 95% of which were civilian, outright, and around twice as many over time." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atomic_bombings_of_Hi roshima_and_Nagasaki
Also, to call US the biggest state sponsor of terrorism during the last several decades is so beyond the pale of rational reasoned fact based reality, that it does not even require a refutation.
Your other side of the story is just as incorrect. The moral equivalency of the Hagannah attacking the British police/military installation in the King David Hotel to the repeated suiced bombings targetting civilians (men, women, children) is shocking. Your various other comments are not worthy of repudiating based on your obvious anti-semitic vitriol which equates a military conflict with the deaths of civilian jewish lives.
IANAL yet, but the government does not conclude that someone is "guilty" before executing him/her, at least in the United States. A jury of his peers votes unanimously (a requirement in capital punishment cases) on the guilt or innocence of said individual. Please keep your anti-capital punishment rhetoric somewhat logical/factual.