UK Honeymoon Couple Attacked in S.A.
Discussion
condor said:
God,or whatever one believes to be a higher being, of course.
So you think an invisible man who lives in the sky will try him after he is dead? And presumably if found guilty the invisible man will sentence him to burn in agony and torment and have his liver pecked out by an eagle every day for ever and ever and ever. That's some seriously whacky s
t you got going on there brother. Breadvan72 said:
Yeah, and I just thought his punctuation was weird.
Using commas instead of brackets is the accepted way to have a flowing sentence 
http://archive.bio.ed.ac.uk/jdeacon/writing/stops....
condor said:
Black, as the Ace of Spades, in the soul is for a higher judgement.
If you think that sentence is well punctuated, I disagree. I would suggest either deleting the commas, or placing them before and after "in the soul". That part of the sentence is the parenthetical part, if it needs one, which it probably doesn't.
Breadvan72 said:
condor said:
Black, as the Ace of Spades, in the soul is for a higher judgement.
If you think that sentence is well punctuated, I disagree. I would suggest either deleting the commas, or placing them before and after "in the soul". That part of the sentence is the parenthetical part, if it needs one, which it probably doesn't.Black, as in the ace of spades = black, similar colour to the blackness of the ace of spades in a pack of playing cards. The ace has the largest, solid proportion of black compared to other playing cards.
The ace of spades was Andy Zarse's comment after Breadvan asked why so many people thought he was guilty. I thought it was something to do with his eyes and body language.
I don't really understand why you're both trying to pick an internet 'fight' with me - as I was just trying to answer Breadvan's question.
Do I think he's guilty?...that wasn't the question...but Yes, I do think he's guilty of not honouring his marriage vows of protecting her. She died, he's alive.
beam me up Scottie 
condor said:
Do I think he's guilty?...that wasn't the question...but Yes, I do think he's guilty of not honouring his marriage vows of protecting her. She died, he's alive.
Not honouring your marriage vows is not worthy of lifetime imprisonment, and that's very much what he faces when he goes on trial in SA. It's not justice I object to, it's the kangaroo court he's returning to which bothers me.
He's as good as been found guilty without even standing trial. SA media make claims of all sorts of "evidence" which exists, and I just don't have the confidence in the SA justice system to trust they'll weed out the poppycock from the facts.
Pints said:
...It's not justice I object to, it's the kangaroo court he's returning to which bothers me.
He's as good as been found guilty without even standing trial. SA media make claims of all sorts of "evidence" which exists, and I just don't have the confidence in the SA justice system to trust they'll weed out the poppycock from the facts.
If they have the smoking gun, the world's view of SA's legal system less relevant. Would I go back to face a SA court - No way, Zuma, He's as good as been found guilty without even standing trial. SA media make claims of all sorts of "evidence" which exists, and I just don't have the confidence in the SA justice system to trust they'll weed out the poppycock from the facts.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff