posted on Mar, 21 2013 @ 07:48 PM
Originally posted by astronomine
So what is the relevance of him being drugged during his "not guilty" days?
Yes it is relevant because you said that he pleaded “not guilty” and you implied that that meant that he wasn’t using islam as a justification
at the time of the killing, because if he did do it in the name of islam, then he would have pleaded guilty, and been proud of it.
I pointed out that that he was drugged out at that time so anything he said, could not be trusted as his actual sane words.
Then you come back and say “What is the relevance of him being drugged”.
Well, nothing, beyond the fact that you can’t use any admission or behavior during that time as an indication, for, or against, him believing in
So, your implication that his “not guilty” statement disproves the idea that he may have done the killing in the name of islam is rendered mute by
the fact that he was drugged during that time. So they could have told him to say anything, and he would have. (as he chased little pink ponies in his