Moussaoui can face death penalty

Originally Posted by philipMac

Second: What do you gain and what do you lose? What you gain is quite quantifiable, and finite. What you lose is unquatifiable.

You gain the fact that some of the most evil people who are also the most accomplished sociopaths NEVER get released to commit crimes again. If you dont think that would happen, read the books by John Douglas and tell me you would be happy for the Ted Bundys of the world to even be considered for parole.

All the while they are alive they have the chance to convince some do gooder in the system they are capable of reform. Some people, predominantly serial killers and paedophiles are beyond rehabilitation once theyve stepped beyond a certain mark.

Also consider the fact that its not revenge but a form of retribution. Whereby the state formally declares that its citizens lives are sacrosanct and if you take any one of them you will be subject to the retribution of the state as it prescribes.

I understand your point and dont argue it lightly. But I have read about too many serial killers and the absolutely heinous things they have done that they can never be released.

People argue about cruel punishments. In their cases, surely death is more of a release and less cruel than keeping someone in jail for their remaining natural years which could be up to sixty years? Because there are some people that just can not be rehabilitated or reformed.

Originally Posted by lynw

...

Because there are some people that just can not be rehabilitated or reformed.

Yeah. I am in agreement with you here. For instance, it is more or less unquestionable that paedophiles are paedophiles till the day they die.
Or, that people do hideous things, and should not be let out for the rest of their lives.

These people, pyschopaths etc, are a burden. But, I dont think that this means its ok to kill them. What does killing them fix?
Life with out parole exists.

In a lot of instances, to do what they did, they are sort of by definition seriously mentally ill, no? If you have someone that commits horrific crimes, would you not want to hold onto them, watch them, look for things that give people an idea what to look for at some point in the future? Maybe people can id something through genetics, or through watching brain activity. There is no question that a large number of mentally retarded people have been killed by the govt. Studying exactly how they are retarded is valuable,

I also agree with you though, that for some of them, death is a release from whatever torment they are in. But, I dont really care. Screw them, if we want to learn from them, tough.

I think, again, you are right, its fine for the state to say human life is sacrosanct, and to punish you, we will take lots of your human rights away from you. But, not their life.
Just my opinion I suppose there.

Then there is the whole randomness of who gets killed and who doesnt. This trial might be the perfect case in point. The punishment of death is randomly given out to people, it depends on the profile of the case, who was killed, how the jury falls, the local judge, what race you are... its a game of dice.

And, nothing will ever get around the fact that people are convicted and sentenced to death incorrectly.

PH,
OK, I have heard this sort of idea before. The thing is though... its sort of been proved that the US govt / US popular opinion doesnt need much persuasion to do anything at all. Definately crashing a load of planes into the shop is over kill. Especially the White House (attempt), the Pentagon, and the WTC.

There are just about a million cheaper ways to sell whatever story the US admin wants to sell the people here. And, the majority of the people seem to buy it. I have seen interviews with people, where the interviewer just made up countries, told the person they might be thinking bad things about the US, and do they think that its ok to bomb them. Within about 3 minutes you had bombers setting off for Tonga as far as they were concerned.

So, yeah, not buying it. Then they have to keep the whole thing quiet. Its not worth it PH. Seriously.

execute him, he was willing to die & kill others so give him half his wish at least, cheaper in the long run. Then take the rest & do the same.Scum.




















Waits for flak.

Originally Posted by philipMac

PH,
OK, I have heard this sort of idea before. The thing is though... its sort of been proved that the US govt / US popular opinion doesnt need much persuasion to do anything at all. Definately crashing a load of planes into the shop is over kill. Especially the White House (attempt), the Pentagon, and the WTC.

There are just about a million cheaper ways to sell whatever story the US admin wants to sell the people here. And, the majority of the people seem to buy it. I have seen interviews with people, where the interviewer just made up countries, told the person they might be thinking bad things about the US, and do they think that its ok to bomb them. Within about 3 minutes you had bombers setting off for Tonga as far as they were concerned.

So, yeah, not buying it. Then they have to keep the whole thing quiet. Its not worth it PH. Seriously.

I beleive the "conspiricy" if you like that our PH was referring to is this:

America, in particularly the Intelligence Community knew that something was coming, perhaps not particularly what it was, or quite how severe, but that something was being planned, and an attack was imminant on US Soil.

The reasons being that it would give them the "upper hand", for want of a better expression, and thus allow an entrance route into the middle east.. and destabilises the entire region, like PH said, enabling us NOT to be held ransom over the substance which is the life blood of our worlds.... Oil.

One counter argument by the "not for oil" brigade, is that it would be futile to invade Iraq for oil.. as it takes 15years to rebuild an infrastructure to such a level that oil can be sufficiently drawn out in quantities which offer a suitable return on investment.

One key thing worth considering, is that the west currently only has enough supply of oil to last, 15-20 years (approx). Do you think its coincidence that 9/11 happened when it did? Or is there a more sinister plot behind it?

Like i said at the top of this post, i dont beleive that George Bush knew the extent of the attacks which were due, nor did any of the intelligence services. But id say it was a fair bet, that they knew something was being planned, that some attack was going to happen... and that they sat back on their laruels waiting for it to happen.

I've often thought about this,

As in the Death Penalty Versus Life Sentences (single or multiple)

I understand that some people might not agree with others, but I think the death penalty should only be used as a last resort, as I think keeping someone behind bars for 20-30-40 plus years should not become a burden on tax payers,

Yes execute him!!

Originally Posted by Akula

Yes execute him!!

Elaborate Akula if you can? You obviously beleive strongly in your opinion, id be interested to hear as to why you say so veniably that he should be executed.

Noone has the right to do anything. At all. Not even breath.

We, as a race, have no rights, we never did, and I'm sure the day may come when we will not again.

We made them up y'see. Gave them to ourselves as justification for the choices we made and actions we took. They let us sleep better at night knowing we were 'right' and the other person was 'wrong'.

Take it back to the bare bones and it's all about capability and choice.

We are all capable of the most heinous of acts. Crimes by our own standards, but standards change. How long ago was it when you would have been talking about Homosexuals the way you talk about Paedophiles?
Go back and ask an adult male of Ancient Sparta how he feels about underage sex = standards change, capabilities don't.

So it's down to choice. Don't kid yourself about rights. It's choice, and it's only if enough people choose something that it's called right, or A Right.

If this guy gets the death sentence, it will be because the individuals of the Jury choose to see him dead because they didn't like the choices he made.

And so to go full circle and bring capability back into the mix - I wonder if they would make the same choice if they also then had to admit and release their own capability for violence. If they had to physically carry out the sentence and kill him.

Rights, law, right & wrong = whatever lets you sleep at night.



By the way, I'm not actually sure where I went with all that burbling - brain working + fingers typing = strange random posting.

The man was willing, part & party, had knowledge of an attack on a people (whether they be American or not, makes no difference) that killed thousands of people in one hit. This was an act of terrorism, this in al quaeda's words is a war. So if this is a war as Moussaoui rightly/wrongly believes why should he not be executed for his crimes?? They executed the likes in the WWI & II, so why not now? And for those bleading heart liberals & tree huggers out their that preach human rights, yes people have a right to life and so on, but when thousands of lives are taken so indiscriminantly (sp) children, women non combatants if you like why not execute him. He and others like him would know doubt be in the thick of another planning of mass murder like 9/11.

Some will probably argue that we are killing their women and children in their homeland. A subtle difference there is that the area they are unfortunately dying in is a WARZONE. It still dosent make it right, and if those that are in charge of the bombing/shooting of innocent civillians should be held accountable the same as Moussaoui. Unfortunately the problem with the Warzone is that alot of the women and children are so fanatical in their beliefs that they are A part of the war itself.

The whole thing is a clusterfeck and whether we should be in Iraq is a different matter, or is it???? The fact remains if left alive, Moussaoui could possibly help another attrocity, unless he was imprisoned in a special population group (we know who they are) that eat nowt but pork and play banjo's.

Martin