Reply to: Jailed terrorist attacked.

[Diver]

If he survives he will have to spend the rest of his life behind bars in solitary confinement for his own protection.
That has got to be worse than death.

[Stan]

What did he do anyway? The thread is a bit light on real info. Until I find out what he actually did to deserve having boiling oil poured over him its hard to say whether it is worth feeling sympathy or not.

[pisces]

I hope he gets millions in compensation and released from prison immediately.

[Old Greg]

Postmanprat: Are you not one of our pro Iraq war bretheren? Wasn't one of the reasons you argued that we were bringing democracy to the region?

If so then explain what the difference between our democracy (as you supprot) and the regime they already had?

If you feel it is OK to attack those who are willing to attack you then I assume that you are fully in support of the Jihadi who are only retaliating against a West that is in their eyes commiting terrorist attrocities against Islam.

If we are to claim the moral high ground then we have to adhere to a higher standard.

I think the truth LG, is that this is not a war for what we might see as liberal democracy, where we aim to spread the principles of the Enlightenment to these people who labour under tyranny. It's about spreading free market philosophy - opening up the Iraqi economy to foreign (principally American) investment. Wiki link for anyone interested. This may or may not be a good thing for the Iraqi economy, but it has little to do with democracy. The neo-con mantra 'people are free when markets are free' stops being true when the people are unable to use their democratic mandate to set the limits of the free market (e.g. by choosing to nationalise oil production should they wish to do so). US and Britain have form on this - they backed the Shah's coup against the democratic Iranian government that was looking to nationalise oil production.

So, yes, they want democracy - but not to the extent that the Iraqis might choose to use their mandate against US economic interests.

[The Lone Gunman]

Postmanprat: Are you not one of our pro Iraq war bretheren? Wasn't one of the reasons you argued that we were bringing democracy to the region?

If so then explain what the difference between our democracy (as you supprot) and the regime they already had?

If you feel it is OK to attack those who are willing to attack you then I assume that you are fully in support of the Jihadi who are only retaliating against a West that is in their eyes commiting terrorist attrocities against Islam.

If we are to claim the moral high ground then we have to adhere to a higher standard.

[Mailman]

We believe in democracy (dont start the argument as to whether we have it or not) and democracy relies on the rule of law and justice for all.

Unfortunately the piece of scum locked up didnt believe in democracy and the rule of law and justice.

No matter what our personal feelings we must aply the law equaly. If there is a failing then we must change the law.

Hence why police want to hold terrorist scum indefinately

We must not stoop to the levels of those who would corrupt or undermine our society.

Why not? Do unto them what they will do unto you. That seems to be the only language these jihadi's understand.

This act, whether justified or not will serve as another rallying point for fanatics.

Your weakness and lack of willingness to do anything about jihadi's acts as a rallying point for this scum.

They see your weakness as an excuse and justification to attack.

Mailman

[The Lone Gunman]

I am with Greg on this one. I think he has made the argument eloquently enough.

I would just like to add:

We believe in democracy (dont start the argument as to whether we have it or not) and democracy relies on the rule of law and justice for all.
No matter what our personal feelings we must aply the law equaly. If there is a failing then we must change the law.
We must not stoop to the levels of those who would corrupt or undermine our society.

This act, whether justified or not will serve as another rallying point for fanatics.

[BrilloPad]

True, but then as a civilised country should we not treat him in a civil manner. Should we stoop to his level? Is this not the reason the world complains about Guantanamo?

I agree. we should save boiling oil for judges and politicians.

[Let-Me-In]

True, but then as a civilised country should we not treat him in a civil manner. Should we stoop to his level? Is this not the reason the world complains about Guantanamo?

That is the whole reason for this discussion as there are differing views...

In my mind, there are arguements both ways...I just wish they wouldn't argue so loudly!!!

[lilelvis2000]

Planning \ attempting, whatever. It had nothing to do with colour or whim.

My point was that if he had no concern for human life, how can he complain when the people whos life he had no concern for have no concern for his?

Please don't bring colour into it.

True, but then as a civilised country should we not treat him in a civil manner. Should we stoop to his level? Is this not the reason the world complains about Guantanamo?

[Let-Me-In]

But later on you said


The group I mentioned - are all nasty criminals - well except for ASBO holders. Just wondered if you selectively pick and choose your justice based on a whim - or colour.

I agree castration is necessary, and murders should be hung, gays - converted, theives given three strikes and out.

Planning \ attempting, whatever. It had nothing to do with colour or whim.

My point was that if he had no concern for human life, how can he complain when the people whos life he had no concern for have no concern for his?

Please don't bring colour into it.

[Old Greg]

But later on you said


The group I mentioned - are all nasty criminals - well except for ASBO holders. Just wondered if you selectively pick and choose your justice based on a whim - or colour.

I agree castration is necessary, and murders should be hung, gays - converted, theives given three strikes and out.

Gays converted? How did gays end up in the same category as criminals and ASBO recipients?

[lilelvis2000]

Please read my post.

I said "that as he was planning to kill thousands or hundreds of thousands..."

I am not sure how paedeophiles, murders, gays, thieves, ASBO holders fit into this category!!!

However, paedeophiles are a different story. I would be all for castration in these circumstances.

But later on you said

however this man was attempting to kill thousands or hundreds of thousands of innocent people

The group I mentioned - are all nasty criminals - well except for ASBO holders. Just wondered if you selectively pick and choose your justice based on a whim - or colour.

I agree castration is necessary, and murders should be hung, gays - converted, theives given three strikes and out.

[Swiss Tony]

I'm afraid that I have had a scan of t’internet this morn and I cannot find a shred of information that backs up my alleged fact that in some states inmates are given the choice of live or death.

Must be an urban myth, interesting train of thought though.

[Chugnut]

I know in the US some states do offer inmates the choice of life in prison or death by gas chamber (or lethal injection.) I’d be interested in knowing what the stats are on this, and how many inmates choose to take their own lives.

I think that even with this option most would choose life, and then there is the old argument of sending 1 innocent man to their grave vs. letting 100 guilty men off.

I know - it's a hugely contentious and emotive area. I'd be interested in the stats too. Since I can't relate to taking someone else's life, I wouldn't even like to guess. Maybe the figures for injection are higher than you'd think amongst those who are prepared to die through acts of terrorism, however, since they'd be no martyrdom in suicide, perhaps not.