24 Feb 07
Originally posted by MerkDid overwhelming societal support for dropping the atomic bomb on Hiroshima make US culture "backwards" in 1945? Also you are assuming that there is "overwhelming societal support" for the acts you mention in Muslim countries which seems dubious.
While I see your point about not judging an entire society on the actions of a few extremists. I'm not sure you can say that a culture that treats women the way they do isn't backwards. Also, while the actions of a few homocide bombers or homocide plane crashers does not make an a culture backwards. The overwhelming societal support for such acts does say somet ...[text shortened]... that their culture is backwards. Or, maybe broken. I'm still not decided on which one yet.
24 Feb 07
Originally posted by scottishinnzA) The guy was sentenced to 100 years. It's possible for him to get parole in 10 years but rather unlikely; the circumstances of the crime will be considered by the parole board. I suspect he'll spend at least 20 years in prison.
As we say in Scotland, Shut yer puss. You are going on about communism for what reason precisely?
Some guys murder a little girls whole family, then rape her and murder her. They do this, not as a "crime of passion" or whatever, but in cold blood. It was a pre-meditated, planned act of brutality. And you think that 10 years is really a suitable ...[text shortened]... admitted being wrong in the past. I'm just not going to admit being wrong when I ain't.
B) The individual sentenced didn't actually kill the family or girl, according to the evidence. Therefore, it would be hard to justify hanging him under any type of proportionality analysis.
24 Feb 07
1 edit
Originally posted by no1marauderWell, you avoided the treatment of women.
Did overwhelming societal support for dropping the atomic bomb on Hiroshima make US culture "backwards" in 1945? Also you are assuming that there is "overwhelming societal support" for the acts you mention in Muslim countries which seems dubious.
My claim of overwhelming support would come from large celebrations for martyrs, posters of them being put up etc. The video of celebrations on September 11th. would also suggest societal acceptance.
24 Feb 07
Originally posted by MerkWomen were surely treated as second class citizens in 1945 (and in some ways, still are).
Well, you avoided the treatment of women.
My claim of overwhelming support would come from large celebrations for martyrs, posters of them being put up etc. The video of celebrations on September 11th. would also suggest societal acceptance.
Your basis for ascertaining "overwhelming societal support" i.e. some television videos and posters is mainfestly absurd. By that standard, there was "overwhelming societal acceptance" for the Black Panthers and/or Ku Klux Klan.
24 Feb 07
Originally posted by no1maraudernot really. he's an accomplice, he should be executed, too.
A) The guy was sentenced to 100 years. It's possible for him to get parole in 10 years but rather unlikely; the circumstances of the crime will be considered by the parole board. I suspect he'll spend at least 20 years in prison.
B) The individual sentenced didn't actually kill the family or girl, according to the evidence. Therefore, it would be hard to justify hanging him under any type of proportionality analysis.
24 Feb 07
Originally posted by no1marauderClearly we have differing views on the date of this guys parole (although perhaps a mental institution would be a better bet for this guy - he clearly has problems), I hope you are right, but I guess we'll just have to wait and see.
A) The guy was sentenced to 100 years. It's possible for him to get parole in 10 years but rather unlikely; the circumstances of the crime will be considered by the parole board. I suspect he'll spend at least 20 years in prison.
B) The individual sentenced didn't actually kill the family or girl, according to the evidence. Therefore, it would be hard to justify hanging him under any type of proportionality analysis.
That said, I still find the concept that he could be out in 10 years contemptible.
24 Feb 07
Originally posted by no1marauderYou're right about the first part kind of. Women and minorities are treated differently by many in society. However, legally they are equal. The same cannot be said for Saudi Arabia for example.
Women were surely treated as second class citizens in 1945 (and in some ways, still are).
Your basis for ascertaining "overwhelming societal support" i.e. some television videos and posters is mainfestly absurd. By that standard, there was "overwhelming societal acceptance" for the Black Panthers and/or Ku Klux Klan.
While I don't live in the middle east, I do read the websites of some of their newspapers. Even in the Kuwaiti newspaper (KUNA) you very rarely see anyone denounce attacks on civilians or the treatment of women. When you do, it's an opinion piece. You see some stories about terrorists coming from other countries in the middle east and killing civilians in Iraq, (I'm sure history could have something to do with that) but for coverage on attacks carried out in any other country, you have to look long and hard.
Heck, the murder of that Pakistani woman this week got way more coverage in the west and in India than it did in the middle eastern papers. I realize India might have alternate motives for covering the story.
The main differnce is when something like our soldiers deliberately killing civilians happens, we denounce them. In the ME they celebrate them by calling them "glorious martyr operations".
24 Feb 07
Originally posted by MerkYour unsubstantiated claims bore me. More innocent civilians by far were deliberately killed in 10 seconds at Hiroshima then have been killed by all the Middle Eastern suicide bombers put together. I'm waiting for a government "denouncement".
You're right about the first part kind of. Women and minorities are treated differently by many in society. However, legally they are equal. The same cannot be said for Saudi Arabia for example.
While I don't live in the middle east, I do read the websites of some of their newspapers. Even in the Kuwaiti newspaper (KUNA) you very rarely see anyone denounce ...[text shortened]... denounce them. In the ME they celebrate them by calling them "glorious martyr operations".
24 Feb 07
Originally posted by scottishinnzI don't. If a parole board finds that after 10 years of being in prison he no longer presents any type of threat to society, what would be the point of keeping him in prison? There are 5 defendants with apparently varying degrees of culpability; 2 have been offered some degree of leniency to testify against the others to assure that the most culpable will be found guilty and suitably punished. Do you find that result "contemptible"? I don't; 10 years in prison isn't exactly a slap on the wrist.
Clearly we have differing views on the date of this guys parole (although perhaps a mental institution would be a better bet for this guy - he clearly has problems), I hope you are right, but I guess we'll just have to wait and see.
That said, I still find the concept that he could be out in 10 years contemptible.
24 Feb 07
Originally posted by no1marauderNo 1, what was your take on this judge in the Anna Nicole Smith case? He's taking a lot of heat and even being called incompetent.
I don't. If a parole board finds that after 10 years of being in prison he no longer presents any type of threat to society, what would be the point of keeping him in prison? There are 5 defendants with apparently varying degrees of culpability; 2 have been offered some degree of leniency to testify against the others to assure that the most culpable wil ...[text shortened]... that result "contemptible"? I don't; 10 years in prison isn't exactly a slap on the wrist.
24 Feb 07
Originally posted by no1marauderI'm not sure how US action 60 years ago makes the US a backward society or means that Islamic societies are not backward in comparison to the west.
Your unsubstantiated claims bore me. More innocent civilians by far were deliberately killed in 10 seconds at Hiroshima then have been killed by all the Middle Eastern suicide bombers put together. I'm waiting for a government "denouncement".
As for substantiaing my claim, how exactly would I do that? I cannot present you with a plethora of articles from middle eastern newspapers denouncing attacks on civilians and treatment of women because they are most often not there. Seek and ye shall rarely find if you compare to western press.
Check out the the Palestinian Human Rights Council website and read the stories of injuries and sometimes even death as a result of celebratory gunfire at weddings. A common and popularly supported practice. To me, that's backwards.
If that's not backwards to you, maybe you're backwards.
24 Feb 07
Originally posted by no1marauderThis is hysterical. Marauder wins all arguments by crying about Hiroshima. Slam dunk, just say Hiroshima and marauder wins, you lose, regardless of the subject.
Your unsubstantiated claims bore me. More innocent civilians by far were deliberately killed in 10 seconds at Hiroshima then have been killed by all the Middle Eastern suicide bombers put together. I'm waiting for a government "denouncement".
24 Feb 07
Originally posted by MerkWho is to say that is different to the "overwhelming" support of the Iraq invasion? It was an invasion after all. There is still no "motive" for the invasion that really makes any sort of sense.
The overwhelming societal support for such acts does say something about the culture. I don't know what that tells you, but those two combined tell me that their culture is backwards. Or, maybe broken. I'm still not decided on which one yet.
Some claim 600 000 thousand Iraqi's have died, some claim 60 000, add to this the 2 million or so people who have fled Iraq to Syria and Lebanon and also the 3,000+ US soldiers who have died (more than the people who died in the 9/11 attacks) and what have all these deaths achieved? Then think that this has been overwhelmingly supported and what do you get? A backwards culture?
24 Feb 07
Originally posted by no1marauderHmm. I can see your point, but I still think the fact that these guys dispensed 5 death sentences on others, in a pre-meditated manner, for no other crime than existing, suggests that it's going to take far more than 10 years to rehabilitate them. I don't believe they will be given sufficient time for that - would a civilian who commits the same crime be eligible for parole in 10 years?
I don't. If a parole board finds that after 10 years of being in prison he no longer presents any type of threat to society, what would be the point of keeping him in prison? There are 5 defendants with apparently varying degrees of culpability; 2 have been offered some degree of leniency to testify against the others to assure that the most culpable wil ...[text shortened]... that result "contemptible"? I don't; 10 years in prison isn't exactly a slap on the wrist.
24 Feb 07
Originally posted by B52EWOHe can be free in 10 years if he behaves and speaks to the parole board the way his attorneys coach him to.... that was the whole point of repeating '10 years' over and over... to emphasize the ridiculously light sentence for these heinous crimes..a true miscarriage of justice
reread the story, he was sentenced to 100 years....stop repeating 10 YEARS for dramatic affect, it's annoying