[Lemmy]

andyt andyt:

1. putting an innocent person to death. That's why the Illinois governor commuted all death sentences in this state - he came to see that it's just too easy to execute an innocent person. Too many people have been found innocent after spending time on death row.

That seems a moot point in this case.

andyt andyt:

2. Makes us killers, same as them, and so coarsens our society and devalues life.

Disagree. It heightens society's value for life when we more harshly punish those without respect for others' lives.

edit for spelling error

[stratos]

$1:

1. putting an innocent person to death. That's why the Illinois governor commuted all death sentences in this state - he came to see that it's just too easy to execute an innocent person. Too many people have been found innocent after spending time on death row.

This is a problem and as of yet has no perfect solution, yes there have been innocent people put to death. With the discovery and use of DNA matching it has become a lot more unlikely that an innocent person will be sentenced to death then say 20yrs ago. As science and tech. incresse in ways of indentifing criminals from the evidence they leave behind I, to a point, feel more comfortable with imposeing the death sentence. As for the increese sentences of death I think it shows that us as a society are stating we are sick and tired of allowing such persons to go on living after they have willfuly taken anothers life.

$1:

2. Makes us killers, same as them, and so coarsens our society and devalues life.

By allowing those who, like these two in the UK. to live, devalues life by saying we don't care that your murders will continue on living while you, who did nothing to warrant death, are left to rot in a grave. As for it coarsening of us as a society are we not coarsened as a society that allows these type of killers to remain alive with a chance to once again kill. Seems more ireisponsible for us to allow them to continue on living and putting the rest of society at risk.

I'm not saying all who kill deserve the death sentence only the wanton types such as those two in the UK. Those who are proven to have killed in self defense/ defense of others or are clearly mentaly unstable I do not advocate the death penalty for. Nor for those who kill by accident an example would be a car accident where someone dies.

[andyt]

DNA is not magic. Shoot somebody and there's no DNA to prove innocence or guilt. Beat them with a club and same deal. DNA comes into play mostly in sex cases. Eyewitness identification has been shown to be very problematic. Forensic science is very poor, despite what CSI will have you believe, including scientists who skew the evidence for the prosecution. Video tape is not often available to prove guilt - the Boston bombers aren't shown setting off their bombs, the video just put them at the scene. Confessions have been coerced or even made by the innocent. On and on. Very little doubt that these two guys are guilty, but you don't build your law on the rare cases. So really you are just after revenge. Well, life in prison is no easy ride, that's enough revenge for me.

The dead don't need you to kill others to honor them.

[BartSimpson]

PublicAnimalNo9 PublicAnimalNo9:

There is such a thing as a situational asshole.

I see we've met!

[BartSimpson]

In other news the cleric who inspired this attack speaks out:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-22650053

Watch the video! Listen to this POS in his own words.

He thinks the attack was justifiable!

$1:

Radical Islamist preacher Anjem Choudary has said he was "shocked" by the murder of a soldier in Woolwich, but has refused to condemn the attack.

Drummer Lee Rigby was killed in broad daylight on Wednesday by two men, who were subsequently shot by police. The suspects, now known to be Michael Adebolajo and Michael Adebowale, were known to security services.

Mr Choudary told the BBC's Newsnight programme that he encountered Adebolajo at a number of Islamist demonstrations.

"When I saw what took place I was shocked... but what he said in the clip, I think not many Muslims can disagree with," he added.

Mr Choudary was participating in a Newsnight discussion on the attack with Shams Adduha Muhammad, imam and director of Ebrahim College, and Julie Siddiqui, executive director of the Islamic Society of Britain. Newsnight's presenter Kirsty Wark chaired the discussion.

[andyt]

It's guys like that they need to do something about. Hard to do in a free society tho.

[stratos]

$1:

DNA is not magic. Shoot somebody and there's no DNA to prove innocence or guilt. Beat them with a club and same deal.

Wrong DNA is left on the gun trigger, bullet caseing and so forth. Same goes for the club not to mention many other forensic material.

$1:

Video tape is not often available to prove guilt - the Boston bombers aren't shown setting off their bombs, the video just put them at the scene.

And leaving the bombs that later were set off, the same type of material that was used in the Boston bombs were found in their vehicle.

$1:

Confessions have been coerced or even made by the innocent. On and on.

True but do to changes in the laws this is becoming very rare.

$1:

but you don't build your law on the rare cases.

No you don't but you use the existing laws to convict them and in this case I would suggest the most sever punishment possible. In Texas thats the death penalty.

$1:

So really you are just after revenge. Well, life in prison is no easy ride, that's enough revenge for me.

Any form of justice can be called revenge be it a parking ticket up to the death penalty. I probably know a lot more about life in prison then you do so you are preaching to the choir about the conditions an inmate lives in, I worked as a correction officer/jail guard for 8 1/2yrs. Yet as I've stated above life in prison is no guarentee that killers such as these two will not kill again be it in prison, escape and and go on a killing spree, or possibly being paroled and going on another select and kill for no reason.

[martin14]

Choudary should not be allowed near a tv camera, fucking terrorist.
A free society is not required to let assholes like him walk around.


He is banned from entering France, btw.

[BartSimpson]

An Italian journalist with quite a skill for writing in English weighs in:

http://www.enzaferreri.blogspot.co.uk/2 ... z2UEjNWgfY

$1:

How the Media Solve a Problem Like the Woolwich Attack

The English vocabulary will soon be depleted of words, if everybody starts speaking like the mainstream media. In connection with the Woolwich killing, the media talked about "religious centres", not "mosques", a now obsolete word. Other archaic, disused terms are "Islam" and "Muslim": we just say "man", "woman" and as useful data we add their age.

A news flash on BBC Radio 5 Live delivered the information that, basically, a man had been killed in Woolwich by two men, and there were another man and a woman, both 29, involved. Of course it is that magic age, 29, that makes all the difference. There are plenty of men and women aged 29 who go around slaughtering and slaying, but thankfully none aged 28 or 30. How could anyone listening to that news flash be enlightened on the nature of the act by this kind of very general, non-specific "information"?

A TV news reporter, in a desperate attempt to exculpate Islam, said that there have been more Muslims than non-Muslims killed by Muslim attacks.

What does that mean? The first victims of Islam are Muslims themselves, that seems pretty obvious to me. The simplest way to realize that is to look at the Muslim-majority countries of the world and see in what terrible state they are. But this does not exonerate the doctrine of Islam and its violent nature.

The media commentaries seem to attach a lot of importance to finding out whether this was a "lone wolf" attack or had an organization behind it, the assumption probably being that lone wolves should provoke less concern, causing only a one-off incident.

If that is the assumption, it's far from correct. If we have not had another 7/7 in London and generally the UK, it is because a vast amount of money and resources from our cash-strapped government has had to be allocated to the police and intelligence services' task of keeping an eye on the "Muslim community".

When an attack is planned, it is easier for the security services to discover the plan and foil it. Yesterday's murder, on the surface, looks like it might have been one without much planning or organization: these killings will be practically impossible to be prevented, as the police said.

Therefore, some other Muslim "lone wolf" who has observed the success of this murder and the impossibility of thwarting it may be encouraged to repeat the enterprise. It is likely that we will see many more of these attacks, since the plots by organized groups are more vulnerable to preventative actions by security services.

This is also the prediction of radical Muslim Anjem Choudary, who led the ominous-sounding group Islam4UK, in its own words "working for the establishment of the Shariah - to make it dominate all other ways of life." The group is now banned, but not on YouTube.

Choudary prophesied: "We are a very politicised community. Some people are angered by draconian measures such as 'stop and search' and restrictions on free speech. There is a chance of more lone wolf attacks happening again due to these draconian measures".

A TV commentator said that the killer we saw on a video speaking to the camera is British and has an obvious London accent, but still feels closer to places, like Afghanistan and Iraq, that he's probably never even visited.

But shouldn't that ring an alarm bell? Oughtn't that to be an indication that place of birth and accent are irrelevant in this context? Of course he feels loyal to his "brothers" in Muslim countries. The nation-state is a European invention that followed the Peace of Westphalia in 1648. For Islam the nation is the Ummah, all the world's Muslims. This man does not feel British, he feels Muslim - and many other Muslims living in the UK will feel the same allegiance to the "Nation of Islam", as in the name of a black racist and Islamic supremacist organization in the USA.

The pathetic utterances about searches for "motives" behind the murder are also ridiculous. There is nothing to search: the jihadist on the video shown by TV stations the world over makes it very clear.

In the fuller version of the video published by Jihad Watch, at the beginning he mentions Surat at-Tawba, the ninth sura (chapter) of the Qur'an, which contains exhortations to kill infidels. He says:

The only reason we have killed this man today is because Muslims are dying daily by British soldiers. And this British soldier is one. It is an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth. By Allah, we swear by the almighty Allah we will never stop fighting you until you leave us alone. So what if we want to live by the Shari'a in Muslim lands? Why does that mean you must follow us and chase us and call us extremists and kill us? Rather you lot are extreme. You are the ones that when you drop a bomb you think it hits one person? Or rather your bomb wipes out a whole family? This is the reality. By Allah if I saw your mother today with a buggy I would help her up the stairs. This is my nature. But we are forced by the Qur'an, in Sura At-Tawba, through many ayah in the Qu'ran, we must fight them as they fight us.
He also said that he wanted to "start a war in London tonight".

Could this be any clearer?

The only problem is that this is precisely the part that the mainstream media have cut out: it's not so much a search for motives that is needed, as refraining from covering them up.

It would appear that the jihadists were tired of media lies and wanted the public to know why they committed this atrocious beheading, in this day and age a quintessentially Islamic way of killing. The media won again, by depriving them (and more importantly us) of the benefit of telling (and hearing) the truth.

What a strange coincidence, having omitted just that highly explanatory bit!

The parents of at least one of the two perpetrators came from Nigeria, another interesting country where Muslims slaughter Christians like there's no tomorrow. Nigeria is in fact one of the worst countries in the world in this respect, called by International Christian Concern The deadliest place to be a Christian.

The Christianity Today blog has this information:

Nearly 1,000 Nigerian Christians were killed in 2012, and more than 100 have died in the first few months of 2013, according to Jubilee Campaign. Executive director Ann Buwalda says this accounts for “almost 70 percent of Christians killed globally” last year, making Nigeria “the most lethal country for Christians by a huge margin.”
But, in the West, who cares? And, further, who is informed by the media? After we've been ignoring what Nigerian Muslims do to people in their country, now they are carrying out the same job here. Will we still ignore it?

Another thing that may make you laugh or cry, depending on your temperament, is the recommendation not to wear uniform in public given by commanders to troops, which has led the soldiers to the opposite behaviour of posting pictures of themselves in uniform on social media.

What next? Clergy advised not to wear cassocks and dog collars? Oh that's already happened, after a number of Muslim attacks on priests in East London some years ago.

We have made so many concessions to Islam that one more or less doesn't make much difference. What's a uniform between friends?

This kind of advice is akin to trying to cure pneumonia with paracetamol. The real treatment would be a bit more radical (from "radix", the Latin word for "root"), going to the root of the problem, addressing the disease rather than the symptom: if there were no Muslims in Britain, there would hardly be any terror attacks.

[N_Fiddledog]

Thanks Bart. I liked this bit.

$1:

It would appear that the jihadists were tired of media lies and wanted the public to know why they committed this atrocious beheading, in this day and age a quintessentially Islamic way of killing. The media won again, by depriving them (and more importantly us) of the benefit of telling (and hearing) the truth.

The media might be a bigger enemy than the Jihadis these days...as long as we're discussing "root causes" I mean. If they would allow the truth to be told plainly, the true causes could be discussed and dealt with.

[andyt]

It's nothing we don't know. And it's an understandable motive. Of course then he should get the fuck out of Britain, and leave them alone as he wants the Islamic countries to be left alone.

None of that explains how a Christian becomes a Muslim convert and goes off the deep end following the jihadists. This ideology is hard to wipe out in countries with freedom of speech. We hurt ourselves, when we claim, as many do here, that all Muslims follow this ideology. That sure won't lead to them cooperating with authorities to turn in these fucekers. But, in a case like this, with little plotting and no organization, even that won't stop them. Just as we can't stop the mass shooters in the US. Just because they don't yell Allah when they do it, doesn't make them less or these guys more of a threat. Our fear does that.

[BartSimpson]

N_Fiddledog N_Fiddledog:

Thanks Bart. I liked this bit.

$1:

It would appear that the jihadists were tired of media lies and wanted the public to know why they committed this atrocious beheading, in this day and age a quintessentially Islamic way of killing. The media won again, by depriving them (and more importantly us) of the benefit of telling (and hearing) the truth.

The media might be a bigger enemy than the Jihadis these days...as long as we're discussing "root causes" I mean. If they would allow the truth to be told plainly, the true causes could be discussed and dealt with.

Reminds me of back in the day when Saladin was on this forum and he'd post all of his jihadist propaganda and the lefties would go into paroxysms trying to explain it all away.

I managed to become friends with the guy (after a fashion) because I was one of the only people who took him at face value.

If that's the same kind of thing these vermin in London encountered then I can appreciate their frustration.

$1:

Jihadi: I want to kill everyone who opposes Islam!

Leftist: You mean you're upset with the economic injustice of the capitalist system and you want to speak out about income inequalites?

Jihadi: No! I want to make you bow down and accept allah as the one, true god or else I want to behead you!

Leftist: Oh, I see now. You're upset with the systematic racism of the upper classes who oppress the common man.

Jihadi: No, damn you! I want you to allow us to impose sharia law on your country or else I want you to die!

Leftist: Yes, it's true, the 1% are unfairly hoarding their wealth and if only we could raise the minimum wage and implement a tax structure that makes the wealthy pay their fair share we'd all be happy!

I can totally understand how the left can frustrate the hell out of a radical jihadist when he can't even behead someone and get the left to recognize that he did it because of his religion.

[Zipperfish]

stratos stratos:

This is a problem and as of yet has no perfect solution, yes there have been innocent people put to death. With the discovery and use of DNA matching it has become a lot more unlikely that an innocent person will be sentenced to death then say 20yrs ago. As science and tech. incresse in ways of indentifing criminals from the evidence they leave behind I, to a point, feel more comfortable with imposeing the death sentence. As for the increese sentences of death I think it shows that us as a society are stating we are sick and tired of allowing such persons to go on living after they have willfuly taken anothers life.

Did you support the death penalty prior to the advent of DNA evidence?

[saturn_656]

BartSimpson BartSimpson:

Jihadi: I want to kill everyone who opposes Islam!

Leftist: You mean you're upset with the economic injustice of the capitalist system and you want to speak out about income inequalites?

Jihadi: No! I want to make you bow down and accept allah as the one, true god or else I want to behead you!

Leftist: Oh, I see now. You're upset with the systematic racism of the upper classes who oppress the common man.

Jihadi: No, damn you! I want you to allow us to impose sharia law on your country or else I want you to die!

Leftist: Yes, it's true, the 1% are unfairly hoarding their wealth and if only we could raise the minimum wage and implement a tax structure that makes the wealthy pay their fair share we'd all be happy!

[stratos]

Zipperfish Zipperfish:

stratos stratos:

This is a problem and as of yet has no perfect solution, yes there have been innocent people put to death. With the discovery and use of DNA matching it has become a lot more unlikely that an innocent person will be sentenced to death then say 20yrs ago. As science and tech. incresse in ways of indentifing criminals from the evidence they leave behind I, to a point, feel more comfortable with imposeing the death sentence. As for the increese sentences of death I think it shows that us as a society are stating we are sick and tired of allowing such persons to go on living after they have willfuly taken anothers life.

Did you support the death penalty prior to the advent of DNA evidence?

Yes I did and freely admited it was not a perfect system and still admit it is not perfect.