Think of Jihadis' WRONGS not their civil rights

[chance1]

Robert Reeg, retired NY firefighter, was nearly killed by flying debris on 911 - he suffered injuries - he's been an advocate to make sure that those who perpetrated the crime pay the price.

He's concerned that there's more emphasis on the civil rights of the monsters than on the victims. KSM - you must remember - beheaded WSJ Daniel Pearl.

He thinks the focus on Gitmo and the treatment of KSM is not on point

That it should be on the pain and destruction KSM caused - and is still causing - as many responders continue to suffer or die from effects of the pile

Anyway, he nor I is suggesting that individuals rights are not important

but .......... focus is critical




Think of jihadis’ wrongs, not civil rights - NYPOST.com

 

[kallipolis]

There is an absolute need to protect the civil rights of everyone including those who terrorise innocent people.

To fail to protect the civil rights of all human beings is to emulate the worst behaviour of those who believe that they possess the God given right to destroy human life in the name of God; thus declaring that the terrorist has won by encouraging us to imitate them.

 

[pat grimshaw]

I have no sympathy for killers.

 

[palemale]

I have no sympathy for killers.

It's not a question of having sympathy for killers. It's about protecting civil rights. A democratic society can only remain democratic if it observes the rule of law and ensures that all individuals have the protection of receiving due process of law.

This seems to be a difficult concept for people to grasp. However, if the state convicts an innocent person, it perpetrates two injustices. The innocent party is jailed and the guilty party goes free.

 

[chance1]

scary how the knee jerk reaction is "poor terrorist" with no mention of the victims

it's like people didn't even read the piece

NO ONE is suggesting waterboarding ........ here anyway

but the knee jerk is for the "victim" which in this case is the piece of shit that beheaded Daniel Pearl AND perpetrated 911

sad

 

[chance1]

Nobody is saying "oh the poor terrorist". I want justice done consistent in a fashion of a democratic nation.

that's a given

read the piece

no need to cry for KSM

 

[Benvolio]

The goal should be to free the innocent and convict the guilty. Our system has created so many roadblocks to conviction that the system is becoming dysfunctional. These trials are for a horrendous crime which took place almost 11years ago. If they are sentenanced to death they probably will die of old age.

 

[bankside]

Human rights are not an alternative to justice being served; they are part of justice being served.

If you don't like the idea that a conviction requires evidence, how do you even know your outrage is placed on the right person?
If you don't like the sentence imposed by a judge, he's only following the sentencing laws passed by the legislature. Vote for a different law. The judge will listen.
If you don't like prisoners being let out of overcrowded jails because the jail is unsanitary and unsafe, vote for someone who will tax all your hard-earned income to pay for enough jails.
If you want prisoners to be raped or knifed in jail because they have it coming to them, then pass a law to make it happen, as well as the constitutional amendment required to make it legal.

Then judges can properly sentence people to torture or rape or death by stoning in the prison yard or amputation and with such civilised practices we will have finally beaten the Taliban.

 

[LuvFindsAndyHardy]

How is honoring the civil rights of defendants ignoring the losses of the victims? Do the victims get MORE justice if the basic civil rights granted to any defendant in our justice system are ignored? The trial has been going now for what, two days? It's a little early to make pronouncements (in what is sure to be a very long procedure) that the victims are being ignored (especially when you consider that most of the time so far has been wasted on grand-standing drama moments by the defendants.)

I read the piece this morning, Chance, and Reeg's position is the exact reason that victims and family members of victims don't sit on juries. Reeg has a natural bias (for which I don't blame him in the least, he's earned it) but honoring the civil rights of defendants (whomever they may be) is about US not about the terrorists. I don't see ANYONE saying "poor terrorists" in this except for the folks who were against any kind of a trial in the first place.

I think a lot of this stems from people losing their minds because the defense attorney wore a burka in court. She has a responsibility to her client (whether she likes it or not and let's face it she probably doesn't) and felt it was appropriate.

KSM will most assuredly be convicted

How have the victims been ignored?

By the way, the "roadblocks to conviction" a poster mentioned are the very "roadblocks" we would all want if we were falsely accused of a crime.

 

[Serenx55]

Boil them in pig fat. Tell Russia and Israel they can do it too. Terrorism is now no longer going to happen as in Islamic religion being touched by pig fat and unwashed will lead to damnation.

 

[LuvFindsAndyHardy]

I see no chance that such actions would inspire Muslims around the world to hate us and feel even more strongly that violence is their only option.

In the cowboy world of serenx we simply wouldn't care cuz we would just bomb into oblivion anyone who doesn't think we're awesome.

 

[chance1]

once again the rush to defend KSM

who frankly should be given the MINIMUM required

yet many here focus on HIM and HIS rights

gross

 

[LuvFindsAndyHardy]

What he said ^^^^^^^

ts not about this mans rights, its about ALL mans rights.

100% agreement

 

[Benvolio]

I could only assume that such sentiment, given the liklihood that justice WILL be done, is an excuse for western indiscretions. Ignore our wrongs, cos theirs are worse!

Not being liberal, I did not realize 9/11 was a mere indiscretion on the terrorists part. Oops, I forgot it is no longer politically correct to say terrorist.

 

[Rolyo85]

Ok, I am really weirded out by Chance' and Benvolio's responses here.

People say "all people's civil rights should be respected, we should not punish someone without due process just because we're angry, that's what uncivilized societies do", and the response is "you're defending the terrorist" and random inane attempt at sarcasm regarding the treating of terrorism in speech.

I mean, huh?

 

[pat grimshaw]

I think all of you would benefit from watching this intelligent film by the great Michael Powell~



It makes the point that gallantry and civility are admirable human traits for which we must all strive. But those traits are not suitable in times of war. We may be well-fed and sitting comfortably in our armchairs but we are living in a time of war. They have declared war upon us.

 

[Rolyo85]

Your definitions of war and mine are vastly different. And yours give excuse to ANY action for ANY reason. Which I disagree with, so I'm happy the law is on my side. Because what this boils down to is "I want people to have fewer rights when I'm angry at them". The law is there for a reason, it is impartial for a reason and it treats everyone equally for a reason.

 

[Benvolio]

Any proof for that claim?

I think many on this board wii vouch for my assurance that I am not a liberal. I see no way to prove that I did not realize that 9/11 was a mere indiscretion, except that only liberals could possibly think that it was an indiscretion.

 

[Rolyo85]

I think many on this board wii vouch for my assurance that I am not a liberal. I see no way to prove that I did not realize that 9/11 was a mere indiscretion, except that only liberals could possibly think that it was an indiscretion.

This is direct trolling. I hope it gets removed.

 

[chance1]

Ok, I am really weirded out by Chance' and Benvolio's responses here.

People say "all people's civil rights should be respected, we should not punish someone without due process just because we're angry, that's what uncivilized societies do", and the response is "you're defending the terrorist" and random inane attempt at sarcasm regarding the treating of terrorism in speech.

I mean, huh?

don't group things that you don't understand ok?

bottom line is KSM is a piece of garbage and it has been established - he masterminded 911 which killed thousands of innocents that day and more following to this day

and beheaded a journalist on camera

give him ALL the respect and decency you can manage by all means

and provide NONE to the victims

and give shit to JQ for feeling inadequate as a gay man

frankly I'm weirded by that