|
Post by mouse on Oct 10, 2010 12:51:04 GMT -5
Trying to throw buckets of whitewash over them and making out that they are NOT murderers is, frankly, pretty bizarre at best and downright hypocritical at worst. no white wash intended you have to KILL to comit murder it follows if you havent killed you cannot be a murder of course you can be complicit in the murders of individuals or millions...that is not in question....what is in question is the acuracy of teminology
|
|
|
Post by fretslider on Oct 10, 2010 14:51:32 GMT -5
Trying to throw buckets of whitewash over them and making out that they are NOT murderers is, frankly, pretty bizarre at best and downright hypocritical at worst. no white wash intended you have to KILL to comit murder it follows if you havent killed you cannot be a murder of course you can be complicit in the murders of individuals or millions...that is not in question....what is in question is the acuracy of teminology Not a popular view, but those - with the exception of operation Paper Clip and some escapees - that were caught were punished. And death sentences passed down. For their responsibility in having others do the killing.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 10, 2010 15:48:03 GMT -5
Trying to throw buckets of whitewash over them and making out that they are NOT murderers is, frankly, pretty bizarre at best and downright hypocritical at worst. no white wash intended you have to KILL to comit murder it follows if you havent killed you cannot be a murder of course you can be complicit in the murders of individuals or millions...that is not in question....what is in question is the acuracy of teminology It is a FACT that in the eyes of the law (and IMHO, the law for once is RIGHT to take this view) a person who ORDERS a murder IS guilty of murder. Teresa Lewis was found guilty of murder and sentenced to death even though she hired hit men to kill her husband. Of course I don't support her execution but I certainly regard her as guilty of murder. So do the MAJORITY of people. Why WILL you keep trying to excuse murderers? It amazes me that you are willing to demonise millions of people who have NOT committed or encouraged murder and yet REFUSE to condemn people who HAVE.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 10, 2010 17:36:45 GMT -5
You don't have to be a pacifist to be against the death penalty. No, you have to be a pacifist to say the state has n o right to kill people. you have excellent company with China, Saudi Arabia, Iran etc etc I have no beef with the Chinese. They know what to do with murderers.
|
|
|
Post by fretslider on Oct 11, 2010 5:18:13 GMT -5
You don't have to be a pacifist to be against the death penalty. No, you have to be a pacifist to say the state has n o right to kill people. you have excellent company with China, Saudi Arabia, Iran etc etc I have no beef with the Chinese. They know what to do with murderers. Absolute rubbish, Joseph. War is a very different proposition to peacetime. Perhaps not in your corner of the US, but it is here in Europe Why not take a tip from the Chinese and charge the family for the cost of the bullet, injection, gas, electricity etc.
|
|
|
Post by mouse on Oct 11, 2010 7:33:09 GMT -5
i dont think i have anywhere EXCUSED murder nor would i....and did the word complicit pass you by ?? which of course is my stance on the other lot you nearly mention ;D if you are party to murder you are complicit..if you encourage..egg on...go with the manifesto...are knowingly an acomplice....then you are complicit..and should pay the price.... its the word ""murderer"" which i object to being attached to people who have not killed ..actually imo to be complicit is just as bad and some times worse
|
|
|
Post by mouse on Oct 11, 2010 7:33:45 GMT -5
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 11, 2010 10:22:52 GMT -5
It's sophistry to pretend that the person who ORDERS a murder is NOT guilty of murder.
For once the law has got it RIGHT when it takes the same view as myself on THAT subject!
|
|
|
Post by mouse on Oct 11, 2010 13:04:11 GMT -5
For once the law has got it RIGHT when it takes the same view as myself on THAT subject! ;D ;D
|
|
Erasmus
Moderatorz
Deep Thought Mod
"We do not take prisoners - we liberate them" - http://www.aeonbytegnosticradio.com
Posts: 2,489
|
Post by Erasmus on Oct 11, 2010 16:35:14 GMT -5
How many people did Stalin and Hitler kill? As far as I'm aware, none. That doesn't make them any less murderers than Saddam Hussein who we know once shot a rival in a conference.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 11, 2010 19:40:20 GMT -5
War is a very different proposition to peacetime. But you are declaring a moral absolute, viz the state never has the moral authority to kill. That is obviously not true. Whether or not the state exercises its moral authority to kill people is not the point. The moral authority is always there. Why not take a tip from the Chinese and charge the family for the cost of the bullet, injection, gas, electricity etc. I have a better idea. Pay the family members of the condemned to compel the murderers to drop their appeals.
|
|
|
Post by fretslider on Oct 12, 2010 2:46:51 GMT -5
War is a very different proposition to peacetime. But you are declaring a moral absolute, viz the state never has the moral authority to kill. That is obviously not true. Whether or not the state exercises its moral authority to kill people is not the point. The moral authority is always there. Why not take a tip from the Chinese and charge the family for the cost of the bullet, injection, gas, electricity etc. I have a better idea. Pay the family members of the condemned to compel the murderers to drop their appeals. No, I'm making a definite distinction. War has its own rules, well it did before Dubya, which are very different from peacetime. Moral authority? The people provide that and here there is no moral authority for state sponsored killing as a punishment for crimes committed under our jurisdiction. Are you in a permanent state of war, Joseph?
|
|
|
Post by mouse on Oct 12, 2010 3:14:33 GMT -5
deed it does..very different rules...trouble is our leaders think they can make up the rules and play a different game where as the ""enemies"" are far more realistic......and actually play war as it really is and our leaders because they are nothing more than idiot numpties surrounded by even more idiot numpties will continue to lose...and lose...and lose.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 12, 2010 9:36:27 GMT -5
No, I'm making a definite distinction. War has its own rules, well it did before Dubya, which are very different from peacetime. Nonsense. There are no rules in war. Zip. Zero. Anything goes, and you know it. Moral authority? The people provide that and here there is no moral authority for state sponsored killing as a punishment for crimes committed under our jurisdiction. The people vest that moral authority in the state, in peacetime and during times of war. You can't turn moral authority on and off like a light bulb -- a different set of rules during wartime and another during "peacetime." The moral authority is always there -- unless, as a pacifist, you believe the state has no moral authority to take human life under any circumstances. Since you're not a pacifist, you recognize circumstances during which the state may exercise its moral authority to kill. All you're saying is that the death penalty is icky and the state ought not to exercise its moral authority to do it. Are you in a permanent state of war, Joseph? Of course. When has it ever been different? If one is prepared for war, it doesn't matter whether or not bullets are flying.
|
|
|
Post by fretslider on Oct 12, 2010 10:15:12 GMT -5
No, I'm making a definite distinction. War has its own rules, well it did before Dubya, which are very different from peacetime. Nonsense. There are no rules in war. Zip. Zero. Anything goes, and you know it. The people vest that moral authority in the state, in peacetime and during times of war. You can't turn moral authority on and off like a light bulb -- a different set of rules during wartime and another during "peacetime." The moral authority is always there -- unless, as a pacifist, you believe the state has no moral authority to take human life under any circumstances. Since you're not a pacifist, you recognize circumstances during which the state may exercise its moral authority to kill. All you're saying is that the death penalty is icky and the state ought not to exercise its moral authority to do it. Are you in a permanent state of war, Joseph? Of course. When has it ever been different? If one is prepared for war, it doesn't matter whether or not bullets are flying. You live in a strange land and you have strange ideas, thank neptune for the Atlantic. The people have not vested that interest here outside of war. Go for your gun.
|
|