BS: USA, hypocrisy and human rights

Subject: RE: BS: USA, hypocrisy and human rights
From: Bill D
Date: 17 Dec 06 - 01:38 PM

Fionn, the events referred to were indeed regretable, but the inference that this implies 'shame' or guilt for the USA as a whole makes no sense.
    You may wish to condemn the death penalty in general, but in this case it is just that some individuals were careless, or there was a physical problem.

*IF* you allow executions, there will inevitably be an occasional problem carrying one out, no matter what method is used. This has NOTHING to do with "preaching human rights to other nations."

Human rights abuses have very little to do with punishment of offenders who themselves have violated human rights (especially by murder).

Whatever your feelings about capital punishment, it would be better to direct your complaints at those directly responsible for the situation than to generalize about a country of 300,000,000 people.

...so tell us how YOUR country manages to be faultless...

Subject: RE: BS: USA, hypocrisy and human rights
From: dianavan
Date: 17 Dec 06 - 01:36 PM

Yes, Barry, that says it all.

"Yes, we live in a great country but it's great mostly for those that are lucky enough, healthy enough, smart enough or white enough that they can afford to live far above the poverty level."

Subject: RE: BS: USA, hypocrisy and human rights
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 17 Dec 06 - 12:14 PM

There's no death penalty in Ireland anyway, that goes with being in the European Union. But a few years back, there was a referendum that put a clause in the Irish Constitution outlawing the death penalty, to guarantee it can't ever be sneaked-in some way, through a change in the EU, or a court decision, or whatever.

Subject: RE: BS: USA, hypocrisy and human rights
From: Ebbie
Date: 17 Dec 06 - 12:04 PM

Kevin, your penultimate sentence got a little garbled but it sounds interesting. Please repeat it.

Subject: RE: BS: USA, hypocrisy and human rights
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 17 Dec 06 - 11:44 AM

I think the point of "this so-called 'civilised' nation" was that, aside from the USA, the death penalty tends to only happen in places like China and Saudi Arabia and Iran.

In some way the USA has a tendency to hold on to old ways, for all the talk about modernity. There are a lot of good aspects to that in civic life - but the death penalty is a less happy example (as was slavery in its day).

But the up side is, when the USA does get rid of it, it will be because ordinary people will have decided against it, unlike in the UK, where the polls still tend to come up with a majority for the death penalty - quite how our politicians had the guts to abolish it I've never understood.

One country where they had a referendum which outlawed the a rejection the death penalty as against the constitution was in Ireland a few years ago. Catholics there don't seem to have the same hang-ups on that as Joe's come up against.

Subject: RE: BS: USA, hypocrisy and human rights
From: GUEST
Date: 17 Dec 06 - 10:15 AM

As they say, pot...kettle...black...

...glass houses...stones...

Subject: RE: BS: USA, hypocrisy and human rights
From: kendall
Date: 17 Dec 06 - 09:25 AM

I'm also opposed to the death penalty, and I'm also opposed to name calling on the forum.

Subject: RE: BS: USA, hypocrisy and human rights
From: Joe Offer
Date: 17 Dec 06 - 02:45 AM

Well, they say the polls say that a vast majority of Americans believe in the death penalty. They also say that a political candidate commits political suicide if he or she opposes the death penalty, so some candidates seem to mumble when the issue is discussed.

I don't know why our American society is so convinced that capital punishment is necessary.It certainly doesn't look execution sentences are handed out in any sort of equitable manner. This American obsession with the death penalty is a real embarrassment to me as an American. I'm glad to see that executions have been stopped (temporarily) in Florida and California this week.

I'm a member of a Catholic parish in a politically conservative area. The Catholic Church is officially opposed to the death penalty, and I'm proud of that - it's interesting to see the little dance my conservative fellow Catholics do when the death penalty is discussed. They're ready to burn other Catholics at the stake for being unenthusiastic about opposing gay marriage or free choice on abortion - but they get really quiet and a bit nervous when they're told their church opposes the death penalty.

-Joe-

Subject: RE: BS: USA, hypocrisy and human rights
From: catspaw49
Date: 17 Dec 06 - 02:14 AM

I was reading down the thread and was all set to post but after reading Barry's post I think I'll just go along with most of what he's said. The details of diffference he and I might have aren't worth the discussion.   The last sentence is worth the price of admission.

Spaw

Subject: RE: BS: USA, hypocrisy and human rights
From: Barry Finn
Date: 17 Dec 06 - 01:51 AM

Well I'm another whose against the death penalty & consider it to be murder. Two wrongs can't make it right to take a life. Aside from seeing it as murder I see it as vengence, society's way of relieving it's self of it's duties to try to rehabilate & society's form of pay back with punishment. Some say it saves money, that shouldn't be a factor though, thogh it costs far more & not just in dollars & sense either. Worst than all though is that innocents are murdered. Excution is final, there is no saying "sorry, wrong guy, let revive them". All the others arguements I see as flawed but I can understand one's acceptance of it but not the arguement that an innocent dies as a result of this & usuall it's the poor, a minority, the undereducated or one that's mentally challanged that dies.

Now the system it's self is set up to be cruel in the first place. The same folks mentioned above, when they walk into a court room for justice they don't get the equal treatment that the upper crust get. They get public defender that the court refuses to pay a fair wage to so there starts the road to unequal justice, the under paid & overbooked laywer, whose already feels like he's been handed a bad deal & in turn offers the defendant a worst deal. Plead guilty because I'm not gonna invest any more time than I need to to get rid of you. If you want justice money is the motivator. The defendant has been sitting in the holding tank & will get to sit in the next & bigger joint while waiting to find out about bail & then will really get to sit foralong time when they can't meet that. So by the time the trial should be rolling around the poor bastard takes any deal they can when they're looking at the gamble of do the 5 years with time spent & good behavior & a payroll (pun) you'll be out in 16 months orthers wise the DA's gonna ask for 10 & I'm not fighting for you!

Ok, that's a cruel justice system.
As for the start of this thread, I have to agree. We got some balls cursing other countries about the human rights abuses when we have so many of our own. We do live in a glass house & it's our policy to throw more stones around than just the first ones.   

I'm also of the mind that if we had less abuse of human rights at home we wouldn't have Guantanamos & Abu Ghraibs. We would have had the morals to not allow them to exist. At war, any war we can find that we complain that the enemy we fight, we fight because they mistreat & are cruel when we turn out to be just as cruel & abusive as what we intended to cure.

Then we have the national health, that's all that needs saying.

Yes, we live in a great country but it's great mostly for those that are lucky enough, healthy enough, smart enough or white enough that they can afford to live far above the poverty level.

Barry

Subject: RE: BS: USA, hypocrisy and human rights
From: dianavan
Date: 16 Dec 06 - 11:16 PM

Big Mick - Please don't be so vague.

I don't have an agenda but I'd like to know what you think my agenda might be.

As far as being ignorant... well, hmmm...

I'm not an authority on much of anything so maybe you can be just a little more specific about that comment. Do you think I am generally ignorant or ignorant about a specific topic?

Just for the record, I think you're a bully.

Subject: RE: BS: USA, hypocrisy and human rights
From: GUEST,I just LOVE the USA
Date: 16 Dec 06 - 10:24 PM

He is a jackass, but our crusading, humorless, thin-skinned Mick he is, lads. A right good warrior bard for god, country and Mudcat. Ready to defend the realm at the drop of a...never mind.

He is obviously gunning for somebody today, considering how quickly that guest bashing thread got deleted.

Subject: RE: BS: USA, hypocrisy and human rights
From: Big Mick
Date: 16 Dec 06 - 08:21 PM

No, actually I am just using the same logic that Teribus and DtG use in the NI threads. There is a core of posters out there, a lot of them British, that seem to think any shot at the USA is OK, but when you apply the same standard to attacks on the UK, you are being a Plastic Paddy or some such nonsense as that.

As to the relevance of the post, please read the opening sentence:

Once again it just beggars believe that this so-called "civilised" nation dares to preach human rights to other nations.

When Den started a thread based on historical fact, and current UK news, he was accused of having a political agenda, and the thread got hijacked off the stated premise. I accept that Den had an agenda in starting it that co-existed with the stated one. That being the case, I would think you would all support me as I hold Peter to the same standard. Given the language used, he was doing the very same thing.

And dianavan, get your own reality check. Your ignorance and your agenda are well known.

Just my two cents worth. Thanks for stepping into the web.

Mick

Subject: RE: BS: USA, hypocrisy and human rights
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 16 Dec 06 - 03:47 PM

Any ill feeling in the UK connected with the American Revolution has dispersed rather a long time ago, Big Mick. Not that there ever was much, from what I've read.

The distaste people feel about this kind of thing isn't caused by anti-American feelings.

Subject: RE: BS: USA, hypocrisy and human rights
From: dianavan
Date: 16 Dec 06 - 03:33 PM

Big Mick is obviously looking for a fight.

Everyone has the right to criticize. He uses history to justify a personal attack and as an attempt to silence those with whom he disagrees. He can disagree with the actions of the U.S. but nobody else has the right to comment.   

Time for a reality check.

Subject: RE: BS: USA, hypocrisy and human rights
From: Paul from Hull
Date: 16 Dec 06 - 03:22 PM

Big Mick, with respect, I have to take issue with your post.

Like you (& it seems, like Peter) I am firmly opposed to the Death Penalty.

I cant offer anything as a UK 'comparison' to the situation(s) Peter posted, but to answer him with the situations you did is not comparing 'like with like'.

Its more comparable with Guantanamo & Abu Ghraib.

None of these, of course, excuse the other, they're all wrong.

Not sure why you brought up the Revolution & 1812 at all, but no matter.

A 'dig' at the way the USA does things isnt necessaily meant as insult to you, regardless of how you, or any other American takes it, nor should a 'dig' at the British Govt. (of whatever era, though if of a past era, the 'dig' means less than nothing...it can hardly change anything) offend us.

Likewise, for ANY of us to criticise Bush/Bliar shouldnt really offend any other of us.

Subject: RE: BS: USA, hypocrisy and human rights
From: Peace
Date: 16 Dec 06 - 02:34 PM

"I learned that murderers die for their crimes
Even if we make a mistake sometimes
And that's what I learned in school today
That's what I learned in school"

Tom had it right decades ago.

Subject: RE: BS: USA, hypocrisy and human rights
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 16 Dec 06 - 02:18 PM

The irredeemable problem with the death penalty is that it is neither reversible nor compensable if subsequently found to have been erroneous.

The race and wealth (which I learned on another thread equates to class in the USA, funny how Michael Jackson is therefore of variable class depending on his current money problems!) skewness of the death penalty seems suspicious. It indicates that justice is neither being done nor seen to be done.

Yet there are no doubt some who deserve to die, if we can only be certain who they are.

I am doubtful whether there can ever be a justification for torturing to death, which seems to be the US system, despite the proven instantaneous (or nearly so) effectiveness of hanging (done properly) and the guillotine.

Subject: RE: BS: USA, hypocrisy and human rights
From: Peter K (Fionn)
Date: 16 Dec 06 - 01:47 PM

It is possible to execute by hanging in such a manner that death is as near as dammit instant, as regrettably was demonstrated in the UK many times over many years.

Also demonstrated was the fact that the death penalty did not help one bit in creating safer, more secure communities. It does however serve as a simple, populist alternative to tackling issues like inequality, poverty and discrimination. Or is it just coincidence that if you want to get yourself esecuted in the US, you get yourself an enormous advantage if you can be born poor and black?

But the bottom line for me is that killing people is wrong. So is locking them up with no possibility of parole/release.

Subject: RE: BS: USA, hypocrisy and human rights
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 16 Dec 06 - 01:31 PM

That was 27 years, almost all of it on death row. Is this a world record?

Subject: RE: BS: USA, hypocrisy and human rights
From: dianavan
Date: 16 Dec 06 - 01:15 PM

Regardless of prison conditions, being segregated from your family and friends and indeed, society as a whole, is adequate punishment. It is far worse than death. The death penalty doesn't solve anything and it is alot easier than living with your conscience.

The death penalty makes no sense at all and to administer a lethal injection is just as perverse as the electric chair or the gas chamber.

A possible death penalty is not going to stop anyone from murdering someone anymore than life imprisonment without parole would.

Subject: RE: BS: USA, hypocrisy and human rights
From: GUEST
Date: 16 Dec 06 - 11:55 AM

No Sinsull, I think you've got it wrong there. I think the jails in this country are pretty damn dismal for the inmates.

Inmates running the asylum would describe the education system.

Subject: RE: BS: USA, hypocrisy and human rights
From: SINSULL
Date: 16 Dec 06 - 11:39 AM

For the record, I am against capital punishment.

The 20 year delay happens in almost all capital cases in the US because the law mandates appeals. In rare cases the convicted murderer forgoes that right and then others step in and claim he is not competent to make the decision.

It is not a dish served cold but an attempt to give the convict every chance to save himself.

There is no humane way to kill a person. Murder is cruel and unusual punishment. Living every day fighting that you may not die next week is a cruel punishment.

My personal opinion is that the sentence should be life without any chance of parole and without any luxuries. The jails in this country are a joke - the inmates run the asylum.

Subject: RE: BS: USA, hypocrisy and human rights
From: Big Mick
Date: 16 Dec 06 - 11:29 AM

Yeah, Fionn, maybe a better way would be to just have shoot to kill rooms, or better yet, just hook up with a paramilitary organization, feed them intel, conveniently disappear when they perform the murder.....something like that. That is what civilized nations do. Get surrogates to carry out their murders.

The point isn't that these executions were right. I am opposed to the death penalty.

Still pissed that you lost the American Revolutionary War and the War of 1812?

With the actions of the British Empire in colonial nations, you have very little room to criticize.

Subject: BS: USA, hypocrisy and human rights
From: Peter K (Fionn)
Date: 16 Dec 06 - 11:22 AM

Once again it just beggars believe that this so-called "civilised" nation dares to preach human rights to other nations.

Botched execution

Which might have been bad enough on its own. But surely lessons might have been learnt from this shameful episode a few months earlier:

Struggle to execute a murderer

Incidentally in the second case cited, execution was in respect of crimes committed more than 20 years ago. Ok, revenge may be a dish best served cold, but is this not taking such indulgence just a little bit too far?