Andy9o8 2
Recommended Posts
SkyChimp 0
Quote[reply
The missile didn't launch itself at the airliner. Someone gave the order.
someone gave the order to launch a missle against an incoming fighter. That identification was wrong and a tragic mistake, but the order wasn't given to launch against a passenger plane (which is what you implied).
If you don't slow down the velocity of Prof. Kallend's spin, he will begin to look like the tasmanian devil.
Does anyone else find it funny that we made a SPORT out of an EMERGENCY PROCEDURE?!?!
SkyChimp 0
I'm just waiting for all the pro Lockerbie peeps to start chanting ALLAH, AKBAR.... ALLAH AKBAR!
Does anyone else find it funny that we made a SPORT out of an EMERGENCY PROCEDURE?!?!
Does anyone else find it funny that we made a SPORT out of an EMERGENCY PROCEDURE?!?!
Ripple 0
QuoteQuoteOK. Two deaths would not make me feel better than one, but that's just me. Everyone's different I suppose.
I man up and take care of my own-everyone's different I suppose
I'm not sure how keeping your loved one's safe by murdering the person who's already killed them, works.
More generally, you could all campaign to boycott Scotland as a tourist attraction for Americans.
Next Mood Swing: 6 minutes
Skyrad 0
I agree that this was the right thing to do. Especially as there are some major question marks over his guilt. Keeping him in prison would have only been vengeance not justice. It would also have cost the British tax payer a fortune as he gets progressively more ill. Why should the British tax payer have to foot the bill for his medical care and confinement, once he goes into hospital he would take a bed that a British person could have and would required a prison officer to be handcuffed to him 24 hours a day until he died, this would typically keep six prison officers away from their prisons and due to the nature of the crime for which he was found guilty he would almost certainly also require 24 hour armed police protection/guard again costing a fortune and diverting police resources.
For all of the above reasons sending him back was not only the humane but the most cost effective thing to do.
Sometimes you have to look at the bigger picture. Apart from the cost of care that the British tax payer would have to have paid which would have been very expensive, we are trying to bring Libya back into the fold. There has to be some payback for them as a reward for behaving themselves and getting back onside. As mentioned elsewhere in this thread, the bombing was a act carried out by the Libyan government. There is a lot of doubt that this guy was even the operator who committed the act.
If we followed your thinking then all the terrorists in Northern Ireland would still be in prison and the 'troubles' would still be in full swing. Some families quite understandably want vengeance but don't get confused between that and justice. A democracy works on the greater good, the families are in the minority, I empathize with them but the greater good in this instance must prevail.
For all of the above reasons sending him back was not only the humane but the most cost effective thing to do.
Sometimes you have to look at the bigger picture. Apart from the cost of care that the British tax payer would have to have paid which would have been very expensive, we are trying to bring Libya back into the fold. There has to be some payback for them as a reward for behaving themselves and getting back onside. As mentioned elsewhere in this thread, the bombing was a act carried out by the Libyan government. There is a lot of doubt that this guy was even the operator who committed the act.
If we followed your thinking then all the terrorists in Northern Ireland would still be in prison and the 'troubles' would still be in full swing. Some families quite understandably want vengeance but don't get confused between that and justice. A democracy works on the greater good, the families are in the minority, I empathize with them but the greater good in this instance must prevail.
When an author is too meticulous about his style, you may presume that his mind is frivolous and his content flimsy.
Lucius Annaeus Seneca
Lucius Annaeus Seneca
RonD1120 62
QuoteI agree that this was the right thing to do. Especially as there are some major question marks over his guilt. Keeping him in prison would have only been vengeance not justice. It would also have cost the British tax payer a fortune as he gets progressively more ill. Why should the British tax payer have to foot the bill for his medical care and confinement, once he goes into hospital he would take a bed that a British person could have and would required a prison officer to be handcuffed to him 24 hours a day until he died, this would typically keep six prison officers away from their prisons and due to the nature of the crime for which he was found guilty he would almost certainly also require 24 hour armed police protection/guard again costing a fortune and diverting police resources.
For all of the above reasons sending him back was not only the humane but the most cost effective thing to do.
Sometimes you have to look at the bigger picture. Apart from the cost of care that the British tax payer would have to have paid which would have been very expensive, we are trying to bring Libya back into the fold. There has to be some payback for them as a reward for behaving themselves and getting back onside. As mentioned elsewhere in this thread, the bombing was a act carried out by the Libyan government. There is a lot of doubt that this guy was even the operator who committed the act.
If we followed your thinking then all the terrorists in Northern Ireland would still be in prison and the 'troubles' would still be in full swing. Some families quite understandably want vengeance but don't get confused between that and justice. A democracy works on the greater good, the families are in the minority, I empathize with them but the greater good in this instance must prevail.
Here's the greater good:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/8213352.stm
Quote"It's very important that Libya knows that how the Libyan government handles itself in the next few days will be very significant in the way the world views Libya's re-entry into the civilised community of nations," Mr Miliband said.
Our correspondent says that the Libyan government is very conscious of this and has avoided any statements of triumphalism.
But some major British oil and gas companies, bidding for highly competitive contracts with the country could benefit from improved relations between Libya and the UK following Megrahi's release, he suggests.
Look for the shiny things of God revealed by the Holy Spirit. They only last for an instant but it is a Holy Instant. Let your soul absorb them.
SkyChimp 0
""I agree that this was the right thing to do. Especially as there are some major question marks over his guilt.""
The evidence presented was undeniable during the 2002 appeal hearing. How can you sa that?
""Keeping him in prison would have only been vengeance not justice.""
Justice for sure but I like your next remark.....
""It would also have cost the British tax payer a fortune as he gets progressively more ill. Why should the British tax payer have to foot the bill for his medical care and confinement, once he goes into hospital he would take a bed that a British person could have and would required a prison officer to be handcuffed to him 24 hours a day until he died, this would typically keep six prison officers away from their prisons and due to the nature of the crime for which he was found guilty he would almost certainly also require 24 hour armed police protection/guard again costing a fortune and diverting police resources.""
This is where the death penalty for such crimes against society are cost effective.
Does anyone else find it funny that we made a SPORT out of an EMERGENCY PROCEDURE?!?!
The evidence presented was undeniable during the 2002 appeal hearing. How can you sa that?
""Keeping him in prison would have only been vengeance not justice.""
Justice for sure but I like your next remark.....
""It would also have cost the British tax payer a fortune as he gets progressively more ill. Why should the British tax payer have to foot the bill for his medical care and confinement, once he goes into hospital he would take a bed that a British person could have and would required a prison officer to be handcuffed to him 24 hours a day until he died, this would typically keep six prison officers away from their prisons and due to the nature of the crime for which he was found guilty he would almost certainly also require 24 hour armed police protection/guard again costing a fortune and diverting police resources.""
This is where the death penalty for such crimes against society are cost effective.
Does anyone else find it funny that we made a SPORT out of an EMERGENCY PROCEDURE?!?!
cost effective but morally bankrupt.
(.)Y(.)
Chivalry is not dead; it only sleeps for want of work to do. - Jerome K Jerome
(.)Y(.)
Chivalry is not dead; it only sleeps for want of work to do. - Jerome K Jerome
except if he's innocent.
stay away from moving propellers - they bite
blue skies from thai sky adventures
good solid response-provoking keyboarding
blue skies from thai sky adventures
good solid response-provoking keyboarding
Skyrad 0
I hope they do benifit from the relaease. My country needs oil and gas revenue to help our economy more than it needs vengence against a man who has been convicted on the word of Ghadafi.
When an author is too meticulous about his style, you may presume that his mind is frivolous and his content flimsy.
Lucius Annaeus Seneca
Lucius Annaeus Seneca
Andy9o8 2
QuoteI hope they do benifit from the relaease. My country needs oil and gas revenue to help our economy more than it needs vengence against a man who has been convicted on the word of Ghadafi.
There's a word for selling justice for money: corruption. Want to keep putting it in financial terms? OK. A society where justice is for sale is morally bankrupt.
Skyrad 0
Quote""I agree that this was the right thing to do. Especially as there are some major question marks over his guilt.""
The evidence presented was undeniable during the 2002 appeal hearing. How can you sa that?Quote
http://www.independent.co.uk/...-prison-1206086.html
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/...s/article5058606.ece
http://news.bbc.co.uk/...scotland/7573244.stm
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/...d/article5042880.ece
http://www.sundayherald.com/...ckery_of_justice.php
As for capital punishment being cheaper, that would only be true if people didn't spend decades on death row in appeals.When an author is too meticulous about his style, you may presume that his mind is frivolous and his content flimsy.
Lucius Annaeus Seneca
kallend 2,106
Quote[reply
The missile didn't launch itself at the airliner. Someone gave the order.
someone gave the order to launch a missle against an incoming fighter. That identification was wrong and a tragic mistake, but the order wasn't given to launch against a passenger plane (which is what you implied).
I do not for one instant believe that the US Navy's radars can't tell the difference between a fighter on an attack run and an airliner climbing to altitude.
...
The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.
The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.
What I would like to know is why he is even getting health care when honest Brits are standing in line waiting for care? Makes me wonder about the moral compass of the brit government.
Andy9o8 2
QuoteWhat I would like to know is why he is even getting health care when honest Brits are standing in line waiting for care? Makes me wonder about the moral compass of the brit government.
Compare the nations that do give prison inmates reasonable health care, with those that do not. There's your answer.
QuoteQuoteWhat I would like to know is why he is even getting health care when honest Brits are standing in line waiting for care? Makes me wonder about the moral compass of the brit government.
Compare the nations that do give prison inmates reasonable health care, with those that do not. There's your answer.
QuoteBut why would a terminally ill convicted mass killer get any medical treatment before a honest hard working citizen?
I dispute your assertion that, at the time the final fire order was given, the commander of the Vincennes believed the plane was nothing other than a civilian airliner, as opposed to a military threat and legitimate target. I also dispute your other assertion that this now-released convicted bomber is probably not guilty.
Make your case with hard evidence, if you can.
Share this post
Link to post
Share on other sites