Quote:
|
Originally Posted by BBKing
I take it you're opposed to human rights then? Why? You're a human, presumably.
Several things struck me about this case:
1) the 'terrorism' he was allegedly engaged in was extremely minor - he didn't manage to create anything dangerous, was evidently unsupported by al-Qaeda (he had to shoplift to keep himself going, and got nicked for it), plus everyone else brought to trial with him was acquitted or the case dropped.
2) Ricin isn't something you'd expect to cause major casualties - while extremely nasty, it's much less dangerous than a conventional bomb.
3) By far the most serious aspect of the case was the murder of the police officer - this, as a crime, is to my mind far more serious than the 'terrorism' and I'd like to see anyone argue to the contrary. So why was the bringing to justice of a particularly vicious cop killer forcibly kept quiet and the ricin case splashed over the papers?
4) Why did a senior Met anti-terrorism rozzer and the deputy Chief Medical Officer say that ricin had been found in the flat when none had - that's called 'lying', in my book.
5) Why did Colin Powell *in front of the UN* attempt to link the case to Iraq, when there's no evidence for it being anything other than a lone nut who was trained in Afghanistan by a group opposed to Saddam Hussein's regime on ideological grounds?
6) ID cards wouldn't have stopped him killing the policeman or obtaining ricin recipes and it's dishonest to suggest it would for political points scoring.
|
In answer (to the best of my knowledge):
1) "Allegedly? He was found with ingredients to make ricin AND cyanide. And he was found guilty, hence not "allegedly". And why minor? Had he not been caught, how can you say it was minor? Can ricin kill?
2) Does it matter how "nasty" the poison is?
3) The original murder trial was kept under wraps until the terrorism-based trial had concluded "for security reasons". No, I don't know what that means.
4) I understood that it had been found. At what stage of it's manufacturing process, again I do not know.
5) There are reports that it was Al-Qaeda supported. But what exactly does that have to do with it?
6) Who actually mentioned ID cards??!! Or is that just a diversion tactic?
For the record, I am opposed to the ridiculous "human rights" legislation currently in effect. I believe this individual forfeited any kind of "human rights" the moment he ceased to act like a human, and decided to try and remove anyone elses rights of any kind.
__________________
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Damien
I am not sure what *his countrys* position is on this. You seen to be of the view that all middle easten countrys beat there criminals to death. Anyway, it doesnt matter. We are not in that country, we're in this country where we value human rights and logical justice
|
He is Algerian, that is not in the Middle East.