So, the jury decided he can be put to death.
Let’s all take a moment and cheer for revenge, and the justification of killing someone out of hatred and spite. We must kill all our enemies so that our view of the world prevails.
There, now you’re the same as Al-Qaeda. Feel good?
You must be logged in to post a comment.
S | M | T | W | T | F | S |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1 | ||||||
2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 |
9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 |
16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 |
23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 |
30 |
38 queries. 0.061 seconds
March 15th, 2007 at 12:15 pm
Kevin,
The basis for the death Penatly is not revenge. the original basis is back to our fore fathers and the judao christian back ground of our fore fathers. wihch has its roots in the law of moses which basicaly states taht any crime that is un-repairable rape murder ect.. they send them back to god to let him deal with them because the only way to make up for killing innocent people is to loose your life. To kill this man in a very humane way does not make us Al-Qaeda. It does not make us vengful. it stops a mad man from ever being able to get out and hurt innocent people again. and to eternaly deal with the crimes which he has commited.
March 18th, 2007 at 8:43 am
The fact of this matter is that the jury decided that Moussaoui could be possibly put to death even tho he had not directly or indirectly killed anyone. But simply for the action of “failing to stop a murder”.
IE. If you saw a man with a knife stabbing a young woman and did nothing to stop it you would be similarly guilty, and could possibly get the death penalty for failing to stop that murder. Or if a friend said “I’m going to kill her”, and the woman ended up dead without you reporting what you heard to police you would similarly be guilty of not reporting what you knew to stop that murder.
It’s quite obvious this choice was based on desire for revenge, not logic.
“An eye for an eye leaves the whole world blind” – Mahatma Gandhi