If you need urgent support, call 999 or go to your nearest A&E. To contact our Crisis Messenger (open 24/7) text THEMIX to 85258.
Options
An evil monster might finally face justice
BillieTheBot
Posts: 8,721 Bot
Pinochet loses immunity
No doubt the Witch will be upset by this... :rolleyes:
But great news anyway. May this be the start of a trend...
No doubt the Witch will be upset by this... :rolleyes:
But great news anyway. May this be the start of a trend...
Beep boop. I'm a bot.
0
Comments
I hope you are not comparing Pinochet with Hamza...
For what?
As far as I know he never committed any crime.
You are dying to watch a new show of Nurnberg kangaroo court style?
Unless you're suggesting that since he did not pull the trigger or connected the electrodes to victims' genitals himself, he's innocent... :rolleyes:
He never put electrodes to anybody’s balls so he is not guilty. As well as Hitler for example.
Real criminals weren’t punish after WWII, so they won’t be punished in Iraq or Chile or Rwanda or anywhere. Some tiny part of “big boys” in brass helmets are punished because they signed some stupid orders. ( this means they violated the freedom of speech… or maybe I confuse something, for freedom of speech, yes? no?) The public swallows this so what the hell do you want to do with Pinochet? To have his balls barbecued by Koffi Anand? by President Bush? by President Putin? by The First Citizen Antoine De Robesblair? who supposedly is the aptest in redistributing conscience over the world
You're fucking cracked.
Look here
If I sign ( just for fun) a piece of toilet paper ordering you to kill Lukesh and you mindlessly do this ( because I name myself your President or PM or a Pharaoh or a General Secretary or a Fuhrer or a Chairman of an European Commission or other kind of great and wise supercreature having the right to command you) who is guilty in the murder?
What an utter waste of bandwidth this is...
This is so insane its not worth wasting my brain on.
I'll just wait for you to grow up instead.
The local anger-filled opinion-fascist squad (blagsta + aladdin) seemed to have missed the point. Always quick to bring the discussion to Ad hominem insults, they missed the point you are trying to raise.
This is a valid ethical question, who is morally culpable; the top brass who give the orders in some far removed political establishment? Or the bods on the ground who carry out the orders?
Difficult to give a general rule, but obviously the Adolfs, Husseins and Slobodans of the world are not without blame. However if you allow your own personal moral objections to be overcome by orders from above I think you must either be brainwashed, weak willed or evil. Perhaps in some cases a combination of the three.
Lots of fun to be had...
lol, hi!
Don't start insulting me though,
i can finance mass heroin and people smuggling ...and only those who do my dirty work will be held responsible ...brill!
heres me thinking they the captain of the ship was always held ultimately responsible.
i'd love to see some of you brave fucks disobey orders from above ...refuse to carry a gun etc when your beloved dictator dictates that you should. you'd rather have your bollocks pulled out with pliers and rats tied to your body in little cages with someone with a little oxy ocetaline gun pointed at the rat so the rats only escape is to eat through your body ...fucking idiots.
I doubt GP is going to see the inside of a court-room, he can appeal against the ruling , he's also too old + infirm to face trial
(notable exception Peter Thatchell re Mugabe noted)
How can you be too old to go to court? When you hit a certain age you can't be tried? In my opinion, if you've commited the crime you have to pay the price, even if you're old, senile, can't pee for yourself etc.
no, someone can be deemed unfit for trial because of above
All the same though, don't you think they should pay the price. In some cases, for example a 90 yr old having a small car crash it's more trouble than it's worth, but with a mass murderer like pinochet it's a bit of a cop out? Even if he can't attend court I think he should be tried by proxy.
:eek:
He could be at home, and have his lawyer or whatever be there to hear his sentence. Obviously, when he's called to the stand he would be there himself :chin: or maybe video-conferencing. But I think it's wrong to escape justice because of ailment.
Also another point I want to raise is that labour generally condem the governments role with regard to personal social issues but are very influential with regard to the economy believing the government to have a strong role to play because individuals and businesses cannot be trusted and the opposite is true of the conservatives.
Why can Labour trust individuals to make the best decisions for themselves and regulate the economy the product of those individuals decisions and why can the tories trust the economy to make the best decisions in general yet regulate the people with regard to more personal social and moral issues??