Select Company Escorts
Toronto Escorts

Should terrorists and murderers be put in jail?

fuji

Banned
Jan 31, 2005
80,012
7
0
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
is.gd
This is a thread for Aardvark, he seems to think we don't spend enough time debating this point.

My view is that terrorists and murderers should be apprehended, given their day in court, and then on conviction left to rot in jail for the rest of their natural lives.

Does anybody disagree?

Not expecting anyone to, really no idea who would disagree, but somehow Aardy thinks this should be a hot topic.
 

fuji

Banned
Jan 31, 2005
80,012
7
0
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
is.gd
By the way, on the topic of this thread:

I am deeply troubled by the fact that the Conservatives have implemented a policy which fails to keep captured insurgents, terrorists, and murderers in jail in Afghanistan.

It has come out that Canadian soldiers have been repeatedly re-arresting the same enemy fighters, and that this is highly demoralizing to Canadian forces.

Apparently the Conservatives not only botched keeping detainees from being tortured, they also botched keeping them in jail.

Disgusting!

Once captured a Taliban fighter should remain a POW until the conflict is over, in my opinion, not let back out to shoot at Canadian soldiers again.
 

papasmerf

New member
Oct 22, 2002
26,533
0
0
42.55.65N 78.43.73W
Can I design and choose the location for the jail?
 

Scarey

Well-known member
When you say murderer..is it second of 1rst degree?.....1 rst degree with all the technlogy for confirmation I support the death penalty...2nd degreers tend to have unique circumstances and may be rehabilitated.
 

Asterix

Sr. Member
Aug 6, 2002
10,025
0
0
This is a thread for Aardvark, he seems to think we don't spend enough time debating this point.
Who started the thread?
 

papasmerf

New member
Oct 22, 2002
26,533
0
0
42.55.65N 78.43.73W
I can help...it is a brick wall, with about a dozen men with rifles, after they are convicted you line the bastards up and shoot them in the head!

Then none of my tax dollars will be going towards keeping a bunch of terrorists alive any longer than they should!

Face it...they are not capable of being rehabilitated!
my plan would not include very many guards.

No need for them where I am thinking to put the prison
 

fuji

Banned
Jan 31, 2005
80,012
7
0
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
is.gd
Who started the thread?
See here. Aardy accused me of giving too much airtime to Canadian war crimes and not enough to the topic of locking up terrorists.

So here we are. It may really be a hot topic though:

Why is the Conservative government allowing captured Taliban fighters to be set free so they can shoot at Canadians twice?
 

Asterix

Sr. Member
Aug 6, 2002
10,025
0
0
my plan would not include very many guards.

No need for them where I am thinking to put the prison
Oh c'mon pappy, your basement can't possibly be that big.
 

duang

Active member
Apr 17, 2007
1,121
0
36
By the way, on the topic of this thread:

I am deeply troubled by the fact that the Conservatives have implemented a policy which fails to keep captured insurgents, terrorists, and murderers in jail in Afghanistan.

It has come out that Canadian soldiers have been repeatedly re-arresting the same enemy fighters, and that this is highly demoralizing to Canadian forces.

Apparently the Conservatives not only botched keeping detainees from being tortured, they also botched keeping them in jail.
I thought your concern in the other threads was that the Conservatives were handing over the captured terrorists to the local authorities and they were practically slaughtering them!

Guess it's hard to keep track of 100 posts a day...

Maybe your issue is that whatever the Conservatives do is going to be evil in your eyes.

I hear the Liberals lost their main fundraiser recently and you seem to have lots of time on your hands [government employee already perhaps?].

D.
 

seth gecko

Well-known member
Nov 2, 2003
3,724
42
48
This is a thread for Aardvark, he seems to think we don't spend enough time debating this point.

My view is that terrorists and murderers should be apprehended, given their day in court, and then on conviction left to rot in jail for the rest of their natural lives.

Does anybody disagree?

Not expecting anyone to, really no idea who would disagree, but somehow Aardy thinks this should be a hot topic.
Okay, I'll disagree
They should be allowed to dance around the maypole wearing garlands in their hair while Zamfir serenades them....he is the KING of the pan-flute, and only the best for these boys!


This shouldn't be necessary, but best to be safe.......:rolleyes:
 
Last edited:

fuji

Banned
Jan 31, 2005
80,012
7
0
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
is.gd
I thought your concern in the other threads was that the Conservatives were handing over the captured terrorists to the local authorities and they were practically slaughtering them!
Yes. That is my concern in the other thread.

It looks like the system is both-ways broken:

What appears to be the case is that the Afghans receive a prisoner they first torture and beat them, and then they let them go, to return to the battle and try to kill the Canadians soldiers who originally captured them.

So not only is the system committing war crimes on the detainees, it is not even effectively keeping them locked up.

It is my view that a captured fighter should be well treated, but once captured, they should be out for the count. Canadian soldiers should never again have to worry about facing that individual on the battle field.

Seems straight forward to me, apparently it isn't.
 

oldjones

CanBarelyRe Member
Aug 18, 2001
24,495
11
38
Seems to me that treating them as criminals requires trials—assuming you're at least pretending to be civilized—and doing a sincere and adequate job of that is next to impossible for Nato or Canada. It's the Afghans' country, and their laws, standards and sense of justice. And it's the turning over to that regime that's raised the current and long-simmering brouhaha.

Our military concerns would be met by taking them out of combat and keeping them there. The facilities are customarily referred to as prisoner of war camps. A tested technology with established standards among Nato countries. But that would raise all sorts of tricky issues about who we're fighting against, on whose behalf and why, wouldn't it?
 

fuji

Banned
Jan 31, 2005
80,012
7
0
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
is.gd
In Afghanistan it is actually a lot clearer than in many other cases.

For those who forget history too quickly, a refresher:

The Taliban were the de facto government of Afghanistan. We invaded their country on the grounds that they were harbouring Al Qaeda after 9/11 and therefore complicit in the attacks on the WTC. It was a straight forward state versus state war justified by reference Article 51 of the UN Charter.

We subsequently drove them out of Kabul, declared "victory", installing the Karzai government at some point. Since then we have been saying Karzai is the "lawful" government of Afghanistan and that the Taliban are "terrorists" or "insurgents".

That is just our view though.

The Taliban have never surrendered, never signed any terms, never stopped fighting, and never recognized the Karzai government as legitimate. They continue to maintain that they are the legitimate government of Afghanistan with Omar as head of state.

Long story short:

They are pretty classic POW's of a pretty straight forward war between a group of allied states and the former Taliban state of Afghanistan. The only wrinkle is they don't wear uniforms, but that is a technicality really.
 

danmand

Well-known member
Nov 28, 2003
46,378
4,784
113
This is a thread for Aardvark, he seems to think we don't spend enough time debating this point.

My view is that terrorists and murderers should be apprehended, given their day in court, and then on conviction left to rot in jail for the rest of their natural lives.

Does anybody disagree?

Not expecting anyone to, really no idea who would disagree, but somehow Aardy thinks this should be a hot topic.
I just noticed the thread and will be happy to oblige you in disagreeing.

Although I am happy that you are not advocating the death penalty, I disagree
with all "automatic" punishment rules, like what the government is proposing now.

In our world (post 9/11) the definition of what is a terrorist has become very broad,
and even "murder" is a fairly wide concept.

I believe that the penal system should be based upon rehabilitation instead of on revenge.
Most "murderers" belong in mental institutions, many for life, but the ones who
can be rehabilitated, should be. Anybody that continues to be a threat to society should stay behind bars.
 

Gyaos

BOBA FETT
Aug 17, 2001
6,172
0
0
Heaven, definately Heaven
My view is that terrorists and murderers should be apprehended, given their day in court, and then on conviction left to rot in jail for the rest of their natural lives. Does anybody disagree?
Who pays for the rotting? Just pull the switch, right?
Are murderers, terrorists? Or are terrorists, enemy combatants? And back-and-forth.
I do know all rappers are terrorists. LOL

Just swinging in the center.

Gyaos Baltar.
 

WoodPeckr

Protuberant Member
May 29, 2002
47,033
5,995
113
North America
thewoodpecker.net
Careful now Gyaos, you don't want to come off sounding like, you know who....:D
 

blackrock13

Banned
Jun 6, 2009
40,087
1
0
No, it's simple.

Put them in SuperMax and watch them go nuts. They'll be at the bottom of the social ladder and it will be a living hell. But first, tell them there are no female virgins waiting for them where they're going, but they could be welcomed by a couple brothers named Ben and Bubba Dover. The hard case 50 year olds will go quickly but those pussy 30 year old terrorists may stick around longer.
 

WoodPeckr

Protuberant Member
May 29, 2002
47,033
5,995
113
North America
thewoodpecker.net
Now that is a Arab paradise....:D
 

WoodPeckr

Protuberant Member
May 29, 2002
47,033
5,995
113
North America
thewoodpecker.net
Illinois prison to get Gitmo detainees

Illinois prison to get Gitmo detainees

By HENRY C. JACKSON, Associated Press Writer – 22 mins ago

WASHINGTON – President Barack Obama has ordered the federal government to acquire an underused state prison in rural Illinois to be the new home for a limited number of terror suspects now held at the U.S. detention facility at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.

The federal government will acquire Thomson Correctional Center in Thomson, Ill., transforming the prison in a sleepy town near the Mississippi River into a prison that meets "supermax standards," according to a letter to Illinois Gov. Pat Quinn signed by Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, Defense Secretary Robert Gates, Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano, Attorney General Eric Holder and Director of National Intelligence Dennis C. Blair.

Those departments "will work closely with state and local law enforcement authorities to identify and mitigate any risks" at the prison, the letter said.

The decision is an important step toward closing Guantanamo Bay. Thomson, about 150 miles from Chicago, is expected to house both federal inmates and no more than 100 detainees from Guantanamo Bay.

Administration officials as well as Illinois Sen. Richard Durbin and Illinois Gov. Pat Quinn were appearing at the White House later Tuesday for the announcement.

Republicans were quick to criticize the administration's plan.

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., said the American people "already have rejected bringing terrorists to U.S. soil." He accused the administration of failing to explain how transferring the detainees would keep the public safer than keeping them offshore in Cuba.

The facility in Thomson had emerged as a clear front-runner after Illinois officials, led by Durbin, enthusiastically embraced the idea of turning a near-dormant prison over to federal officials.

Sen. Roland Burris, D-Ill., said he had "full confidence that the facility will hold these terrorism suspects safely and securely." In a statement, Burris said that with Illinois struggling with 11 percent unemployment, the transfer will be "a great economic benefit to the state by creating over 3,000 well-paying jobs and bringing in valuable federal dollars to fund local facility operations."

The Thomson Correctional Center was one of several potential sites evaluated by the Federal Bureau of Prisons to potentially house detainees from the Navy-run prison at Guantanamo Bay. Officials with other prisons, including Marion, Ill., Hardin, Mont., and Florence, Colo., had said they would welcome the jobs that would be created with the new inmates.

Closing Guantanamo is a top priority for Obama, and he signed an executive order hours into his presidency directing that the process of closing the prison begin. Obama has said he wants terrorism suspects transferred to American soil so they can be tried for their suspected crimes.

The Thomson Correctional Center was built by Illinois in 2001 as a state prison with the potential to house maximum security inmates. Local officials hoped it would improve the local economy, providing jobs to a hard-hit community. State budget problems, however, have kept the 1,600-cell prison from ever fully opening. At present, it houses about 200 minimum-security inmates.

Some Illinois officials have not supported the idea. GOP Rep. Mark Kirk, who is seeking Obama's old Senate seat, said he believes moving Guantanamo detainees to Illinois will make the state a greater threat for terrorist attacks. Kirk has lobbied other officials to contact the White House in opposition to using the facility.

To be sure, Thomson will not solve all the administration's Guantanamo-related problems. There still will be dozens of detainees who are not relocated to Thomson, other legal issues and potential resistance from Congress.

Thomson is a symbolic step, however, a clear sign that the United States is working to find a new place to hold detainees from Guantanamo.
 
Toronto Escorts