Despite legal irregularities, in violation of a binding international legal decision as well as worldwide protest, Texas has illegally executed a Mexican citizen.
http://edition.cnn.com/2008/CRIME/08/06/mexican.executed/index.html
Should this kind of violation of international law be condoned? Should the global community allow one of the United States to join the long line of rogue states, which ignore international law? Has the Texas legislature's arrogance surpassed acceptable standards?
It is time that American politicians realize that they, too, are bound by the laws they attempt to have others obey.
Thread
Posts in chronological order
Wait, there's a Mexican Government?
By the by, I'm opposed to the death penalty for two main reasons.
1). If the criminal is later found to be innocent... well that kind of sucks then doesn't it?
2). What if there's no afterlife and you're not sending them to Hell? Better to keep the stupid cunts alive and living in terrible conditions; that way they're guaranteed to be paying for their crimes in some fashion. God or no God, it's the best way.
This sort of story does not surprise me though.
By the by, I'm opposed to the death penalty for two main reasons.
1). If the criminal is later found to be innocent... well that kind of sucks then doesn't it?
2). What if there's no afterlife and you're not sending them to Hell? Better to keep the stupid cunts alive and living in terrible conditions; that way they're guaranteed to be paying for their crimes in some fashion. God or no God, it's the best way.
This sort of story does not surprise me though.
Texas is....well, it's unique. It's history is very unique compared to the rest of the country. They were actually their own country for a while before they petitioned to join the United States (which was hotly debated at the time). They have never forgotten that they were once their own country, and have ever since had an almost unbelievable cavalier attitude to the federal government. They are NOT going to let ANYONE tell them what to do, no matter who they are. Combine that with the fact that it was such a lawless area for a long period of time and that it was a military outpost once the law finally did arrive, and you create the psyche of most Texans (notice I said MOST, not ALL).
They execute more people than anywhere else in the country. About 90% of the other states have banned the death penalty as cruel and unusual punishment. It will take a mandate from the federal government to make the Texans give it up in all likelihood. Sad as this story is, it doesn't surprise me. Not only is it "typical Texan" cowboy attitude, but not even the Feds see Mexico as any kind of threat as far as governments go. Had this person been European the Feds would have gone in with tanks if necessary to stop it. But Mexico? Nope.
They execute more people than anywhere else in the country. About 90% of the other states have banned the death penalty as cruel and unusual punishment. It will take a mandate from the federal government to make the Texans give it up in all likelihood. Sad as this story is, it doesn't surprise me. Not only is it "typical Texan" cowboy attitude, but not even the Feds see Mexico as any kind of threat as far as governments go. Had this person been European the Feds would have gone in with tanks if necessary to stop it. But Mexico? Nope.
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]Zebonka12 wrote: [/QUOTENAME]Wait, there's a Mexican Government?
By the by, I'm opposed to the death penalty for two main reasons.
1). If the criminal is later found to be innocent... well that kind of sucks then doesn't it?
2). What if there's no afterlife and you're not sending them to Hell? Better to keep the stupid cunts alive and living in terrible conditions; that way they're guaranteed to be paying for their crimes in some fashion. God or no God, it's the best way.
This sort of story does not surprise me though.[/QUOTE]
haha love your first point! and as for your second point: you are right.
By the by, I'm opposed to the death penalty for two main reasons.
1). If the criminal is later found to be innocent... well that kind of sucks then doesn't it?
2). What if there's no afterlife and you're not sending them to Hell? Better to keep the stupid cunts alive and living in terrible conditions; that way they're guaranteed to be paying for their crimes in some fashion. God or no God, it's the best way.
This sort of story does not surprise me though.[/QUOTE]
haha love your first point! and as for your second point: you are right.
MasterHistoryGirl:
(first off...wouldn't that be MISTRESS History Girl?)
I am well aware of Texas' extraordinary past (specializing, as I do, in American History of the period between the Mexican-American and Spanish-American wars, i.e. about 1848-1900); however, it is about time that those in charge of ruling Texas (as well as several other Southern states) realize that the Confederacy is no more, and they cannot bully the country into accommodating their every whim like they did in the period before the Civil War. When the North won the American Civil War, the issue of the relationship between states and the federal government was settled: America was a nation from then on, and not a voluntary association of nations. Former confederates and their successors (still referred to as 'Confederates' by Texan Lyndon B. Johnson) tried to ignore this all the way up to the 1950s, and indeed, Eisenhower did little to stop it. But from the Kennedy administration onwards, a stand was made. Texas was once a nation, but that is now over a century and a half ago. It is time for them to start abiding by the laws their country sets, and thus also to honor international treaties the US signed. If not, they will become a liability sooner or later.
(first off...wouldn't that be MISTRESS History Girl?)
I am well aware of Texas' extraordinary past (specializing, as I do, in American History of the period between the Mexican-American and Spanish-American wars, i.e. about 1848-1900); however, it is about time that those in charge of ruling Texas (as well as several other Southern states) realize that the Confederacy is no more, and they cannot bully the country into accommodating their every whim like they did in the period before the Civil War. When the North won the American Civil War, the issue of the relationship between states and the federal government was settled: America was a nation from then on, and not a voluntary association of nations. Former confederates and their successors (still referred to as 'Confederates' by Texan Lyndon B. Johnson) tried to ignore this all the way up to the 1950s, and indeed, Eisenhower did little to stop it. But from the Kennedy administration onwards, a stand was made. Texas was once a nation, but that is now over a century and a half ago. It is time for them to start abiding by the laws their country sets, and thus also to honor international treaties the US signed. If not, they will become a liability sooner or later.
I suppose it could be "Mistress", but I always associate that word with either younger girls or a more subordinate role. Either that or really bad historical porn. Since that's the association I have with the word I don't normally use it. Besides, I didn't get a Mistress degree. LOL
I hadn't realized you were an American history student. There seems to be quite a few Europeans that wish to study American history for some reason. Why that is heaven only knows; I personally find it rather dull and disappointing, but it's probably the way they cram it down your throat for 12 years and then you find out when you get to university that half of what you have learned is either a downright lie or such a shadow of the truth it might as well be.
I agree with your opinions on this issue, even South Carolina (the first state to secede from the Union during the Civil War) doesn't have this upstart attitude the Texans seem to have. But the Texans cling to it as their identity. Since the Texans technically haven't done anything wrong (as the Federal Government has not completely banned the death penalty; it is still the punishment for treason) there isn't much that can be done. Though the Feds could have and should have tried harder to prevent this situation from escalating into an international matter, do you honestly think that would happen with a Texan president in the White House?
I hadn't realized you were an American history student. There seems to be quite a few Europeans that wish to study American history for some reason. Why that is heaven only knows; I personally find it rather dull and disappointing, but it's probably the way they cram it down your throat for 12 years and then you find out when you get to university that half of what you have learned is either a downright lie or such a shadow of the truth it might as well be.
I agree with your opinions on this issue, even South Carolina (the first state to secede from the Union during the Civil War) doesn't have this upstart attitude the Texans seem to have. But the Texans cling to it as their identity. Since the Texans technically haven't done anything wrong (as the Federal Government has not completely banned the death penalty; it is still the punishment for treason) there isn't much that can be done. Though the Feds could have and should have tried harder to prevent this situation from escalating into an international matter, do you honestly think that would happen with a Texan president in the White House?
Sure, it's a violation of International Law...
But you know what... FUCK HIM!! HOPE HE'S BURNING IN HELL RIGHT NOW
He was a murderer and a rapist. He well deserves what he's got.
If there's anything to criticize about the U.S. government are things like this:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080808/ap_on_re_as/afghanistan
So please let's stop whining about murderers and rapists being executed, and let's focus on stopping innocent civilian deaths instead.
But you know what... FUCK HIM!! HOPE HE'S BURNING IN HELL RIGHT NOW
He was a murderer and a rapist. He well deserves what he's got.
If there's anything to criticize about the U.S. government are things like this:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080808/ap_on_re_as/afghanistan
So please let's stop whining about murderers and rapists being executed, and let's focus on stopping innocent civilian deaths instead.
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]ThomasQuinn wrote: [/QUOTENAME]Despite legal irregularities, in violation of a binding international legal decision as well as worldwide protest, Texas has illegally executed a Mexican citizen.
http://edition.cnn.com/2008/CRIME/08/06/mexican.executed/index.html
Should this kind of violation of international law be condoned? Should the global community allow one of the United States to join the long line of rogue states, which ignore international law? Has the Texas legislature's arrogance surpassed acceptable standards?
It is time that American politicians realize that they, too, are bound by the laws they attempt to have others obey.[/QUOTE]
Dude, you are actually surprised this happened?
Can't think of a country more hypocritical than America. Still i understand you're amazed they still get away with it while the world is watching.
http://edition.cnn.com/2008/CRIME/08/06/mexican.executed/index.html
Should this kind of violation of international law be condoned? Should the global community allow one of the United States to join the long line of rogue states, which ignore international law? Has the Texas legislature's arrogance surpassed acceptable standards?
It is time that American politicians realize that they, too, are bound by the laws they attempt to have others obey.[/QUOTE]
Dude, you are actually surprised this happened?
Can't think of a country more hypocritical than America. Still i understand you're amazed they still get away with it while the world is watching.
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]The Fairy King = RickRolling all of you wrote: [/QUOTENAME][QUOTE][QUOTENAME]ThomasQuinn wrote: [/QUOTENAME]Despite legal irregularities, in violation of a binding international legal decision as well as worldwide protest, Texas has illegally executed a Mexican citizen.
http://edition.cnn.com/2008/CRIME/08/06/mexican.executed/index.html
Should this kind of violation of international law be condoned? Should the global community allow one of the United States to join the long line of rogue states, which ignore international law? Has the Texas legislature's arrogance surpassed acceptable standards?
It is time that American politicians realize that they, too, are bound by the laws they attempt to have others obey.[/QUOTE]
Dude, you are actually surprised this happened?
Can't think of a country more hypocritical than America. Still i understand you're amazed they still get away with it while the world is watching. [/QUOTE]
I never said I was surprised. And it isn't the whole country, it's certain regions. It's important to note that the (Republican) executive stood by idly while his home-state violated international law.
http://edition.cnn.com/2008/CRIME/08/06/mexican.executed/index.html
Should this kind of violation of international law be condoned? Should the global community allow one of the United States to join the long line of rogue states, which ignore international law? Has the Texas legislature's arrogance surpassed acceptable standards?
It is time that American politicians realize that they, too, are bound by the laws they attempt to have others obey.[/QUOTE]
Dude, you are actually surprised this happened?
Can't think of a country more hypocritical than America. Still i understand you're amazed they still get away with it while the world is watching. [/QUOTE]
I never said I was surprised. And it isn't the whole country, it's certain regions. It's important to note that the (Republican) executive stood by idly while his home-state violated international law.
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]Mr.Jingles wrote: [/QUOTENAME]Sure, it's a violation of International Law...
But you know what... FUCK HIM!! HOPE HE'S BURNING IN HELL RIGHT NOW
He was a murderer and a rapist. He well deserves what he's got.
If there's anything to criticize about the U.S. government are things like this:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080808/ap_on_re_as/afghanistan
So please let's stop whining about murderers and rapists being executed, and let's focus on stopping innocent civilian deaths instead.[/QUOTE]
Yes rapists and murderers should be jailed. No they should never walk free again; but EXECUTING them? That makes one as barbarious as they are. And you, Jingles, for applauding it, are a barbarian and definitely not a Christian. Or were you asleep when they taught you to forgive and show mercy to the wicked? I am not a religious person, but even I value those virtues.
But you know what... FUCK HIM!! HOPE HE'S BURNING IN HELL RIGHT NOW
He was a murderer and a rapist. He well deserves what he's got.
If there's anything to criticize about the U.S. government are things like this:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080808/ap_on_re_as/afghanistan
So please let's stop whining about murderers and rapists being executed, and let's focus on stopping innocent civilian deaths instead.[/QUOTE]
Yes rapists and murderers should be jailed. No they should never walk free again; but EXECUTING them? That makes one as barbarious as they are. And you, Jingles, for applauding it, are a barbarian and definitely not a Christian. Or were you asleep when they taught you to forgive and show mercy to the wicked? I am not a religious person, but even I value those virtues.
Bush is from Texas; not only does he believe in the death penalty (having failed to commute the sentences of MANY who died while he was governor of the state), of course he wouldn't step in. He thinks the US is above international law, and Mexico is no threat. Besides, Texas didn't violate federal law by executing that man; international yes, but how much stock does this president put into international law and opinion?
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]The Fairy King = RickRolling all of you wrote: [/QUOTENAME] Still i understand you're amazed they still get away with it while the world is watching. [/QUOTE]
Beijing 2008
...
Tibet
Beijing 2008
...
Tibet
To be honest, international law is bullshit. It's merely a set of promises between nations. There is no authority to enforce it, as the highest level of authority is at the national level. I'm not saying it shouldn't be followed, but when it comes down to it, it is NOT law, and it is NOT enforceable.
Also, I am 100% against the death penalty, but there is no comparison between legally killing a murderer and murdering someone. The former is not infringing upon the rights of anyone. Rights are forfeited once a crime is committed and it is proven in a court of law. Property can be seized (fines), liberty can be restricted (jail), and life can be taken(death penalty). The latter is inherently infringing upon the rights of the victim. To put them on the same level is simply idiotic.
Also, I am 100% against the death penalty, but there is no comparison between legally killing a murderer and murdering someone. The former is not infringing upon the rights of anyone. Rights are forfeited once a crime is committed and it is proven in a court of law. Property can be seized (fines), liberty can be restricted (jail), and life can be taken(death penalty). The latter is inherently infringing upon the rights of the victim. To put them on the same level is simply idiotic.
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]Music Man wrote: [/QUOTENAME]To be honest, international law is bullshit. It's merely a set of promises between nations. There is no authority to enforce it, as the highest level of authority is at the national level. I'm not saying it shouldn't be followed, but when it comes down to it, it is NOT law, and it is NOT enforceable.
Also, I am 100% against the death penalty, but there is no comparison between legally killing a murderer and murdering someone. The former is not infringing upon the rights of anyone. Rights are forfeited once a crime is committed and it is proven in a court of law. Property can be seized (fines), liberty can be restricted (jail), and life can be taken(death penalty). The latter is inherently infringing upon the rights of the victim. To put them on the same level is simply idiotic.[/QUOTE]
But if you want to get philosophical about it, there is no such thing as law even on a local level. After all, law is merely a set of customs that everyone has agreed to follow, on the penalty of others who they decide to put in authority over it. But because their authority derives only from our agreement that a law is a law, it's not exactly any more binding than International Law. International Law is just the same thing on a grander scale.
Also, I am 100% against the death penalty, but there is no comparison between legally killing a murderer and murdering someone. The former is not infringing upon the rights of anyone. Rights are forfeited once a crime is committed and it is proven in a court of law. Property can be seized (fines), liberty can be restricted (jail), and life can be taken(death penalty). The latter is inherently infringing upon the rights of the victim. To put them on the same level is simply idiotic.[/QUOTE]
But if you want to get philosophical about it, there is no such thing as law even on a local level. After all, law is merely a set of customs that everyone has agreed to follow, on the penalty of others who they decide to put in authority over it. But because their authority derives only from our agreement that a law is a law, it's not exactly any more binding than International Law. International Law is just the same thing on a grander scale.
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]Music Man wrote: [/QUOTENAME]To be honest, international law is bullshit. It's merely a set of promises between nations. There is no authority to enforce it, as the highest level of authority is at the national level. I'm not saying it shouldn't be followed, but when it comes down to it, it is NOT law, and it is NOT enforceable.
[/QUOTE]
That's a very pragmatic point of view but shouldn't a country honour their treaties and keep their promises? If you travel abroad and are arrested you want consular help from your country, too and what would you think about the country that imprrisoned you if they did not grant it? We live in a globalized world and our goal must be to make this world safer for all of us which means we have to fight for the human rights everywhere where they are violated or this world will sink back into barbarism. It's a bad thing for the whole world that the USA gave up the basic principles of granting human rights. They gave up the Western values in favour of what? I don't know. Each time when we ask a country to grant fair trial or to uphold the human rights they laugh into our faces and tell us to look at the USA and what they are doing. When Bush told China they should improve on the human rights the other day the whole world really laughed and said "look who is talking, they just convicted the driver of Osama Bin Laden to 5 years in prison for driving his boss after they kept him in a cage for 7 years, tortured him, held the trial in secrecy in a newly set up court system and told him that they would still keep him for life no matter what the court said because they do not even respect the verdicts of their own courts." You cannot turn a blind eye to such severe violations of basic rights, it's not about some murderers and criminals who do not deserve our compassion - you could be the next to be victimized if they are not stopped, it's a matter of principle.
[/QUOTE]
That's a very pragmatic point of view but shouldn't a country honour their treaties and keep their promises? If you travel abroad and are arrested you want consular help from your country, too and what would you think about the country that imprrisoned you if they did not grant it? We live in a globalized world and our goal must be to make this world safer for all of us which means we have to fight for the human rights everywhere where they are violated or this world will sink back into barbarism. It's a bad thing for the whole world that the USA gave up the basic principles of granting human rights. They gave up the Western values in favour of what? I don't know. Each time when we ask a country to grant fair trial or to uphold the human rights they laugh into our faces and tell us to look at the USA and what they are doing. When Bush told China they should improve on the human rights the other day the whole world really laughed and said "look who is talking, they just convicted the driver of Osama Bin Laden to 5 years in prison for driving his boss after they kept him in a cage for 7 years, tortured him, held the trial in secrecy in a newly set up court system and told him that they would still keep him for life no matter what the court said because they do not even respect the verdicts of their own courts." You cannot turn a blind eye to such severe violations of basic rights, it's not about some murderers and criminals who do not deserve our compassion - you could be the next to be victimized if they are not stopped, it's a matter of principle.