The Murdering Of Timothy McVeigh would be a Hate Crime by the Americian People

[SunTzu]

Anyone can be executed in their lifetime, hence Execution Style Murder
People who are legally executed deserved it, because the JURY of the defendents peers found him guilty and sentenced him to death.
I myself will rejoice when he is executed, he is trash and trash has no meaning in life. Now HE and other convicts who are executed are Collateral Damage.
If you don't like the American Legal system, then either move out of the country, or stay and live here and don't screw up, but please, PLEASE don't b*tch about it, because most americans are tired of all anti-government people,
If i was president and a republican i would be, i wouldn't hesistate to send in federal troops to arrest anti-government citizens.

------------------
Civilization God of War & Economic Prosperity
http://www.civfanatics.com Staff and forum moderator
Elevators always smell different to midgets

 

[SpacemanSpiff]

FL2: "When a life is taken by force, justice demands that it be repaid in kind."

This is an ancient notion. We should have evolved past this by now. We are supposed to be more civilized at this point in history. Many other countries are! What's wrong with us?! But people keep insisting on bringing ancient, barbaric notions from our past into our future and holding us back.

SunTzu: "People who are legally executed deserved it, because the JURY of the defendents peers found him guilty and sentenced him to death."

Just because 12 people think someone is guilty, without even being able to hear ALL the facts, does not mean they came to the correct conclusion and, if incorrect, a defendant may NOT deserve it. (This case is different 'cause McV admitted to it, with no evidence or claim of coersion.) But otherwise, "12 people say so, so it's right!" Do you really live by that anywhere else in life? Does anyone?

Sure, we need SOME design for a legal system, but if what 12 people say later proves to be incorrect, then a live person can be set free. A dead person cannot. And, still, no pro-DP person has addressed my argument of, "what if it were you". (see other Tim McV thread) Any reason we seem to keep skipping over that one?


SunTzu: "If you don't like the American Legal system, then either move out of the country, or stay and live here and don't screw up, but please, PLEASE don't b*tch about it, because most americans are tired of all anti-government people."

Oh, I see. Disagree with what a Republican wants and you are anti-gov't, eh? Disagree with what a Democrat or liberally-minded independent (me) wants and you are what?: a Republican!

First, when you have the death penalty you don't have to screw up to be dead. You could be minding your own business and just happen to match a description and not have a verifiable alibi.

And, as a Republican, you don't like gov't welfare and social programs. Well, you better not b*tch about it, because most americans are tired of all you anti-government people.

Spiff <IMG SRC="http://forums.civfanatics.com/ubb/scan.gif" border=0>

[This message has been edited by SpacemanSpiff (edited June 10, 2001).]

 

[BorderPatrol]

Originally posted by SunTzu:

If i was president and a republican i would be, i wouldn't hesistate to send in federal troops to arrest anti-government citizens.

Can you say Tienneman Square?

Do we need to forgo our constitution and freedom of speech if someone disagrees with us?

It just confirms my fears that the conservative movement is a movement towards totalitarianism like what China has.

------------------
<IMG SRC="http://forums.civfanatics.com/ubb/tank.gif" border=0><FONT COLOR="green">If you cross the border, you better have your green card!</FONT c><IMG SRC="http://forums.civfanatics.com/ubb/tank.gif" border=0>

 

[Alcibiaties of Athenae]

You bring up some interesting points, RW, so I will address this older post, but I have read the others.

Originally posted by RedWolf:
Scorn McVeigh if you want.

I do indeed.
There is nothing of value in this person, in my opinion.

Just never forget where he got the term "collateral damage" from. The federal government which so easily bombs foreign nations at will.

The term "collateral damage" is a military term referring to targets destroyed that where not intended.
It has nothing to do with governments.

How much "collateral damage" took place during the Gulf War? Iraqi children are STILL dieing to this day due to crippling economic sanctions.

Surprisingly little. As for suffering Iraqis, you should look to Saddam, not the rest of the world on this point.

Clinton got embroiled in a sex scandal and he bombs afghanistan. oops. Some collateral damage there.

Clinton was a disgrace, but the use of the word "colleteral damage" is misused here.
The weapons hit the intended targets.
The fact that the targets were not correct is the case in point here.

The WACO incident was one big example of collateral damage. Koresh has some illegal weapons? Well that crime is so serious that we lay siege to his compound and then burn it down burning how many children alive? More collateral damage.

Again, misuse of the word.
That murderer Reno destroyed the intended targets, the Branch-davidians.

FBI sharp shooter puts a bullet in Randy Weaver's wife AND small child - collateral damage. Weaver was aquitted of all charges by the way.

Again, the FBI hit what was intended.
They didn't 'accidently' shoot those people. It was deliberate. And unjustifiable
But not 'collateral'.

Lots of collateral damage in Bosnia...probably some in Somalia... TONS in both Vietnam and Korea...

In any combat environment, it exists.

We dropped a nuke on Hiroshama to end world war II... 130,000 collateral damages there.

This is completly incorrect.
The people were the target, and I did read where you believe it neccessary.

Again.. I'mnot saying that what McVeigh did was right.. and I'm not passing judgement on your governments actions (well I AM for some of the above listed things) BUT my point has always been that your government/society created him. He's not animal.. he's a person that was pushed to the breaking point by what he saw as injustice.

I disagree most strongly.
I am also a veteran (but not of the gulf war), and very strongly disagree with many of the federal governments actions under the Reno/Clinton regime, but would never harm innocents to make a point.
Only a dispictable animal attacks the innocent.
Cause or no cause.
It's the act of a coward and a traitor.
Not a traitor to the United States, but a traitor to humanity.

Why did he think that killing more children would solve the problem? I don't know. He deserves to spend the rest of his life in prison.. but I don't HATE him and yet I don't feel sorry for him...

He now claims he was unaware they were there, but I don't believe him.
And why should he get a life at all, when he vicously stole life from others?

I just can't get all worked up over this whole thing. I refuse to get involved in this lynch mob mentality... especially when most of the people that are calling for his blood won't be taking a look at their OWN government's actions any time soon.

That is a personal choice on your part, and it is, of course, your right.
Lynch mobs have nothing to do with this.
A lynch mob moves quickly, without the rule of law, in an unjust fashion.

The punishment for this crime is proscribed, and it is death.
McVeigh knew it it before he did this evil deed.
He did it anyway, and is on record as saying he would have struck again and again.
By his own admission, he is guilty.
He killed.
Now he will be killed.
Fitting and just.

The last part of your paragraph fits in another thread, and is not clearly defined, so I will not address it.

------------------
<IMG SRC="http://forums.civfanatics.com/ubb/blast.gif" border=0><FONT size="4"><FONT COLOR="blue">All knowledge begins with the Phrase:</FONT c><FONT COLOR="red"> I don't know</FONT c></FONT s><IMG SRC="http://forums.civfanatics.com/ubb/ninja1.gif" border=0>
<FONT COLOR="blue">Tuatha De Denann Tribe</FONT c>

[This message has been edited by Alcibiaties of Athenae (edited June 10, 2001).]

 

[Lefty Scaevola]

Originally posted by RedWolf:
You claim that the confederate states were traitors. I don't see it that way.

The "way" that an incompetent layman sees it does not change the plain meaning of law, a meaning common to the large majority of modern nations.

Following that logic America is a country of traitors since they seperated from England and declared independence.
Traitors are only considered traitors when they lose. When a traitor achieves the desired goals they become heroes.

This is correct, the revolutionaries were traitors to Britain/George III, until the final treaty released them from that sovereignty.

 

[RedWolf]

Lefty: So now I'm incompetent am I? Thanks. I like you too.

Sun Tzu: After this comment: "If i was president and a republican i would be, i wouldn't hesistate to send in federal troops to arrest anti-government citizens."

I now KNOW that you are a fascist dictator at heart.

IF a president ever gives that order... To arrest people on the basis of their beliefs alone(ie: anti-government views) then I believe that a revolution is justified AND required. Any president that gives the order deserves to be arrested (killed if neccasary to topple his regime) because HE is a traitor to democracy and everything that America stands for. As well, any police officer, soldier, federal agent that FOLLOWS that illegal order also forfeits their life.

They become an enemy of the people - storm troopers really and "just following orders" is not an excuse for following the will of a dictator. I'm still not saying that they deserve to be "executed" only that a "war" against them would become justified.

The right to believe whatever you wish.. even when it's contrary to the views of a country's government is a fundemental part of the constitution. It's one of the KEY rights that makes us free.

Spaceman: You're the only person here that seems to understand my point. Thank you.

Everyone: To say it again for the FINAL time. I to consider Tim MCveigh to be a murderer and a criminal. I have never said that killing innocents is jutified and I simply believe that Tim deserves to rot for the rest of his life in prison. I don't feel that his murder brings ANY closure to this incident - there are a few family members (of victims) that ALSO hold this belief.

A also find it ironic that in their haste to punish McVeigh the FBI violated the law AGAIN (by not handing documents over to the defense). For some reason the majority of Americans don't question this - they just accept it and STILL can't wait to see McVeigh die - as soon as possible. They hate him so blindly that even when the government "cheats" - they refuse to demand accountability.

 

[Lefty Scaevola]

Redwolf, you are most certainly incompetent to tell me what the law of treason in the USA was during the civil war, or what it is today, and almost certainly incompetent to tell me what it ought to be.
By the way incompetent does not means stupid (at least not until you get past the first seven or so definitions) it means unqualified, wether by training or legal prohibition. A minor is incompetent to vote, buy alcohol, enter most contracts, etc, because the law prohibits him, regardless of his knowledge (the first definition of incompetent-noun is usually "a minor"). I am incompetent to practive medicience because I am untrained and have no license, regardles of a 154 IQ. You are incompetant to tell what the law of treason is because you have not: read it, read it history, read similar laws, had any experience in the area, learned the definition of the words commonly used in these laws, had nay experience in legal analysis. None of these require a law license, just a few hours of study. Having ZERO knowledge or experience with the subject, you had the gall to tell most of the world that they had it all wrong.
Note that "incompetence" is entirely the other way from incompetent with too stupid to do something in the first definition and most common usages.

------------------
Gauis Mucius Scaevola Sinistra
Pontificator Pedanticus
Older, richer, and wiser than you.
Did I mention that I love the spellchecker?


[This message has been edited by Lefty Scaevola (edited June 10, 2001).]

 

[RedWolf]

Lefty.. my problem wasn't with the use of the word "incompetent". It was with HOW you used it.

"incompetent layperson" as if you are somehow above me or something.

Do you know more about the law then me? Yes it sounds like you DO. Do you know the exact legal definition of the word traitor? YES you do.

I'm not really sure why we're fighting over the legal definition of anything however. Does it really matter?

Traitor is a horrible dirty word and i think it's subjective. One man's traitor is another's hero.

Being a traitor isn't always a BAD thing... Your actions can fit the definition of "traitor" yet you can still be doing something justified (I'm talking general terms here... not McVeigh specifically)

Will you at least give me THAT?

 

[Alcibiaties of Athenae]

Originally posted by Lefty Scaevola:
regardles of a 154 IQ.

That high, and yet you still forget to use the spellcheck!

Unless of course, regardles is a law term known only to you shisters!

------------------
<IMG SRC="http://forums.civfanatics.com/ubb/blast.gif" border=0><FONT size="4"><FONT COLOR="blue">All knowledge begins with the Phrase:</FONT c><FONT COLOR="red"> I don't know</FONT c></FONT s><IMG SRC="http://forums.civfanatics.com/ubb/ninja1.gif" border=0>
<FONT COLOR="blue">Tuatha De Denann Tribe</FONT c>

 

[Lefty Scaevola]

Spellchecker has been cranky tonight and does not load well. By the way Spellchecker is not in the spell checker.

 

[Lefty Scaevola]

Originally posted by RedWolf:
"incompetent layperson" as if you are somehow above me or something.

With regard to the subject on which you chose to contradict me, yes.

One man's traitor is another's hero.

Being a traitor isn't always a BAD thing... Your actions can fit the definition of "traitor" yet you can still be doing something justified (Will you at least give me THAT?

I have already done so by implication of my response about the American revolution against Britain. Treason is relative to the sovereign. Successful traitors in revolutions become founding fathers.

 

[RedWolf]

Originally posted by Alcibiaties of Athenae:
regardles is a law term known only to you shisters! <IMG SRC="http://forums.civfanatics.com/ubb/groucho-marx.gif" border=0>

Is that the correct spelling of "shister"?
*grin*

 

[SunTzu]

Yes Redwolf, i am Saddam Hussein, Fidel Castro, Josef Stalin, Adolf Hitler, Benito Mussolini and George W. Bush all in one!
I Am your worst nightmare!

I will work the poor peasents to death, while building up and maintaining a professional army to protect me and the upper class and upper-middle class, and i'll starve my people while attacking poor 3rd world countries and i'll drill for oil in enviromental reserves, i'll also arrest all enviromentalist and anyone else who opposes the law.

Great nation eh? lol

 

[goodbye_mr_bond]

Originally posted by Questerr:
Sixth: We dropped the bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki to save Allied lives. Here's an example:
The spearhead of the Japanese home island invasion was to be the 5th Marine Division, the largest, most expierienced, and best equipped Allied unit in the area. After D-Day+5, there is no longer a mention of this 75,000 man unit in the plans. THEY WERE ASSUMED TO BE WIPED OUT.

Surely there's a bit of a difference between the projected death of X-number of troops and the actual death of a hundred thousand citizens?

THe Allied lives that were being saved by the killing of these citizens weren't Allied citizens, but Allied soldiers--professional non-draftees in your particular example, Questerr. So to spare the soldiers, let's hit the citizens? Sorry, I can't agree. No matter what the numbers may be.

[This message has been edited by goodbye_mr_bond (edited June 11, 2001).]

 

[Simon Darkshade]

Well, this seems another topic that draws the battlelines. Here go's.
I saw the topic originally, and was hoping it would die a quiet death. Unfortunately, it was provided with the dignity of responses, and so now I'll saw my bit.

The criminal, who I will not dignify with a name or publicity, has confessed, and provided no excuse accepted by the law, as it is in the USA. He has expressed no remorse, and wants to die.
If assisting in his wish, and at the same time discharging the justice the law proscribes ( if you do not like it, run for office and change it. But do not presume that you have some moral superiority over people with other beliefs) then let him have the three chemicals injected into him, and then let us forget this scum.

Two wrongs do not make a right, but the execution may provide some sort of closure. If but for that purpose, then let it be.

I will not fall into criticizing and flaming other peoples beliefs or opinions on history, but confine myself to the topic.
The criminal is not being "murdered", he is being executed by due process of the law, or on the other hand, committing "sucide by cop"
This is not a hate crime.
I cannot speak for the American people, but in my belief, the hate crime occured in April 95 when one man took it upon himslef to avenge himself on innocent people for the sufferings of the victims of a deluded, megalomaniac, pedophile of a religous leader.

The ATF and government are never legitimate game, and neither is violent revolution justified before all the options within the system have been explored. In the end, who is vindicated by the reaction of the public, the criminal and his mindless ilk, or due process, and the memory of innocents.

He chose to sacrifice at the altar of violence. It is true that violence begets violence, but we must be strong in cruel world, or the righteous will be trampled by those who lack such scruples. It would be wonderful if we could put aside our swords, but we must stand firm against those who would attack the weak, and children.

The argument presented in the opening post was garbled, nonsensical and addled. But it is Johan's opinion, and his right to hold it , express it and believe in it. I beg to differ.

I am sad that another man must die. Having said what I have about him, I believe it is possible to forgive someone, and still punish them, and I pray for his soul.

This may or may not be the last post before the execution, so let us all think. Don't cheer on one side, or jeer on the other.
Just think, and remember those people who died, and their kin.

------------------
Whether you like it or not, history is on our side. We will bury you.
- N.S.Khrushchev

 

[MrSparkle]

goodbye_mr_bond, when Questerr wrote about that American divison being all but wiped out in D-Day, he was reffering to the Allied belief that even greater loses would have been taken if they invaded Japan.

And i was thinking that whether someone is a traitor or a revolutionary depends on who wins. If they succeed, its a revolution, if they loose, they are traitors.




------------------
I am disrespectful to Dirt! Can you not see that I am serious?

 

[Lefty Scaevola]

Originally posted by goodbye_mr_bond:
THe Allied lives that were being saved by the killing of these citizens weren't Allied citizens, but Allied soldiers--professional non-draftees in your particular example, Questerr. So to spare the soldiers, let's hit the citizens? Sorry, I can't agree. No matter what the numbers may be.

You have forgotten about the 6 million Japanese that were projected to die in the invasion and from the additional year of blockade. Most of the male population of Japan above the age of 14 was elisted into militias to fight the invasion, (and a large number of women IIRC). 2 million of these were armed with spears, 1 million were armed with 1 sachel charge each for suicide attacks on tanks. The two bombs killed (including delayed effects) about 3% to 5% of the Japanese that the invasions of Kyushu and Honshu would have.
Still they should not have been dropped in the middle of population centers (officially targeted on military installations inside those cities such as the Army group headquarters in Hiroshima). They should have been targeted on military instalations outside population centers.

 

[Siggy]

Ok, deleted this post. I donnot see a point in discussing this kind of things.

I just posted a quite off-topic post about the a-bombs on Japan. It just pissed me of that 1 million US casualties were considered more valueble than 130000 civilian lives. I thought it over. Probably the civilian casualties would have been much higher if US forces actually had invaded Japan. My excuses.



[This message has been edited by Siggy (edited June 11, 2001).]