Man to be 'crucified' for raping 5 children (2 Viewers)

[Jeee]

WTF @ the photo!!!!

I hope that shit is photoshopped.
MY GOD.

 

[Cyrus the Great]

Mashallah, the Sauds are the true believers of Allah. May allah forgive the royal family for what they have did in the past

 

[Sprangler]

WTF @ the photo!!!!

I hope that shit is photoshopped.
MY GOD.

Nick Berg.

 

[Jeee]

Nick Berg.

*There is controversy over the identity of the alleged killers and the circumstances surrounding the killing..
Al Jazeera, in an article entitled "Bloggers doubt Berg execution video", and other websites and mainstream news media outside the United States including the Sydney Morning Herald and Asia Times, point out what they say are inconsistencies in the video.
According to Saleh al-Hami, Zarqawi's brother-in-law, "The killer on the video cuts with his right hand... Mr Rababa and Mr Abu Doma, who shared the same room with [Zarqawi] for several years, insisted that he used his right hand only for eating and shaking hands."
An editorial in the Sydney Morning Herald said that some people said that a voice said in Russian, "do it quickly."*

Hmm...interesting...
Either way, that's fcking gross.
HOWEVER, as I always like to shed light on the other perspective, this man (if he was beheaded) was put out of his misery, while those in GB and Abu Ghraib prison, continue to suffer...

 

[Marin3 Muscl3]

Beheading is fucking sick and the images stick with you for a very long time. He should be locked up for life but because of what he did to that 3 year old, i hope he gets beheaded. Human rights my ass. This is beyond human rights. He deprived those 5 children of human rights and one of them the right to life itself. An eye for an eye. He should be left in the desert with a bottle of petrol. LOL Quantom of Solace styles

 

[muzlak]

That isn't severe enough for the sikko. Absolutely he deserves it.

I agree. People say that this is barbaric, but why should we treat him with any more respect after what he did?

 

[JonathanM]

I remember when they did that to Nick Berg. His fucking family saw that shit.

These are the sick cunts some people on this forum defend, inadvertently or not.

 

[Cookie182]

Why is this world still so violent?

You people definitely don't mean any of the punishments you say.

 

[katie tully]

thread title misleading

he will be beheaded before the crucification

beheading isnt an unreasonable punsihment for raping a 3 year old and leaving them in the desert

it's saudi arabia who gives a fuck, the more of them they kill off the better the world is

 

[Ethanescence]

I don't agree with capital punishment at all, and I don't agree with it in this instance. Especially if there's adequate facilities for full-time incarceration.

I don't condone what the criminal did in the least and I have no sympathy for his current situation, but as a general rule wouldn't a more appropriate punishment be life imprisonment as it allows the criminal to think over their crimes and suffer through life? Death just seems like an incredibly easy way out to me.

 

[Cookie182]

I don't agree with capital punishment at all, and I don't agree with it in this instance. Especially if there's adequate facilities for full-time incarceration.

I don't condone what the criminal did in the least and I have no sympathy for his current situation, but as a general rule wouldn't a more appropriate punishment be life imprisonment as it allows the criminal to think over their crimes and suffer through life? Death just seems like an incredibly easy way out to me.

I agree until you reach this sentence.

Why does the focus of a justice system in this 'modern era' have to be about suffering/pain/retribution?

As I have said previously, at least in Western culture, the goal of any correctional system needs to be rehabilitation where beyond the prisoner's deprevation of liberty, no intentional suffering is imposed. I don't just don't think we gain anything as a society by going to sleep at night knowing someone is in dire punishment, if not torture. This stands independent to the nature of the crime commited, as sickening as it can be (and is in this instance) [though I openly admit scepticism towards any reported "legal facts" in Saudi Arabia; I don't really recognise their legal system as legitimate].

Having said that, if the prisoner is to be deprived of their liberty for the rest of their natural life, voluntary euthanasia should in a civilised world be an option: the ultimate decision over whether one wishes to remain conscious is never up to the state and for all manners of civilty must be made by the individual. I argued this vehemently months ago.

 

[Ethanescence]

I partly agree.

I don't believe in retribution (in terms of revenge), yet I still think that criminals should "suffer" the consequences of their actions. I don't mean suffer as in being tortured physically or mentally by outside forces, or being deprived from basic human needs. But they should have to suffer through their own guilt and conscience about what horrendous acts they have committed.

And I don't think someone should be allowed to commit homicide or another indictable crime, be sentenced to incarceration and then be killed via capital punishment. And I don't agree with prisoners being able to have access to euthanasia either. I equate that to a serial killer committing suicide after they've already killed over 20 people, merely to escape the guilt and consequences of their actions.

There seems no justice in a system where a criminal can be put to death OR choose to die, instead of truly having to live with the consequences of their actions.

 

[Cookie182]

I partly agree.

I don't believe in retribution (in terms of revenge), yet I still think that criminals should "suffer" the consequences of their actions. I don't mean suffer as in being tortured physically or mentally by outside forces, or being deprived from basic human needs. But they should have to suffer through their own guilt and conscience about what horrendous acts they have committed.

And I don't think someone should be allowed to commit homicide or another indictable crime, be sentenced to incarceration and then be killed via capital punishment. And I don't agree with prisoners being able to have access to euthanasia either. I equate that to a serial killer committing suicide after they've already killed over 20 people, merely to escape the guilt and consequences of their actions.

There seems no justice in a system where a criminal can be put to death OR choose to die, instead of truly having to live with the consequences of their actions.

My response to this is still why?

The suffering is the deprivation liberty, perhaps for the natural life of the accussed. Such confinement and the necessity to live with others (who are often violent etc) is a large enough punishment in itself. However, as I have previously argued, on paper the official stance is one of rehabilitation or if that is not possible restraint from further community harm. The fact that jail often does physically and mentally torture inmates stands as an aside (its not its offical "reason" for existing).

So then I turn to you and ask why does it matter or not if the criminal is to spend the rest of his natural life in his cell or to die? Once the threat of reoffending and harm to the community has been removed, why is it pertinent that they "suffer" from inside forces, particularly their own mental processes? Arguably, in order to commit acts such as homicide, molestation, violent robbery or rape, a criminal would need to have an abnormal mental state anyway, what makes you think that by keeping them locked in a cage for 40 yrs their troubled brain patterns are going to unmuddle & they will fall to their knees in act of sorrow and seek redemption? In what sense does it make you feel better personally knowing that while you lay there at night some other human is mentally suffering, tortured by guilt? If you require this as an element of a "good community" then your own mental state would be drawn into question?

As to the victims family of these crimes. State sanctioned slaughter of the prisoner will not bring back their child; it will never take away their grief, nor will any knowledge of the prisoners pain/suffering. Though purely idealistic [but it has occured] if the justice system did actually function as it should, a rehabilitated prisoner offering a formal apology to the family may actually be the closest thing the family can get towards closure.

Other then our own violent intutions as a species and need for an "eye for eye" [the most disgusting element of "old testament" morality] I can not find a rational justification for the ongoing imposition of "suffering" upon another individual, beyond the deprivation of their ability to further violate the liberty of others.

As to whether they should be able to end their own life, if it is a rational and thorough decision that has been reached, then all individual's should have full capacity over the future of their consciousness. Now in the realm of the "outside world", this should generally be restricted to those with terminal illnesses (as a range of other psychological treatments are available to any one else), yet I don't feel those serving a life sentence are any different to those with a terminal illness. If you have come to the conclusion like myself that they are not there to "suffer" and are only being held to protect the community, then why delay the inevitable (natural death) for them if it's their choice?

 

[SylviaB]

No. Beheading is barbaric. We're just sinking to the level of the criminal, imo.

So, someone grossly violates the freedoms of a CHILD and makes them die a horrible, inhumane way, and it's wrong to expect that they should have to go through even a fraction of the suffering which they were responsible for?
That's ridiculous.

Can't you see how horrible it is that a terrible man will go through less pain than the innocent people that he caused to suffer?

 

[pman]

Don't bother to behead him, just crucify him properly