• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

US breached order by executing Mexican: UN court

Reverend_Hellh0und said:
it was in reference to a rapist and a murderer.


he answered you. What is your deal?
Click to expand...

I never asked if he'd be okay with other countries executing people who rape and kill little girls. Seriously. Stop. You're embarrassing yourself.
 
Hatuey said:
That's not what I asked though. Seriously. Are you illiterate? Read the question I asked. And read the answer he gave. He answered what he wanted to answer. Not what I asked.
Click to expand...
People losing a debate start changing the subject, question and anything else to divert attention.
 
Reverend_Hellh0und said:
it was in reference to a rapist and a murderer.
he answered you. What is your deal?
Click to expand...
Hautey's actions denote some psychological defect that compells her to be the only one that is always right, regardles of circimstance, or how absurd she must be in order to be able to argue same.
 
American said:
People losing a debate start changing the subject, question and anything else to divert attention.
Click to expand...

People who have nothing to provide to the debate try to be relevant by using irrelevant one liners. Ooops.


Okay two liner.
 
Goobieman said:
Hautey's actions denote some psychological defect that compells her to be the only one that is always right, regardles of circimstance, or how absurd she must be in order to be able to argue same.
Click to expand...

Goobieman is Stinger is disguise. Unable to ever answer a question and always looking for the ad hom the moment the missing part of his brain that handles logic is discovered.
 
Hatuey said:
I'm not OK with other countries putting Americans to death on the basis that I don't support the death penalty?
Click to expand...
That's not what you wrote.

I asked:
If an American raped and murdered 2 little girls in come country, would you oppose that country, according to its laws, executing that American?
Click to expand...

YOU said:
I don't believe in the death penalty. So no. I wouldn't.
Click to expand...

So, you would NOT oppose the execution.
 
Hatuey said:
Goobieman is Stinger is disguise. Unable to ever answer a question and always looking for the ad hom the moment the missing part of his brain that handles logic is discovered.
Click to expand...
As the desert said to the grain of sand...
 
Hatuey said:
Actually what you said :



If he never told authorities that he wanted Mexico to be notified that he was arrested for molesting kids and killing them - then why was the U.S. found to have breached the Vienna convention? The story does not support your statement. If he had been notified that it was his right to notify his country's officials in the U.S. of his situation then I'm sure the U.S. wouldn't have been found to have breached the Vienna convention. Please try again.
Click to expand...

Actually, it does. When the suspect was first arrested, he never told authorities he wanted Mexico notified. It was after sentencing that the UN asked Texas to review this case, amongst others, and demanded that the execution NOT be carried out. Texas said no. It is really a matter of Sovereignty at this point. Which laws do I consider most important? The laws of the United States, or the laws of the UN? The answer here is a no-brainer.

In Texas, we execute those who rape and kill children, so non-citizens who might be contemplating such an act are now advised that the UN won't be able to pull their asses out of the fire, should they do that and get caught.
 
Hatuey said:
I never asked if he'd be okay with other countries executing people who rape and kill little girls. Seriously. Stop. You're embarrassing yourself.
Click to expand...





Hmm. in context with the thread, that is precisly what you asked. Danny answered you, you then widened the goal post.


Seriously what is your actual point?
 
danarhea said:
In Texas, we execute those who rape and kill children, so non-citizens who might be contemplating such an act are now advised that the UN won't be able to pull their asses out of the fire, should they do that and get caught.
Click to expand...
The point of Hautey's entire appearance here is her opposition of the death penalty. All other factors here are subservient to that.

No, it -doesn't- matter what someone has done - no crime by no person ever warrants execution.
 
Reverend_Hellh0und said:
Hmm. in context with the thread, that is precisly what you asked. Danny answered you, you then widened the goal post.
Click to expand...
How STUPID of us to answer the question within the context of the topic.
 
Hatuey said:
People who have nothing to provide to the debate try to be relevant by using irrelevant one liners. Ooops.


Okay two liner.
Click to expand...
Oh I see you're straining yourself to stay on topic. You were complaining about Rev not answering your irrelevent question. Carry on.
 
Goobieman said:
The point of Hautey's entire appearance here is her opposition of the death penalty. All other factors here are subservient to that.

No, it -doesn't- matter what someone has done - no crime by no person ever warrants execution.
Click to expand...

Actually, I think Hatuey's objection is based, not on whether or not he supports the death penalty, but because of an honest disagreement with me over what I consider to be an issue of sovereignty.

Here is the way I see this - When the POS was arrested, the Mexican consulate was not notified, due to an administrative error. However, is that error great enough to prevent the wheels of justice from grinding this POS into pulp? Hell no. Texas has a right to deal with criminals within its borders as it sees fit, so long as the punishment is not cruel and unusual. Actually, for me, that really sucks, because I would prefer that the POS gets raped to death as his sentence, but the law is the law. I am talking about Texas law, of course, not UN rules. Of course, the procedure would be to let the consulates know if their citizens are arrested on US soil, but if a mistake happens, and they are not notified, justice should still be carried out. Like I said, the man raped and murdered 2 little girls. Justice prevailed, not administrative error.

BTW - The Supreme Court held that the execution was legal, so stick that in your crack pipe and smoke it, UN.
 
Last edited:
danarhea said:
Actually, I think Hatuey's objection is based, not on whether or not he supports the death penalty, but because of an honest disagreement with me over what I consider to be an issue of sovereignty.
Click to expand...
Yes, that could be.

BTW - The Supreme Court held that the execution was legal, so stick that in your crack pipe and smoke it, UN.
Click to expand...
Careful -- next time, the UN might send French troops to halt the execution.
 
The UN has no authority over the US.
 
The United Nations should stay out of this. The crime occurred on Texas soil and is the responsibility of Texas to deal with. If foreign people are not expected to obey the laws of the land, or face the appropriate consequences, then what is to stop them from committing crimes in that land?

We cannot be certain that Mexico would have dealt with this appropriately, and lets keep in mind that it occurred on Texas soil and the victims were Texans. The victim's families and friends deserved to know justice was carried out in a manner that will help them get passed this trauma. Can we really be sure that this would have happened in Mexico?
 
I am very happy they are dead. It makes me feels like two warts have been burned off the butt of humanity.
 
U.S. Constitution said:
This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding.
Click to expand...
When we signed the UN treaties, we gave the UN authority over the U.S. We are obligated to abide by the UN treaties we signed, just as we are obligated to abide by the Constitution itself. They are legally equal.
 
Binary_Digit said:
When we signed the UN treaties, we gave the UN authority over the U.S. We are obligated to abide by the UN treaties we signed, just as we are obligated to abide by the Constitution itself. They are legally equal.
Click to expand...

I have no problem with that. However, the UN does not have the right to demand that we stop the wheels of justice in order to correct an administrative error.
 
danarhea said:
I have no problem with that. However, the UN does not have the right to demand that we stop the wheels of justice in order to correct an administrative error.
Click to expand...
I find it hard to believe that an administrative error in any way nullifies our obligation to abide by signed treaties in good faith, and I find it hard to believe that you would take such a position.
 
danarhea said:
The guy we executed here in Texas only raped and murdered 2 little girls.

Screw the UN. Justice has been served.

Article is here.
Click to expand...

Denial of access to Mexican consuls was a clear violation of international law. This will make it possible for foreign dictators to use this as an excuse to similarly treat Americans in the future. I agree, he should have been executed if he committed the crimes, however, access to Mexican representatives is a matter of international law and protocals acceded to by the United States.
 
americanwoman said:
While the US did not follow the orders correctly, the details of the case is disgusting and I cannot blame the state of Texas for what they did.
Click to expand...

Wouldn't it have been better for Texas to follow the obligations assumed by the US government through treaties that have been signed and ratified, THEN executed the b^%^#D? That would have preserved the rights of Americans overseas and preserved the moral high ground for the State of Texas.
 
americanwoman said:
When you know the laws and you break them, no matter what country you are in, you should face the punishment. The first thing when you travel to, or move to, another country you should make yourself familiar with their laws. Then when you do break the law, you have to face the consenquences.
Click to expand...

But when the host country does not follow IT'S obligation under laws it has agreed to?
 
danarhea said:
You are the one who widened the goal posts. Fact is, the suspect never told authorities that he wanted Mexico to be notified that he was arrested for molesting kids and killing them, and that's his tough luck. Of course, authorities in Texas could start asking every Hispanic they pick up if they are illegal aliens, but then you would accuse them of rascism.
Click to expand...

They are obligated to notify him of his rights. Did they so notify him? Apparently not. The State of Texas failed to abide by treaties that the United States has signed. No one is arguing that he should have been punished for breaking the law and committing the crimes. However, that does not excuse the United States for violating international law.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom