• 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!

Terminally ill Lockerbie bomber released

Another example of the oh-so-known European bizarreness.
They have lost all of their morals and their definition of justice is simply screwed up.

Judging the morality and legal systems of every European nation based on one legal decision by one country. Yep, that's a reasoned and nuanced opinion there. :roll:
 
Judging the morality and legal systems of every European nation based on one legal decision by one country. Yep, that's a reasoned and nuanced opinion there. :roll:
The words "Another example of" at the start of the quoted post send your ridiculous accusation to the comments graveyard.
 
I'd like to make this very very clear.

This is all on Scotland and its 'SNP'. Not United Kingdom and most certaintley not Westminister.
It was the Scottish Govt. who made this foolish decision.

As to the OP?
He should have died in jail.

I dsiagree. I think we've ade completely the rigt call on this one. He was a monster. We're not. Why should we stoop to his level by showing no compassion or mercy?

We as a society are BETTER than these idiots. Let's not think we should show them inhumanity because they have behaved inhumanely.
 
We as a society are BETTER than these idiots. Let's not think we should show them inhumanity because they have behaved inhumanely.

Justice is justice. Mercy has no place in the fair execution of justice. He had his day in court, the court ruled, a jury of his peers found him guilty, and now an outside body is overturning that sentence.

I call b.s.
 
The words "Another example of" at the start of the quoted post send your ridiculous accusation to the comments graveyard.

Um, no, dear. This decision says bugger all about justice in EUROPE. It was a Scottish decision by a Scottish court. We're a continent, and our respective legal systems are very different. Or should I be attempting to use Canadian and Mexcan decisions to beat the US with because you all happen to share the same land mass?
 
I dsiagree. I think we've ade completely the rigt call on this one. He was a monster. We're not. Why should we stoop to his level by showing no compassion or mercy?

We as a society are BETTER than these idiots. Let's not think we should show them inhumanity because they have behaved inhumanely.
We as a society are better than Murderers!
Why should we punish them and hurt their freedom?!
Why not have mercy?!

This is just too sick, the tragic end of a society that was obsessed with morals and freedoms for everyone until it crossed the line and gave legitimacy to its criminals to walk among its people.

This society is not a society of morality and freedoms, this society steals away the individual's freedom from crime and does not punish its own criminals.
 
Justice is justice. Mercy has no place in the fair execution of justice. He had his day in court, the court ruled, a jury of his peers found him guilty, and now an outside body is overturning that sentence.

I call b.s.

They're not over-turning his sentence. They're releasing him on compassionate grounds. No one's claiming he's innocent, or that his sentence was unjust. They're simply saying that having hm die in jail as opposed to showing him mercy and allowing him to end his days with his family doesn't benefit us as a socirty.
 
We as a society are better than Murderers!
Why should we punish them and hurt their freedom?!
Why not have mercy?!

Wow, if someone had said that, that'd suck. Luckily, no one did. I simply said that saying "Oh, he showed his victims no mercy" does not mean we should do likewise to hm. Please refrain from atempting to put words in my mouth.

Apocalype said:
This is just too sick, the tragic end of a society that was obsessed with morals and freedoms for everyone until it crossed the line and gave legitimacy to its criminals to walk among its people.

This society is not a society of morality and freedoms, this society steals away the individual's freedom from crime and does not punish its own criminals.

Hyperbole. We try and imprison our criminals just like any other nation, and you know it.
 
Terminally ill Lockerbie bomber released - CNN.com



Ok, I lean on the liberal side, but this is killing me. This guy killed 270 people as a terrorist and they are "showing him mercy," because he has a terminal illness!!!!!? That's karma bitch! He should have rotted and died in prison. Thoughts?

Life in prison...sounds to me like that covers terminal illness...that just means you get out sooner, though not alive. Plus terrorists have a habit of blowing themselves up, so just because the dude has cancer doesn't mean he ain't gonna do nothing. In fact, he may be more apt to since he's gonna die anyway.
 
Last edited:
Justice is justice. Mercy has no place in the fair execution of justice. He had his day in court, the court ruled, a jury of his peers found him guilty, and now an outside body is overturning that sentence.

I call b.s.

:rolleyes:

Nice soundbites, ridiculously inaccurate, comical really, but this is not about facts anymore is it?

He was not convicted by a jury of his peers, but by three Scottish judges sitting in a special court in Holland.

The "outside body" is the Scottish executive which has overall authority, so is not really outside at all, and, releasing criminals in their final days to die at home with dignity is common practice in the UK. This is not, in that respect, a case of special treatment.
 
We as a society are better than Murderers!
Why should we punish them and hurt their freedom?!
Why not have mercy?!

This is just too sick, the tragic end of a society that was obsessed with morals and freedoms for everyone until it crossed the line and gave legitimacy to its criminals to walk among its people.

This society is not a society of morality and freedoms, this society steals away the individual's freedom from crime and does not punish its own criminals.

Cry me a ****ing river. The west functions on the basis of the rule of LAW, not on making special exceptions because some people would feel like big meanies keeping a murderous terrorist in jail.

Here's your tiny little violin.

violin_1.jpg
 
:rolleyes:

Nice soundbites, ridiculously inaccurate, comical really, but this is not about facts anymore is it?

He was not convicted by a jury of his peers, but by three Scottish judges sitting in a special court in Holland.

The "outside body" is the Scottish executive which has overall authority, so is not really outside at all, and, releasing criminals in their final days to die at home with dignity is common practice in the UK. This is not, in that respect, a case of special treatment.

It's a shame that your system of justice is so flawed.
 
Life in prison...sounds to me like that covers terminal illness...that just means you get out sooner, though not alive. Plus terrorists have a habit of blowing themselves up, so just because the dude has cancer doesn't mean he ain't gonna do nothing. In fact, he may be more apt to since he's gonna die anyway.

This man is not a fundamentalist! He was a spy for a secular government, which to the best of my knowledge has never carried out any suicide bombings.

Also, as I have said, releasing criminals with terminal illness to die with dignity is common practice in the UK.
 
Cry me a ****ing river. The west functions on the basis of the rule of LAW, not on making special exceptions because some people would feel like big meanies keeping a murderous terrorist in jail.

Here's your tiny little violin.

violin_1.jpg
Was I speaking about the Western society here?

I would tell you what you should do with this tiny little violin, but civility is the bulk of my ideal society.
 
Was I speaking about the Western society here?

I would tell you what you should do with this tiny little violin, but civility is the bulk of my ideal society.

My bad, I think we're in agreement. I didn't realize on first read that your post was sarcastic. Please be a dear and pass the violin along to Slainte.
 
This man is not a fundamentalist! He was a spy for a secular government, which to the best of my knowledge has never carried out any suicide bombings.

Also, as I have said, releasing criminals with terminal illness to die with dignity is common practice in the UK.

Did this man have a hand in an act of terrorism that killed over, what 250 people was it? If yes, he can rot in jail till dead. That's what a life sentence is. Do you let all life sentence people out of jail when they're old so they can "die with dignity". I think if you wish to die with dignity you don't commit terrorist acts which kill over 200 people.
 
My bad, I think we're in agreement. I didn't realize on first read that your post was sarcastic. Please be a dear and pass the violin along to Slainte.

Your knowledge of this case is clearly very limited, as reflected by your "jury of his peers" and "special tretment" statements.

I would suggest you actually examine the facts surrounding the case before jumping on a populist bandwagon and launching crude and unintelligent insults at those who disagree with you.
 
Did this man have a hand in an act of terrorism that killed over, what 250 people was it?

Maybe all the experts who have posted on this thread could tell me, and while they are at it, point me to some convincing evidence!
 
Maybe all the experts who have posted on this thread could tell me, and while they are at it, point me to some convincing evidence!
He was convicted, he was never acquitted, he is, therefore, guilty.
 
Maybe all the experts who have posted on this thread could tell me, and while they are at it, point me to some convincing evidence!

That should all be provided in the court documents. If this guy had a hand in a terrorist act which killed over 200 people, rot in jail.

You never answered my question, do you let all old people who are on life sentences out of jail early when they are old so they can die with dignity at home? Or is it just terminal disease for some reason? Cause both cases are essentially the same, only in one case someone is dying faster. But the statement about dying with dignity didn't seen to be dependent on speed of death, so do you or do you endorse early release for all life sentences so people can die with dignity out of jail?
 
Maybe all the experts who have posted on this thread could tell me, and while they are at it, point me to some convincing evidence!

Was he convicted in court? If so, he should not be released. THE END.
 
You never answered my question, do you let all old people who are on life sentences out of jail early when they are old so they can die with dignity at home? Or is it just terminal disease for some reason? Cause both cases are essentially the same, only in one case someone is dying faster. But the statement about dying with dignity didn't seen to be dependent on speed of death, so do you or do you endorse early release for all life sentences so people can die with dignity out of jail?

I believe they must have less than 3 months to live according to medical experts, as well as meet a host of other criteria. However, every case is handled on a case by case basis and ultimately depends on the justice department.

As I said in my first post, if this were an open and shut case I do not think he would be released. However, as such controversy surrounded his conviction, and bear in mind, the relatives of most of the Scottish victims support his release, factors which, technically speaking, should not be considered probably were.
 
Back
Top Bottom