The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > Article Comments > The wrong signal for Asia’s firing squads > Comments

The wrong signal for Asia’s firing squads : Comments

By Tim Goodwin, published 17/10/2008

Rudd's hypocrisy: courting those who support the death penalty, while arguing Labor haven’t abandoned their human rights policy.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. All
Those people who have deliberately engaged in activities which result in the taking of life, whether they be Bali bombers or Australian citizens who have engaged in drug running, have already forfeited any claim to be treated with clemency when given the death penalty.

The government should therefore have a consistent policy on the matter and refrain from making representations for Australian citizens who have broken the laws of other countries in this regard.

David
Posted by VK3AUU, Friday, 17 October 2008 9:37:05 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
This fellow makes me sick.

I’m opposed to the death penalty in all but a few circumstances: terrorism and murder of law-enforcement officers come to mind as good reasons to apply the death penalty.

How anyone – particularly an Australian – can have sympathy for the Bali bombers, and think that Australia should lobby against their well-deserved death by firing squad, is beyond me. These bastards murdered innocent Australians and others; even though their lunatic spiritual leader claimed in today’s Australian that it was a plot by the CIA and Australia. He should removed from earth too. And it’s high time Indonesia got on with the job of ridding the world of the grinning murderers directly responsible for the bombings.

“Rudd has even adopted his predecessor’s tactic that the penalty is a matter for the Indonesians”, because he is right. Like Howard, Rudd knows the difference between right and wrong in matters like this, at least.

People like this author, who prates about the ‘human rights’ of mass murderers have no interest in the human rights of the victims of these animals.

Even in with the hanging of an Australian drug dealer, Tim Goodwin has no respect for the sovereign rights of another country. I, like many others, think that the death penalty for drug smuggling is over the top; a prison sentence such as another Australian is currently serving is more than adequate. But, that is not the way Indonesia and Singapore see it, and they are perfectly entitled to run their own country they way they see fit. Their citizens cop the same treatment; foreigners should not be treated better. Nobody is forcing anyone to go to Singapore to smuggle drugs out.

There is nothing hypocritical about the current Australian Government’s attitude. We don’t execute anyone here, and only an idiot would suggest that we have the right to interfere in another country’s policy.

Let’s hear more about the rights of victims, and less about the mythical rights of perpetrators
Posted by Mr. Right, Friday, 17 October 2008 10:07:10 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
The bombers should be shown clemency, and let off with a suspended sentence (suspended from a large oak beam, by a strong hempen rope).
Posted by plerdsus, Friday, 17 October 2008 10:36:45 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Mr Right

I disagree with your view that the death penalty should apply in some circumstances, but you are at least consistent – you argue that it should apply to Australians and foreigners, here and abroad.

The point of the article is that the Australian government does not display this consistency. The issue is not about having “sympathy” for the Bali bombers, but whether we are consistent or hypocritical in applying a declared principle of the Australian Government – opposition to the death penalty – in cases where the criminals' victims are Australians as well as where the criminals are Australians.

The double standards the article highlights are clear, and they undermine the credibility and moral authority of the Australian Government
Posted by Rhian, Friday, 17 October 2008 2:51:57 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
He's right. We should recall our ambassador to Washington immediately.
Posted by bennie, Friday, 17 October 2008 3:16:36 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
There are three issues in my mind.

In spite of the evidence presented, the convicted bombers may not have been directly responsible. Unlikely, but possible. False confessions happen, with criminals directly responsible staying free. It would not be the first time those given the ultimate sentence were misidentified at law and covered the trail.

They have made it plain that they want to be martyrs. Knowing that it will happen is making them happy. If they were to be comfortably looked after for the rest of their days, confined with no links to those of similar persuasion, it would be a cause for great disappointment and unhappiness - to them and their kind. Execution will foster growth rather than reduction of motivation for such fundamentalist-generated crimes.

Kevin Rudd’s stance in supporting execution in this particular situation is that of a hypocrite. Worse, it portrays Australia as having intolerable arrogance in foreign affairs – we are happy to have other nationalities killed, but not our own.
Posted by colinsett, Friday, 17 October 2008 3:53:13 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
As much as I will enjoy hearing the news that Amrosi and his kin have been ripped apart by the bullets of the firing squad, Tim does have a point.

If the bombers had simply been given life sentences and left to rot for the rest of their lives, they would not have had all the press opportunities at the appeals.

While Rudd's hypocrasy gets votes, it does nothing for human rights around the world or Australia's credibility.
Posted by Shadow Minister, Friday, 17 October 2008 4:21:49 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Agreed totally, Colinsett.

It's actually in a way, a much crueler punishment not to give these guys the death sentence. They are heroes in their own mind. Execute them, and they will become heroes in others. Leave them alive to sit in prison and the world will leave them behind. Rather than being marytrs, they will just be sad, have no relevance and be seen by people who may have followed them as very poor role models.

A few crazy people may have thought that Martin Bryant was someone of note after he murdered so many people in Tasmania. Nobody knowing his situation now can think he is nothing but truly pathetic, and not someone to be admired.
Posted by JL Deland, Friday, 17 October 2008 4:23:12 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
The fact that an unelected bureaucrat can lawfully pass on information to a foreign country that leads to the execution of Australian citizens troubles me. The fact that an unelected bureaucrat can do this after assurances have been given to informing parents that their son/daughter will come to no harm troubles me more.
Posted by Fester, Friday, 17 October 2008 10:50:20 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Yes, the last thing we need is more martyrs for the cause of terrorism.

You cannot be against the death penalty except for "some exceptions". It is like saying you are a vegetarian but you still eat fish.
Posted by pelican, Saturday, 18 October 2008 9:35:27 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Well said Pelican.
Posted by Fractelle, Saturday, 18 October 2008 10:31:06 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
'You cannot be against the death penalty except for "some exceptions". It is like saying you are a vegetarian but you still eat fish.'

This really shows the stupidity of those who oppose the death penalty for any reason. The same people usually oppose children getting a smack for rebellion which results in the violence we see on the streets today. Those who oppose the death penalty are also more likely to oppose it violently. We see this with environmental 'peaceful' protest. Tolerating the intolerable does not lead to a peaceful existence.
The woman who is raped by a 'reformed' serial rapist would certainly have wished this person was castrated before he had the opportunity to destroy another life.
Posted by runner, Saturday, 18 October 2008 12:30:18 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Makes me think that indeed *Mr TurnBull* is correct when he says he is somewhat closer to his "role" model than *Mr Wudd* is to his.

Even in Oz it seems that some pollies are all to willing to hitch a ride like a symbiotic parasite onto the relgious control mechanism, but only so far as it suits their purpose.
Aduh!

*Amrozi* has put in I suppose what u wld call a last plee. That is, to be hung and not shot. It has to do with the sanctification. Nothing unusual in that BUT

Careful now ..

A bit of background. There is no social security other than that of the religious groups and therein lies the loyalty of the local group. So, in some parts u have Islam, in others Hindu Adat etc. The commonality is that they will all, I assume, fight fanatically for their own financial security solution and locus of control.

Already here in Bali, the "Hindu" religious collective is insisting that their local religious laws override Indonesian federal law. If pushed, by allowing others that previously were not allowed to buy land (such as Javanese) who will not donate to the Hindu Temples, in the absence of education and or another social security solution, they may fight. These are the same ones who wld knowingly insult the Islamic collective by imposing an unconstitutional, unsanctified death by firing squad.

Perhaps some of the red necks here wld like to come and guard the ex pat community in Bali. Here we are "Bule" (BooLay) white people and the dutch seem to have tainted our reputation as a group for millenia, whether we are euro, ozzie or otherwise.

U c, presently, some say, Australia supports Hindu Bali -> Bang! Bang!

Better not to be seen to be taking a position with one religious group or other within Indo and rather adopt a neutral non-double standard position.

Hold an indicative plebisite within Oz if u must.

Indos generally grin somewhat fatuously when stressed. It is not perculiar to Amrozi et al.

...Adam...
Posted by DreamOn, Saturday, 18 October 2008 1:20:01 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I disagree runner

Many Christians I know are against the death penalty - I am not sure from your post whether you are or not - I assume not since you a committed Christian.
Posted by pelican, Saturday, 18 October 2008 7:31:01 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
pelican,

I would imagine that opinion is divided as to the death penalty among Christians. If you have more concern for the victims and potential victims of crime you are more likely to be in favour. If you hold to the philosophical dogma that the death penalty is always wrong (thus affirming your belief in absolutes) then you will oppose it. I for one am in favour in extreme circumstances (such as repeat murderers, rapist, child molesters). It is a sad reflection on human nature that sometimes it is better to end a life than to cause untold misery and pain to others. Jesus made this clear when he spoke of those who would cause little ones to sin. I have met a number of people who have raped, murdered and molested children and yet still only ever think of their own evil desires. In some of these cases remorse is non existent just like the Bali bombers.
Posted by runner, Saturday, 18 October 2008 7:56:52 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
runner
By your reasoning those who oppose the death penalty are not concerned for victims or potential victims. That is a big reach - and if you think about it sincerely, I am sure you will see that is not the case.

Killing the perpetrator does not change the fact the act has already occurred and does nothing to help the victims. In the case of the Bali bombers, all you are doing is creating martyrs for terrorism and for terrorist leaders (given that Amrosi often mentions his devotion to Bin Laden).

We don't gain anything in our evolution as civilised people by becoming barbaric. Which is what we do when we reduce our values to the lowest act a human can commit.

What if someone is convicted of a crime he did not commit and faced the death penalty only to find out years later he was innocent. Who is the victim then? There are numerous cases of this occuring throughout the world, particularly in the US.

There are certainly many people who are selfish with no thought to the harm or pain they cause others; and many who feel no remorse. I don't know what it is that makes people lack the empathy to care about their fellow human beings. Some serial killers have even been raised in strict religious families others not. There seems to be no pattern to it. Thankfully they are in the minority.
Posted by pelican, Sunday, 19 October 2008 9:52:25 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I'm tired of hearing that the flimsy excuse, that executing Amrozi etc will turn them into martyrs.

This is unadulterated NONSENSE. Keeping them alive and allowing them to spread their poisonous message is far more damaging to our cause. The Bali bombers WILL be forgotten when they are dead. Whilst they are still on the news every week, that will not be the case. One of the best recruiting grounds for Islamic terrorists is prisons. Do we really want these men, heroes to the terrorists, being able to help reruit others?

There are already tens of thousands of martyrs to the Islamo-Facist cause and they are not remembered. The execution of the Bali Bombers WILL NOT aid their cause, but it will provide justice for the families of the victims.

They are frightened of dying, make no mistake about that, and have petitioned the courts to stop the executions ot to change the method of execution.

Pelican says >> You cannot be against the death penalty except for 'some exceptions'. It is like saying you are a vegetarian but you still eat fish.

WHAT ABSOLUTE RUBBISH. There has been a special class of crimes, known as capital crimes, which have warranted the death penalty across the ages. It has ALWAYS been the case that the death penalty was applied to certain crimes and not to others.

Your analogy is simply ridiculous. You're saying a person either always support the death penalty for every crime, or they never support it. I wonder Pelican, whether you could tell me under what legal system, ALL crimes were punished by death?

Almost invariably, the death penalty has only been applied in certain circumstances.

These guys planned and carried out the brutal attack that killed hundreds and wounded hundreds more innocent civillians. Indonesian law on this matter is clear. Lets get on with it.
Posted by Paul.L, Sunday, 19 October 2008 1:05:22 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Pelican

'We don't gain anything in our evolution as civilised people by becoming barbaric. Which is what we do when we reduce our values to the lowest act a human can commit.'

You could not possibly support killing the unborn if you truly believe this. A lower act than capital punishment would be to allow a child molester to destroy more lives by burying our head in the sand and sticking to our failed dogmas.
Posted by runner, Sunday, 19 October 2008 11:09:35 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
The death penalty is final - what happens when we get the verdict wrong? How many innocent lives can we justify as the means to the end?

The only way I would accept the existence of capital punishment is if juries, prosecutors and judges were also given the death penalty if it was found that they'd convicted (and thus murdered) the wrong person.

With that caveat I doubt anyone would be game to take the chance.
Posted by Collin Mullane, Monday, 20 October 2008 12:54:52 AM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
What an idiotic post Paul L.

You know very well what I am saying. If you really believe that my earlier post was about advocating capital punishment for All crimes or No crimes - you missed my point entirely (and I suspect deliberately).

Clearly every other poster knew I am talking about crimes for which the death penalty would apply.

While you always revert to insulting attacks on people whom you disagree with, I did at least think that you had a modicum of intelligence. It appears on this - I was wrong.

Grow up.

Sheesh!
Posted by pelican, Monday, 20 October 2008 7:44:12 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Pelican says that “You cannot be against the death penalty except for "some exceptions", despite the fact I find that I can be against the death penalty except “in all but a few circumstances”. Perhaps Pelican did not read my post, however, as he has misquoted me, or he doesn’t know what quotation marks mean.

Whoever he is lecturing, his comment is obviously wrong.

As for the death of terrorists causing martyrdom – what nonsense!

Terror is a political weapon used to instil fear and mistrust in most of the world’s population – including Muslims who are the people these lunatics kill most.

Anyone who attempts to bully with fear is a cowardly bastard who uses fear, knowing what fear does to him; knowing that there is more than an even chance his targets will not retaliate in the same way.

Well, this is why terrorists should be put to death so that they will know real fear as they stand on the trapdoor with a rope around their necks; wait, messing themselves, behind a sheet, not knowing when the fusillade of bullets will strike.

Forget martyrdom. The more of these animals we put down, the safer everyone will be.
Posted by Mr. Right, Monday, 20 October 2008 9:14:44 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
The Bali bombers is just another classic case of 'trial by media'. The media should be banned from reporting on anything to do with trials until the trial has been completed and a verdict has been achieved. It is at this point that the verdict becomes news, not before.

As for the death penalty. Each country has its laws and, if you break those laws, irregardless of your nationality, then you pay the penalty. End of story!
Posted by rehctub, Monday, 20 October 2008 9:31:00 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy