Jihad needs scientists
in [Design]
|
From: Eeyore on 23 Jan 2007 09:57 unsettled wrote: > T Wake wrote: > > "unsettled" <unsettled(a)nonsense.com> wrote in message > > > >>...Your persistent America bashing shows your bias despite the internet and > TV, so it >>isn't a communications and information issue. > > Here you conveniently jump subjects... > > > It is a shame you think I am bashing America. I think America has a lot > > going for it and should be prepared to live up to the high standards. Sounds like the same subject to me ! Graham
From: Eeyore on 23 Jan 2007 10:01 unsettled wrote: > T Wake wrote: > > > > You see, here you demand that people be punished on the suspicion that they > > intend to do harm. > > > > It is sad you do not see this is a morally wrong thing to do. > > Naive views. > > You've ignored that conspiracy to commit a "main crime" is a > criminal act even before the "main crime" has been committed. > People are sent to prison for this rather frequently. > > Conspiracy is the usual case in the forms of terrorism that > are the basis of these discussions. Suspicion alone, which is what this is about, is not enough to jail someone though. Graham
From: Ken Smith on 23 Jan 2007 10:43 In article <dea3b$45b5f630$4fe7715$21843(a)DIALUPUSA.NET>, unsettled <unsettled(a)nonsense.com> wrote: >Ken Smith wrote: >> In article <47753$45b561fd$4fe772a$17621(a)DIALUPUSA.NET>, >> unsettled <unsettled(a)nonsense.com> wrote: >> [....] >> >>>Beyond that, our western sane criminal will insist on full >>>protection of the same laws being violated. Insane ones >>>don't much care. >> >> >> That is not true in most cases. People who are insane often have a narrow >> area in which their logic is messed up or they believe things that simply >> aren't true. In other areas they may be quite sane. > >Those are the ones who fail to achieve an insanity defense, >and not what I was talking about. That isn't true. For the insanity defence to work, the insanity needs to be seen to have either prevented the person from understanding what they are doing is wrong or prevented them from conforming their actions. If you believe that all green eyed people are going to kill you and that you must defend yourself by killing them first, you may seem normal when there are no green eyed people about. > > > -- -- kensmith(a)rahul.net forging knowledge
From: Ken Smith on 23 Jan 2007 10:51 In article <ep52il$8qk_001(a)s826.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com>, <jmfbahciv(a)aol.com> wrote: [....] >>It is a shame you can not remember the details, because it would be >>interesting to see how convicted terrorists escaped Italian law - they tend >>to have quite good anti-terror and anti-organised crime legislation >>now.(Albeit with a few spectacular mistakes!) > >If you insist on following your legalities that assume the nation >is at peace, then you have to assume that a Muslim extremist >is innocent until proven guilty. But, wait! He hasn't made >any messes yet. So you can't arrest him. If your police do >manage to arrest him, he can pay the bail and be free to continue >his plans to make a mess. If this person is in the US there is the RICO law. Many european countries have laws like that too. The person only needs to belong to the crimianl organization to be quilty of a crime. There is no need to stop obeying the law to defeat these guys. -- -- kensmith(a)rahul.net forging knowledge
From: unsettled on 23 Jan 2007 11:00
Ken Smith wrote: > In article <dea3b$45b5f630$4fe7715$21843(a)DIALUPUSA.NET>, > unsettled <unsettled(a)nonsense.com> wrote: > >>Ken Smith wrote: >> >>>In article <47753$45b561fd$4fe772a$17621(a)DIALUPUSA.NET>, >>>unsettled <unsettled(a)nonsense.com> wrote: >>>[....] >>> >>> >>>>Beyond that, our western sane criminal will insist on full >>>>protection of the same laws being violated. Insane ones >>>>don't much care. >>> >>> >>>That is not true in most cases. People who are insane often have a narrow >>>area in which their logic is messed up or they believe things that simply >>>aren't true. In other areas they may be quite sane. >> >>Those are the ones who fail to achieve an insanity defense, >>and not what I was talking about. > > > That isn't true. For the insanity defence to work, the insanity needs to > be seen to have either prevented the person from understanding what they > are doing is wrong or prevented them from conforming their actions. If > you believe that all green eyed people are going to kill you and that you > must defend yourself by killing them first, you may seem normal when there > are no green eyed people about. And the insanity defense won't work in the real world. "strictly a legal term, not a clinical term, the definition of which varies by jurisdiction. In most jurisdictions, this legal concept means a severe mental illness extant at the time the crime was committed such that the illness substantially impaired the defendant's capacity to understand and appreciate the moral wrongfulness of the act. A small minority of jurisdictions differentiate moral and legal wrongfulness." www.psychologyandlaw.com/Definitions.htm Paranoia of the type you're describing doesn't impair the insane person's ability to understand the wrongfulness of the act despite their emotional imperative to follow through on their paranoia. This person understands the law and respects it even though he violates it. This person is understood, by law in most jurisdictions, to be responsible for his actions. On the main topic. Islamist terrorists don't accept the validity of laws or morality outside their narrowly construed dictates handed down from Allah through their Mullah to them that it is their duty to kill the infidels or whoever their Mullah tells them to kill. From Allah's mind through the Mullah's mouth, that's all they concern themselves with. |