Racism and the Death Penalty
Racism and the Death Penalty
A new Santa Clara Law Review study finds that in California murder trials, a victim’s race significantly affected the likelihood of a defendant receiving the death penalty. Specifically, those who murdered whites were four times more likely to receive a death sentence than those who killed Hispanics, and three times more likely than those who killed blacks. The study’s co-author concluded, “To put it bluntly, there’s apparently different values being placed on victims from different racial and ethnic groups.”
While the Santa Clara study dealt only with California, the problem is a national one. Studies in Ohio, Illinois and New Jersey have made similar conclusions about the role of the victim’s race in murder trials:
Ohio: “Offenders facing a death penalty charge for killing a white person were twice as likely to go to death row as if they had killed a black victim. Death sentences were handed down in 18 percent of cases in which the victims were white, compared with 8.5 percent of cases when victims were black.†[AP, 5/7/05]
Illinois: “When certain facts in aggravation, such as previous criminal history of the defendant, are controlled for, there is evidence that the race of the victim influences who is sentenced to death. In other words, defendants of any race who murder white victims were more likely to receive a death sentence than those who murdered black victims.†[Governor’s Commission on Capital Punishment, 2002]
New Jersey: “Killers are more likely to be sentenced to death in New Jersey if their victims were white rather than black, a new judicial report has found. ‘There is unsettling statistical evidence indicating that cases involving killers of white victims are more likely to progress to a [death] penalty phase than cases involving killers of African-American victims,’ the report found.†[The Bergen County, NJ Record, 8/14/01]
It’s high time that we address this problem seriously.
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
It’s sad that people are so ready to ignore blatant racism in our country with the most serious of consequences.
September 22nd, 2005 at 1:44 pmWas there any doubt that this was the case. Why does it take a study to “discover” what is already known.
Here, I will make it easy for the next study:
Rich people are found not guilty of murder, while poor people are.
September 22nd, 2005 at 2:05 pmThanks for posting.
September 22nd, 2005 at 2:07 pmIt’s time to address the entire issue of the death penalty. I’ll be the first to jump in and say it has to go.
September 22nd, 2005 at 2:34 pmWhy aren’t the HMOs, Bush hacks, and other insurers held to the death penalty for committing murder for withholding medical treatment so that the insured dies?
I mean murder is murder whether it is done with a gun, non-action, or paper work.
September 22nd, 2005 at 2:36 pmRegardless of a person’s feelings about the death penanlty, these types of studies show serious injustice is involved with the most severe punishment avialable. Until these issues of racism can be adequately address, there should be a moratorium on capital punishment.
September 22nd, 2005 at 2:44 pm“It’s high time that we address this problem seriously.”
Indeed it is. But let me add this: Many of us oppose the death penalty first and foremost because it is wrong. Morally wrong. In every case. Period. The fact that the death penalty is meted out in a racist fashion is, of course, indefensible, but even a “fair” death penalty would be entirely unacceptable to me.
September 22nd, 2005 at 2:46 pmwhile i agree that this racist death penalty must go..
September 22nd, 2005 at 2:48 pmin reference to #5..our inactions could be considered murder since we’re not all in developing nations feeding those who starve to death daily. that being said..its obvious that our administration holds the power to eradicate certain things w/ the swoop of a pen..but they don’t. its easier to convict when there is tangible evidence rather than intangible negligence. lets convict bush of for the same crimes for which he wants to convict his ol play pal saddam.
We’ve had over 100 death row inmates exonerated through new DNA, confessions of the guilty and investigative techniques since 1973.
http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/article.php?scid=6&did=110
Most of these people were wrongly accused and railroaded simply because they were poor (and more often because they were poor and black). Based on these recent findings it’s clear that the death penalty has killed many innocent people, and is an immoral and barbaric solution to a problem that it doesn’t solve. It doesn’t deter crime (in fact we have much HIGHER crime rates than countries that don’t have it), and it’s a nonsensical solution from a moral and societal perspective.
How anyone who claims to be a christian could be in favor of capital punishment after the example of christ is beyond me. It’s clear they didn’t learn anything from their bible study…
September 22nd, 2005 at 2:54 pmThis is not one of my arguments against the death penalty. I know there are plenty of reasons that it should be eliminated, some of which have been posted here. But, I’ve also had the thought that death is to good for some criminals, that they should be made to suffer.
September 22nd, 2005 at 3:18 pmI am against the death penalty because it is not applied evenly. Would some member of the Moral Christian Left (except the self proclaimed Bible scholar, Ryan) please explain how you can be adamantly pro-”choice” and just as adamantly anti-death penalty?
September 22nd, 2005 at 3:24 pm“Based on these recent findings it’s clear that the death penalty has killed many innocent people”
Ok, then name one.
The DP is not morally wrong, it is the just punishment for murder.
Finally, the study does not prove white racism is the cause of the disparity. Per capita black-on-white crime is much higher than per capita white-on-black crime.
September 22nd, 2005 at 3:30 pm“I am against the death penalty because it is not applied evenly. Would some member of the Moral Christian Left (except the self proclaimed Bible scholar, Ryan) please explain how you can be adamantly pro-â€choice†and just as adamantly anti-death penalty?”
Actually I’m a hindu, just because happen to know more about christianity than the supposed christians do, don’t take it to heart. None of the reichwingers like you ever seem to do your homework, so why would this be any different.
So a better question is why don’t you already know this question? I already know why the reichwingers feel abortion is OK, and yet they believe that war, the death penalty, and allowing those same children to be mercury or lead poisoned is alright – why don’t you know why left wingers feel abortion is OK? Don’t you ever listen to the arguments of the other side? Well of course you don’t – you’re just another self righteous reichwing propagandist aren’t you…
So a better solution would be for you to go research the opinions of the left – and to return with a book report. But then again, I bet you’re the type that always got the boys to do your homework for you so you could skate by and be lazy. Seems like old habits die hard for the hateful and the lazy…
September 22nd, 2005 at 3:34 pmSo aphrodite the ann coulter of our site says she/he has no problem with the death penalty – only its application. And yet, how could one possibly apply it evenly? After all, it’s been shown that innocent people are killed even with the best efforts of science available at any given time. So if we assume in his/her wild imagination there is a place where it should be applied evenly – one would wonder whether he/she is comfortable with the occassional innocent person who’s killed despite that innocence. And if he/she doesn’t have a problem with that – then wow, he/she is just as immoral and stupid as I suspected…
September 22nd, 2005 at 3:36 pm#12 I found 16 such cases. This study claims that all 16 of the cases they found were innocent people executed for crimes they did not commit.
That took approximately 7 seconds to find with Google. I’m sure there are many more.
September 22nd, 2005 at 3:39 pmUh… that would be here: http://www.quixote.org/ej/grip/reasonabledoubt/report.html
September 22nd, 2005 at 3:40 pmOut of at least 400 innocent people convicted of capital crimes they did not commit, 23 were executed. Execution of an innocent person is an injustice that cannot be rectified.
September 22nd, 2005 at 4:06 pm” I will believe in the death penalty when you will prove to me the infallibility of human beings.” Marquis de Lafayette
September 22nd, 2005 at 4:10 pmhow can a punishment so final as the complete elimination of a human life be practiced in a system that is not perfect or final…and never will be?
humans are not perfect..therefore our flaws will come forth in our actions. to end a life is unjust and hateful.
spreading hate will only cause hate to spread.
September 22nd, 2005 at 4:11 pmCome on 12, is your head that far lodged that you couldn’t have clicked on the link that gave tons of case run downs of innocent people who have been killed?
September 22nd, 2005 at 4:18 pmIt is wrong because it isn’t correct all the time. It is also wrong because it ties up the courts with appeals and retrials. The average stay on death row in Florida for example is well over a decade. http://www.dc.state.fl.us/oth/deathrow/#Statistics
From the aboved link at deathpenaltyinfo.com we learn that the average death penalty retrial costs 50 percent more in Arkansas and 70 percent more in Kansas than the average trial.
Not only that, studies have show that the penalty is applied in an obviously racist manner. What more would it take for you to admit the death penalty is wrong? Would it take a few dozen Bible passages about the anger God feels when unjust judging kills the poor and the innocent?
Aphrodite,
I won’t try to be the voice of the “Moral Christian Left,” but I’ll give you my point of view as a Christian and a liberal. For me, being against the death penalty and pro-choice has to do with how human beings are. We make mistakes and are often in bad situations. When presented with these types of moral quandries, in which there is not a clear moral yes/no answer, I try look at the utility of a position. And, yes, I know that utilitarianism is not the end all, be all of philosphical morality. I just believe that when you’re dealing with human nature, not everything is black and white.
This is not the full answer I would like to give…but unfortunately, I have to go into a meeting. Bad V for blogging at work.
September 22nd, 2005 at 4:34 pmIf I may just jump in here and make a quick point: “Let he who is without sin cast the first stone”. Thanks awfully for your time and see you all at the Rapture.
September 22nd, 2005 at 4:40 pmJust curious — was there any correlation between the victim race and conditions of crime? To use a hugely inappropriate example, are juries more likely to approve execution in cases involving gangbangers, when gangbangers are more likely to be black or hispanic…?
I’m not arguing that some sort of racism, active or latent, isn’t at work — but it’s not the only example for a correlation between victim melanin and execution rate. I’m against the death penalty, anyway.
September 22nd, 2005 at 4:53 pmThat should’ve read,
“…not the only possible reason for a correlation….”
September 22nd, 2005 at 4:59 pmMichael,
There’s a direct correlation between the death penalty, race and the race of the victim. Blacks who kill blacks are given the death penalty less often than blacks who kill white. Whites who kill blacks are given the death penalty less often than whites who kill whites. And whites who kill whites are given the death penalty less than black who kill blacks.
It’s a racial and prejudicial system that unfairly targets black men who are unfortunately often innocent but who prove convenient scapegoats for republican politicians who want to pretend to be tough on crime.
September 22nd, 2005 at 5:01 pmPuleeez. Why should we worry our beautiful brains about this? Many of these “people” who are executed are poor, so it works out pretty well for them.
September 22nd, 2005 at 5:27 pmStill no names? Not even one? There’s been so many, but you can’t name a single innocent person who has been executed?
As an aside, how would those against the DP punish a person serving a life sentence who murdered a guard in prison?
September 22nd, 2005 at 5:31 pmMore facts….
Governor who has presided over the most executions in US History: George W. Bush, 152 executions in six years as Governor of Texas, a record which still stands.
As of 2003, six of the top seven states in murder rate were states that voted for George W. Bush, and all of them had the death penalty.
As of 2003, eight of the bottom 13 states in murder rate voted for Kerry, and eight of the bottom 13 states did not have the death penalty.
Culture of life, indeed.
September 22nd, 2005 at 5:32 pm“It is wrong because it isn’t correct all the time.”
Is it wrong to put someone in prison until they die, since that isn’t correct all the time?
September 22nd, 2005 at 5:33 pm“…152 executions in six years as Governor of Texas…”
Sounds like a good start.
September 22nd, 2005 at 5:35 pmWallace,
At least prison is reversable if they’re found to be innocent – the same can’t be said for the death penalty. So yeah, I’d say that seems more like a reasonable and rational approach given the alternatives.
September 22nd, 2005 at 5:41 pmOk, then name one.
Delma Banks. Odell Barnes, Jr. Sam Marshall. Lee Perry Farmer. Troy Lee Jones. Oscar Lee Morris. Delbert Tibbs. Nicholas James Yarris.
That took me two minutes of searching on the Internet, less time that it took you to write off everyone on Death Row as guilty.
September 22nd, 2005 at 5:43 pmWallace, if we put someone in jail for the rest of their lives and then discover we have made a mistake, we can let them out. While still quite wrong, it can be remedied. Decent defense attorneys would be a great start.
September 22nd, 2005 at 5:47 pmZookeeper!
That’s SO true. In texas the defense attorney configuration is insane. They have limited budgets (compared to prosecutors who have UNLIMITED budgets). They’re paid miserably (compared to prosecutors who are paid handsomely). And they don’t even have enough of them funded to REVIEW the cases before they’re presented. It’s an abomination, and why there’s so much injustice in that poor excuse for a ‘justice’ system they have…
September 22nd, 2005 at 5:53 pmRyan, you misunderstood my objection, I think.
You write, “It’s a racial and prejudicial system that unfairly targets black men who are unfortunately often innocent but who prove convenient scapegoats for republican politicians who want to pretend to be tough on crime.”
I’ve already said that I don’t think there isn’t active/latent racism at work here, although I suppose my curiosity about other correlating factors might make it seem that way.
You write further, “Blacks who kill blacks are given the death penalty less often than blacks who kill white. Whites who kill blacks are given the death penalty less often than whites who kill whites. And whites who kill whites are given the death penalty less than black who kill blacks.”
Therefore, ranked by frequency of execution from highest to lowest:
Perpetrator -> Victim
Black -> Black
Black -> White
White -> Black
White -> White
Questions I could ask you include the following:
Are murders with white perpetrators more likely to involve self-defense? Is one black person more likely to kill another black person in the midst of another crime?
Without definitively answering those questions — and perhaps the studies cited do, as I haven’t checked — there remain other plausible, non-racist explanations for at least some of the regressions that were run. I make the point not to argue against the existence of racism in our judicial system (as I’ve noted twice already now) but to wonder at the statisical figures given and at the methodology used to control for other possible explanations. In my own experience with quantitative social science researcher blindness can lead to significant error.
For what it’s worth I’ll download the study to my desktop and put it on my to-read list, although I probably won’t return to this thread again. (I do most of my blog reading via RSS feeds.)
Feel free to email me if you’d like to discuss the matter further: m1flynn at ucsd (dot edu).
September 22nd, 2005 at 6:03 pmNo, you’ve gotten that wrong. Death penalty likelihood as I understand it is such that the most likely candidates are black men who kill white people. The least likely are white people who kill black people.
In otherwords black lives are the less valued by the system in both sides of the criminal situation.
If you are truly interested in this, there are significant amounts of research done on the subject. Just go do an internet search and look it up…
September 22nd, 2005 at 6:11 pmMy mistake again — the link is actually to an AP review of the as-yet-unpublished study. I’ve emailed the co-authors about seeing a copy.
September 22nd, 2005 at 6:16 pmOh, so I got my stupid series of arrows wrong. My mistake. You’re not even responding to the substantive points I’m trying to make, though — typical of both the left- and right-wing extremists who comment on this site. I should’ve known better.
September 22nd, 2005 at 6:18 pmMichael,
That’s because your statements are largely spin, and not actually relevant. Why aren’t you asking the RELEVANT questions.
1) Do whites and blacks receive the same level of legal support?
2) What percentage of blacks rely on court appointed attornies – versus whites?
The biggest issue is poverty – you’re trying to turn it into a eugenics study…
September 22nd, 2005 at 6:25 pmMichael,
Since you seem incapable of researching this information yourself – go here at look at some raw data collected.
http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/article.php?scid=45&did=539
And learn how to do your own homework while you’re at UCSD!
September 22nd, 2005 at 6:26 pmRe #32: Just posting a list of names in no way demonstrates that they were innocent and executed. Try again.
Re #33: “Wallace, if we put someone in jail for the rest of their lives and then discover we have made a mistake, we can let them out.”
Unsurprisingly, given your other posts, you missed the question. I’ll ask it again: If someone serves a life sentence in prison until they die, is that wrong because the system is not perfect?
September 22nd, 2005 at 6:32 pm“The biggest issue is poverty”
Then why are you race-obsessed leftists trying to make it about race, like you always do?
September 22nd, 2005 at 6:33 pmWallace,
Only a race obsessed redneck won’t admit that race is often a part of these decisions. I know the south, you aren’t fooling anyone.
“If someone serves a life sentence in prison until they die, is that wrong because the system is not perfect?”
Actually that’s not even a sensical question. I presume you meant to ask if someone serves a life sentence who is innocent is that wrong – and the clear answer is sure it is. That’s why states need to actually reasonably fund poor people who are accused of crimes – instead of being like texas and assuming they’re guilty and not funding their defense.
So I’d ask you – is it wrong to use unlimited resources to prosecute a poor person who can’t defend themselves and put them in jail just because they’re too poor for a defense? You answer that question!
September 22nd, 2005 at 6:47 pm““The biggest issue is povertyâ€
Then why are you race-obsessed leftists trying to make it about race, like you always do? ”
Because unfortunately republicans (MrWrong for instance who posts white supremacist literature on this site almost daily serves as the perfect example of this) are often racists – even the ones that think of themselves otherwise… The reality is that you believe that these people have some defect that makes them more prone to crime – MrWrong posted this VERY argument earlier this week. So the reality is race and poverty are inter-related, because racist people do not provide equal opportunties, equal education or equal access to minorities. This is why we have affirmative action – and why it’s critical along with even better social programs to help these people escape poverty.
A better way to state this is while the problem for much of this is poverty, in america race an poverty are intermingled and this fact is inescapable.
But then I have a reasoned argument – you only have racism and classism as your tools of understanding.
September 22nd, 2005 at 6:50 pmVendla – Thank you for your response. However, I’m a little confused by your statement. “For me, being against the death penalty and pro-choice has to do with how human beings are. We make mistakes and are often in bad situations.” Are you discussing the human who makes the “mistake” of killing someone, the woman who finds herself pregnant and says “oops!”, or the soon to be born baby who finds itself in the “bad situation” of having a pair of scissors plunged in the back of their head and their brain sucked out? I appreciate your liberal answer but it’s a little too “squishy” to understand. Is your answer a good example of “situational ethics”?
September 22nd, 2005 at 7:11 pmMightyPropagandistTwit,
First of all the scissors to the baby head isn’t even covered under Roe v. Wade. Your reference to ‘late term’ abortions are in fact not a federally protected right. What is right is the removal of a ‘fetus’ which is a clump of cells that can become a human being, yet which possess no alpha waves, or higher brain functions and therefore is not yet a human. To argue that they have the ‘potential’ to become a human is irrelevant, because they are NOT yet a human being – in the same way that Terri Schiavo who had lost her brain functions was no longer a living person.
Those with less sophisticated brains (that would be you), have a hard time realizing that tissue is not a person – a person who has a thinking and rational mind is a person. While you may have religious beliefs that cloud and shape your opinion – they are hardly backed up by science or medicine. While you are certainly welcomed to have those feelings and not have an abortion yourself, to claim that a fetus is a child, or that you have a right to force a woman to be a baby incubator is entirely nonsensical and irrational.
Considering how emotional, irrational, and unscientific reichwingers like you are – I’m sure you’ll try to do some witty retort that continues to show you have actual grasp of the situation.
And if you care so much about scissors to the back of the head – then I’m sure you’d say electrocution of a potentially innocent person is just as heinous? Or does all of your compassion remained attached to the womb?
September 22nd, 2005 at 7:16 pmAs a friend once said, Conservative compassion seems entirely limited to fetuses in the womb – as soon as they’re out of the womb they’re on their own. This kind of narrow and childish view of compassion shows how infantile and disrespectful of life the reichwingers truly are…
September 22nd, 2005 at 7:18 pmNow back to the topic at hand.
Republicans choose to defend the killing of innocent people by accusing liberals of doing the same. If they feel they are so much morally superior – why don’t they just argue that murder is wrong in all cases, including warfare? Why are they so selective in their choice of who they think should be killed? Because it isn’t about morality – it’s about power. Lets look at each scenario.
1) Abortion – this is about power of the ‘anxious masculine’ men to control the bodies of women. I believe aphrodite is probably one of those ‘men’, although it’s hard to tell what gender if any this person is. They believe that if they don’t control women, they’ll never procreate – and considering how vile most republican men I’ve met are, this might be true.
2) Death Penalty – the threat of death to minorities who commit crimes against white people is why this law exists. This feeling of insecurity is all about white power, and nothing more.
3) War – this is an engine of political distraction and economic exploitation (as halliburton demostrates).
In each of these cases the reasons that republicans choose the side they choose isn’t for civil liberties, religious values or even civil discourse – it’s power over people they fear. It is truly the party of fear, greed and ignorance!
September 22nd, 2005 at 7:22 pmI don’t see any Republicans here making racist statements Ryan, unless you’re claiming to be a Republican.
Your logic is all screwed up. If we must ban the death penalty because some innocent someday might possibly be executed, then we must end incarceration on the same basis. it’s teh same injustice if an innocent person rots in prison for 40 or 50 years and dies there.
Also, if perfection is the standard, we must close every highway in America, becasue we knwo for a fact that some people will die if they staty open.
We must close every restaurant in America, because we know some people will die from food poisoning if they stay open.
We must disband the police and the military, becasue we know for a fact that some innocents will be arrested and/or shot.
We know that some convicted murderers will re-offend if they aren’t executed. How will you solve that one, given the standard that we must be perfect?
The demand for perfection is simply dishonest and asinine.
September 22nd, 2005 at 7:25 pmThis entire paragraph is BS, from beginning to end:
“First of all the scissors to the baby head isn’t even covered under Roe v. Wade. Your reference to ‘late term’ abortions are in fact not a federally protected right. What is right is the removal of a ‘fetus’ which is a clump of cells that can become a human being, yet which possess no alpha waves, or higher brain functions and therefore is not yet a human. To argue that they have the ‘potential’ to become a human is irrelevant, because they are NOT yet a human being – in the same way that Terri Schiavo who had lost her brain functions was no longer a living person.”
September 22nd, 2005 at 7:26 pm“As a friend once said, Conservative compassion seems entirely limited to fetuses in the womb – as soon as they’re out of the womb they’re on their own. This kind of narrow and childish view of compassion shows how infantile and disrespectful of life the reichwingers truly are…”
Your friend is either a liar, an idiot, or both. I’d dump him, but I obviously have higher standards than Ryan. *L*
September 22nd, 2005 at 7:27 pm“why don’t they just argue that murder is wrong in all cases, including warfare?”
Killing in warfare isn’t murder, for starters. *L*
September 22nd, 2005 at 7:29 pmWallace,
Your propaganda is irrational and illogical. You haven’t proven anything other than you don’t know anything and rant blah blah blah.
There’s no moral reason to kill people who might be innocent – that’s cruel and unusual punishment. However incarceration of people who have been tried in a fair court of law should be able to expect that they might be incarcerated. The problem is the system isn’t fair, and therefore the chance of them dying unnecessarily is high. Of the 400 deaths so far, 23 have been PROVEN to be innocent. This isn’t some mythical scenario – it has already happened repeatedly.
To use your analogy of food deaths, if 400 people who ate a hamburger died of food poisoning – they would shut down the restaurant that sold it. Your arguments are so limbaugh nonsensical you MUST be a stupid ditto head.
“We must disband the police and the military, because we know for a fact that some innocents will be arrested and/or shot.”
Well actually that makes a good argument for not doing a pre-emptive war – and the one that we used to prosecute Nazis in WWII. Too bad for you and for us that you’ve become one of them…
“We know that some convicted murderers will re-offend if they aren’t executed. How will you solve that one, given the standard that we must be perfect? ”
Using the strawman argument that nothing is perfect does not excuse you from doing what’s stupid. In a perfect world everyone would get a fair defense. We do not live in that perfect world however, so a reasonable person will say then we shouldn’t kill people who might be innocent as this is a final solution to a problem that frankly does not call for one.
September 22nd, 2005 at 7:35 pm“Killing in warfare isn’t murder, for starters. *L*”
What? Are you insane? Wait – don’t answer that – YES YOU ARE!
Who told you that crock of $hit – rush limbaugh? You are a retard beyond retards! Is that why we charged Nazis with murder – wait no – that would make you an irrational idiot if that were true – and yet it is!
September 22nd, 2005 at 7:37 pmWallace you don’t have any standards. If you can’t offer a reasonable argument for why my statements are ‘false’, other than your witless opinion without reasons – then I take that as a conceded defeat by someone uneducated on the subject… Don’t worry, you haven’t offered anything else of value other than unsound and irrational statements – so I don’t expect you to develop a brain at this point…
September 22nd, 2005 at 7:39 pm“What? Are you insane? Wait – don’t answer that – YES YOU ARE!
Who told you that crock of $hit – rush limbaugh? You are a retard beyond retards! Is that why we charged Nazis with murder – wait no – that would make you an irrational idiot if that were true – and yet it is! ”
Such juvenile irrationality. Are you incapable of thinking and arguing? If so, why don’t you try it instead of ranting and name-calling? *L*
Nazis were not charged with murder for killing enemy soldiers on the battlefield, genius. Your moral idocy is matched by your historical ignorance.
September 22nd, 2005 at 7:58 pm“I take that as a conceded defeat by someone uneducated on the subject…”
I have no interest in how you take anything.
September 22nd, 2005 at 7:59 pm“Such juvenile irrationality.”
You’ve described republican values and arguments in a nutshell – thanks for being so clear…
“I have no interest in how you take anything.”
And yet you prove you are a liar, because you keep responding to what I say. If you care so little, why come to the site? Because we represent the truth and you live a lie and you can’t allow the truth to exist which undermines that lie.
Nuremburg trials – ARTICLE 6
The Tribunal established by the Agreement referred to in Article 1 hereof for the trial and punishment of the major war criminals of the European Axis countries shall have the power to try and punish persons who, acting in the interests of the European Axis countries, whether as individuals or as members of organizations, committed any of the following crimes.
The following acts, or any of them, are crimes coming within the jurisdiction of the Tribunal for which there shall be individual responsibility:
(a) Crimes against Peace: namely, planning, preparation, initiation or waging of a war of aggression, or a war in violation of international treaties, agreements or assurances, or participation in a Common Plan or Conspiracy for the accomplishment of any of the foregoing;
September 22nd, 2005 at 8:18 pm(b) War Crimes: namely, violations of the laws or customs of war. Such violations shall include, but not be limited to, murder, ill-treatment or deportation to slave labor or for any other purpose of civilian population of or in occupied territory, murder or ill-treatment of prisoners of war or persons on the seas, killing of hostages, plunder of public or private property, wanton destruction of cities, towns, or villages, or devastation not justified by military necessity;
(c) Crimes against Humanity: namely, murder, extermination, enslavement, deportation, and other inhumane acts committed against any civilian population, before or during the war,14 or persecutions on political, racial, or religious grounds in execution of or in connection with any crime within the jurisdiction of the Tribunal, whether or not in violation of domestic law of the country where perpetrated.
Did you see the word murder repeated multiple times? You’re such a classic retarded republican – I’ve forgotten more ‘facts’ than you’ve clearly ever heard in your life…
September 22nd, 2005 at 8:19 pmWallace,
You’re out of your league and clearly talking out of your a$$. Go back to the freerepublic so you don’t have to think anymore – it might give you a brain aneurism since you aren’t used to using that organ.
September 22nd, 2005 at 8:21 pmYou’re probably also ignorant of the fact the NeoCons are followers of LeoStrauss and his policies of modern american fascism? You guys are all following a fascist dictator and are too stupid and illiterate to even know it! What freeptards!
September 22nd, 2005 at 8:22 pmVendla, I’m sorry your attempt to explain your death penalty vs. abortion stance was hijacked by a sophomoric ideologue. Reading this site, I realize one of the reasons I left progressive politics was the “squishy” moral relativism and the constant anger -not from you Vendla, but from 95% of the lefties I know personally and at sites like this – many could boil it down easily to “ALL ANGER – ALL THE TIME”
Mr. Messy – If the true concern of NARAL, NOW et al. is Roe v. Wade, why oppose the ban on partial birth abortion, which you admit, is not covered by Roe? Try to stay out of the circular reasoning – it’s dangerous for you – kind of like operating heavy machinery. On a light note*** Congratulations – your argument sounds like Canada’s favourite abortionist, Henry Morganthaler. You need to get past your Move.on only sources!!
September 22nd, 2005 at 8:47 pm“why oppose the ban on partial birth abortion”
Ban on what? A medical procedure you say? Lets see…
One reason is that the fetus could be deformed, and incapable of actually being a ‘functional’ adult.
One reason is that the mother’s life might be in danger.
See this medical issue is already regulated strictly at the state level based purely on medical conditions in pretty much all cases.
A better question is why do you presume to overrule valid medical reasons for a procedure with religious and personal opinions? Are you a doctor? Do you believe you have more of a right to make this decision than the woman and her doctor? If you do – then you clearly know nothing of medical ethics or civil liberties, but since you’re a republican – I already knew you were unaware of both principles.
“Congratulations – your argument sounds like Canada’s favourite abortionist, Henry Morganthaler. You need to get past your Move.on only sources!!”
Actually I wrote that entirely out of my own mind based on my assessment of the situation. If I align with another great liberal mind (I’m unaware of the person you refer to – I’m an american) then that just goes to show you how reasonable and rational the argument is…
And unlike you, I don’t need a talking point spoon feeder who’ll think for me – I came to this opinion entirely on my own – surely a foreign concept for a little lemming like yourself…
Your arguments for why abortion should be made illegal are entirely baseless from a scientific or rational perspective. You have a right to live and believe any fantasy you wish (be it based on religion or mythological fairies) – but when you try to project your prejudices and irrational values on the country as law, then you’re just a dangerous crackpot (which clearly you are), with a clearly overinflated sense of your selfworth or the extent of your knowledge and wisdom…
September 22nd, 2005 at 9:04 pm“Reading this site, I realize one of the reasons I left progressive politics was the “squishy†moral relativism and the constant anger -not from you Vendla, but from 95% of the lefties I know personally and at sites like this – many could boil it down easily to “ALL ANGER – ALL THE TIME—
And yet you follow republicans which are entirely moral relativism in action. You claim to want to protect babies, yet you starve, poison and abandom them. You claim to want to protect lives, yet you wage wars, kill innocent inmates and torture innocent people.
If you left progressive politics because you thing liberals are moral relativists – then you’re a more stupid idiot than I thought!
Lets look at the ‘consistency’ of the liberal argument for all of these situations – it’s called civil liberties.
1) Abortion – liberals suppor this because the civil liberties of the mother outweigh any religious bigotries and ensure that she has a right to appropriate and reasonable medical options over her own bodies.
2) Capital punishment – liberals are against this because the civil liberties of the inmate should ensure that they aren’t put to death because this is both a cruel and unusual punishment, and that it takes away their rights to potentially be proven innocent at a later date.
3) Torture – liberals are against it because the civil liberties of potentially innocent (and even guilty) prevent this radical and obscene treatment.
4) Terminating ‘Schiavos’ – the civil liberties of the family responsible for this decision should have the rights to decide (like abortion), and it is not the realm of the state to violate these rights.
Interesting how the only way the CONservative responses work to all of these questions is with ‘moral relativism’… You’re clearly a clueless dope!
September 22nd, 2005 at 9:12 pmAnd for those that didn’t know, many of the NeoCons ‘claim’ to have been liberals. How quickly they become fascist when israel’s protections get involved. How long have you been a zionist aphrodite? Do you have your israeli citizenship yet?
I asked you this last week, but like a classic republican propagandist you refused to answer and changed the subject. Why are you afraid to admit you’re a zionist – are you ashamed of your politics?
September 22nd, 2005 at 9:14 pmAnd ‘moral relativism’ of the reichwing usually means that you won’t promise to kill all of the palestinians with the zionists. If you have any sort of balanced view of foreign policy where you wish to protect BOTH parties, they treat you as being immoral, when clearly the opposite is true. That’s what moral relativism REALLY means to a NeoCon. If you don’t help them protect their ‘relatives’, then they’re ‘morally’ obligated to lie, cheat, torture, murder and steal you out of your democracy…
Pick your allegiance aphrodite, is it to america or to israel – you can’t serve two masters… And this holds true for the radical christians as well who are just as hellbent on screwing the palestinians to ensure the rapture comes and the second coming of the messiah happens. Both groups of zionists are religious morons who kill innocent people (islamic terrorists get no free ride, they are the same ilk), steal elections and poison the world political environment for some stupid fable! Religion is a tool of love and understanding – religious extremism is a tool of worldwide destruction!
September 22nd, 2005 at 9:35 pm“why oppose the ban on partial birth abortion, which you admit, is not covered by Roe? Try to stay out of the circular reasoning – it’s dangerous for you – kind of like operating heavy machinery.”
You should read the warning labels from your medication, they made it into your post…
If we’re going to talk moral outrage, and ‘moral relativism’ if you reasoning. If you don’t believe that late term abortions (partial birth is so propagandist) should be legal, then why is the separation of siamese twins legal? After all, this often results in the death of one of the children (what you say you oppose) and even though the death of one child might kill the other – the arguments you use and apply for late term abortions would clearly apply. In that scenario it’s clear that you should be lobbying for the banning of the separation of siamese twins even in the case of potential death to both parties….
And now the propagandist must decide if she’s capable of, or even can find a talking point to respond to this argument. And why are there probably no talking points? Because ryan actually having a brain just came up with it in 30 seconds, whereas aphrodite clearly hasn’t had an original thought in her/his pitiful and self agrandized life!
So now miss stupidPriss – when are you going to get on the phone to end this madness of the republican moral relativism!
September 22nd, 2005 at 9:47 pmUh, none of those references to murder referred to killing soldiers on the battlefield, genius. *LOL*
Not rational, to say the least: “You’re probably also ignorant of the fact the NeoCons are followers of LeoStrauss and his policies of modern american fascism? You guys are all following a fascist dictator and are too stupid and illiterate to even know it! What freeptards!”
Pretty pathetic.
September 22nd, 2005 at 10:10 pmYes they did – but then again reading comprehension isn’t your strong suit is it.
Such violations shall include, but not be limited to, murder, ill-treatment
It doesn’t say where these must occur – only that they must.
September 22nd, 2005 at 10:39 pm“Pretty pathetic.”
You sure are.
You don’t believe killing is murder? Now if that isn’t moral relativism, and clearly a cognitive disconnect, then clearly nothing is… And you forget the documented murders at AbuGraib of prisoners who were beaten to death. War always produces MURDER whether you like it or not – and so far this administration has protected those who did those acts….
The belief that war makes killing someone ‘legal’, is just another way to justify crime and call it uncriminal. Hitler did the same thing with german laws – but it’s clearly insane. And if you didn’t notice in the second section of the articles of nuremburg, attacking an enemy pre-emptively that has not attacked you and clearly has no reasonable ability to do so, makes those attacks murder. Get with the program you apologists for murderers and treasonous politicians!
September 22nd, 2005 at 10:44 pmNo response on LeoStrauss or that your party is being run by fascists with fascist doctrine? You have no problem with this? Or you refuse to accept it and deny that it’s true.
Go to wikipedia and search for leo strauss, you might be surprised at what you find – you clearly are clueless in all things…
September 22nd, 2005 at 10:45 pmNow back to the topic. If the point of terrorism is to terrorize a group into not performing an action – then the death penalty surely applies as terrorism. Since one of the stated intention for murdering a potentially innocent person is to ‘deter’ (eg. terrorize) other people who might commit a crime – then clearly it fits the definition of terrorism…
September 22nd, 2005 at 10:47 pmAnd for those that believe you can’t commit murder in war, read this ‘christian science’ article.
http://www.csmonitor.com/2005/0429/p01s02-usju.html
Even if you only believe the ‘conservative’ definition (eg. the spin moral relative edition) of murder, war still clearly has cases of murder – even ones that are sometimes prosecuted, although clearly most aren’t. If war ‘creates’ murder, then clearly it is inherently immoral..
September 22nd, 2005 at 11:12 pmIt’s high time that we address this problem seriously.
posted and comment by Payson
Damn right it’s high time to address the problem. The problem is there are not enough states with the mandatory death penalty for killing a white man, or anyone else as if it made a difference.
Since the “12% of our Black population commit over 50% of the vicious crime and kill whites at a rate 30 times higher than the other way around it is time we addressed the problem. Let the word go out through the black community that if you kill a white man or woman you will fry like the Col’s chicken. Then do it.
September 23rd, 2005 at 9:31 amWhile I’m against the death penalty in almost every case, and I suspect there probably is some ethnicity-related bias (there really is no such thing as race, scientifically speaking), I really dislike studies like these that dumb-down and manipulate statistics for a desired effect. Showing just one simple statistic, regarding just one variable pair in the study, is irresponsible.
Consider the definitions and 6 scenarios below:
S* = Sneetches with stars
S = Sneetches without
murder = pre-meditated or at least considered as a possibility ahead of time, not killing strictly in self defense.
1) S* drug-dealer murders S* drug-dealer
2) S drug-dealer murders S drug-dealer
3) S* drug-dealer murders S* Mom-and-Pop store owner
4) S drug-dealer murders S Mom-and-Pop store owner
5) S Mom-and-Pop store owner murders S* drug-dealer
6) S* Mom-and-Pop store owner murders S drug-dealer
These six situations are not all equivalent, and would evoke different emotions and results from Sneetch juries. But the studies and quotes listed above only consider race. If you did a study of six cases (one of each of the above) and cases 1, 3, and 6 got the death penalty, then that would certainly suggest a racist bias.
September 23rd, 2005 at 12:18 pmBut, for the sake of argument, say you did a study of twelve cases (seven of number one, and one each of the rest), and 3 of number 1 got the death penalty as well as cases 2, 3, and 4. That’s 4 S* death penalties to 2 S death penalties, based on the cases considered. So the headline could read “Sneetches’s with stars twice as likely to get death penalty”. In my opinion, that’s poor reporting. It’s a true statistic, but it’s deceiving and not intellectually honest. It’s either irresponsible, if done out of ignorance or innumeracy, or criminal, if done intentionally.
Did that make sense? Is it too much to ask for honesty in reporting rather than sensationalism to make a point?
Maybe there is a true bias shown in these studies, but if there was I don’t think it wasn’t communicated well at all.
(I apologize to any Sneetch readers I may have offended by using them as an example.)
#70: Right. I feel no need to address every loony conspiracy theory posted by every tinfoil-hat-wearing nut on the Internet. *L*
It is not “moral relativism” to note that all killing is not murder. It is moral idiocy to suggest that all killing is murder.
September 23rd, 2005 at 12:50 pmRyan Messy – “And yet you follow republicans which are entirely moral relativism in action. You claim to want to protect babies, yet you starve, poison and abandom them. You claim to want to protect lives, yet you wage wars, kill innocent inmates and torture innocent people.” No, Ryan we feed and shelter abandoned children through numerous charities and philanthropies. I want to see no one innocent of a crime executed – that is why I support Barry Scheck’s “Innocence Project” which has assisted inmates convicted of horrific crimes through the use of DNA. If by torturing “innocent people” you are referring to Islamic detainees of the US (again your thoughts are a bit “squishy”) I hope they make them wear soiled underwear on their heads 24/7. (My avenging nature comes out when I think of the frozen fear and mental anguish of Daniel Pearl, Nick Berg and others.) And yes, oh quick one, I am a PROUD defender of Israel and a Zionist. I am a “recovering liberal” due to fact liberalism tries to negate the competitve side of human nature – and the majority of the welfare programs DO NOT WORK. Liberalism makes excuses for people’s poor behaviour and props up cultures of illegitimacy and disdain for education. Two quick questions for you:
September 23rd, 2005 at 1:34 pm1.) Did Mom and Dad waste their hard earned $$ on your
“education”? – You always manage to duck that “q”.
2.) Your responses seem to be EXTREMELY immature – sort of like my kids when they were 7 or 8. Go sit in the corner!
Your question about my alliegance? I am a PROUD AMERICAN!! (rather than a “squishy” UN community member!) I come from a fighting family on my father’s side; we have proudly served (and lost) some of our bravest and most unselfish members in EVERY war since the Civil War. (We were not lucky enough to be here in order to contribute to the Revolution – but we have been PROUD to contribute ever since our arrival.) On my mother’s side, she was a more recent arrival having been lucky enough to leave Austria after the occupation of Hitler and the embrace of Nazism by MANY Austrians. P.S. Jonathan Pollard is where he belongs -I do NOT condone his illegal spying on behalf of Israel. To encapsulate, mas enfante, (for all you squishy Francophiles!) I am a PROUD AMERICAN – AND AM PROUD TO SUPPORT THE MIDDLE EAST DEMOCRACY OF OUR LOYAL FRIEND, ISRAEL!
September 23rd, 2005 at 2:52 pmIsrael is a democracy in the same way the apartheid Republic of South Africa was a democracy.
September 23rd, 2005 at 3:10 pm#78 – Yaaawwwnnnnn ….. didn’t you try this argument once before ….. a long, long …time ago?
Mr. Messy – “If you don’t believe that late term abortions (partial birth is so propagandist) should be legal, then why is the separation of siamese twins legal? After all, this often results in the death of one of the children (what you say you oppose)” – Ryan
September 23rd, 2005 at 3:55 pmI’m sorry to sink to your level, but have you always been as stupid as your “logic” indicates or do you work hard at shifting the goal posts – that’s aggressive football lingo for you soft, squishy wimps -the separation of Siamese twins is not designed to KILL them!!!!! Partial birth abortion is DESIGNED to kill – and it’s implementation produces just such results. When I was expecting my last baby, my then 6 yro daughter asked, “Mommy Aphrodite, what are we going to do if the new baby is “tarded? I told her we would just have to be patient and loving. You talk about doing away with the damaged and retarded – who died and made you the Hindu equivalent to …. whatever…….
#79, maybe but you have not put up any argument or facts to successfully counter it. How about we start with where you think the legitimate borders of Israel are?
September 23rd, 2005 at 4:43 pmCome on, I’m throwing you a bone, Israel gets to exist, I’m already ahead of the Iranians.
September 23rd, 2005 at 4:49 pmSince you won’t address my argument, I guess you musn’t disagree with it….
September 23rd, 2005 at 4:51 pm#79, maybe but you have not put up any argument or facts to successfully counter it. How about we start with where you think the legitimate borders of Israel are?
Comment by Terrytheturtle
Goddess…never try and agree with a crook what is legitimate.
September 23rd, 2005 at 5:43 pmCome on IRI, we’re talking about lebensraum here, this should be your area of expertise.
September 23rd, 2005 at 6:04 pmTerry – The legitimate borders of Israel those designated in 1948 and land captured after a three prong attack in 1967. Isn’t it amazing that tiny Israel, thanks to the weaponry provided/or/ sold by the US could FEND off such an ATTACK!!!!! It’s called the SPOILS OF WAR! That Sharon is attempting to negotiate by giving away Gaza and parts of the West Bank- who knew??!!??
September 23rd, 2005 at 8:43 pmI-RIGHT-I, We enjoy the thrill of the chase, don’t we? Like my dear departed mother said, “Never start a fight – but IF they hit you first – HIT THEM BACK AND HIT THEM HARDER!!!!!!!!!!! I listened to MOM.
Come on IRI, we’re talking about lebensraum here, this should be your area of expertise.
Comment by Terrytheturtle
People like you who speak of Israeli Jews in a Nazi context should be forced to spend a few months in Israel wearing a Jews ‘r Cool t-shirt. Or meet some of my friends. I think you may be an evil little terp.
September 23rd, 2005 at 8:51 pm“People like you who speak of Israeli Jews in a Nazi context should be forced to spend a few months in Israel wearing a Jews ‘r Cool t-shirt. Or meet some of my friends. I think you may be an evil little terp.”
And yet israeli jews keep palestinians in concentration camp. A people suffering great tragedy does not give them right to inflict great tragedy on others. In fact it means they have MORE responsibility because their experience should have taught them something. Obviously israelis are slow learners, and if aphrodingy and ned are any examples – I’d say it explains a lot.
Buddhism and Hinduism teach that all wounds are at some level self inflicted – and that all things have a karma. Israel has a lot of self inflicted wounds that she takes no accountability for, as she continues to inflict wounds on others. The conflict there is a world tragedy, and at an earlier point in history israel was largely blameless – now they are as much of a part of the problem as they are a part of the solution…
September 23rd, 2005 at 10:25 pm“The legitimate borders of Israel those designated in 1948 and land captured after a three prong attack in 1967.”
Too bad you repeat the same lie that you were corrected on last week – like we don’t remember? Are you a lying mossad spy, or are you just too stupid to remember anything? Israel attacked its neighbors – not the other way around. Claiming the opposite is like claiming saddam attacked us first – it’s pure fiction, just like your rationalizations.
” Isn’t it amazing that tiny Israel, thanks to the weaponry provided/or/ sold by the US could FEND off such an ATTACK!!!!! It’s called the SPOILS OF WAR!”
So then if Europe or the UN went and took back the land from Israel you would simply support that as the spoils of war? That overly simplistic, naive and childish response is why so much negativism is shot at israel. It attacks its neighbors in a ‘pre-emptive’ strike (just like Nazi germany did), and seizes and keeps their land (just like Nazi Germany did) and then it keeps them as the spoils of war (just like the Nazis did). It’s clear the reason the Nazis hated you, is that you reminded them of themselves too much..
” That Sharon is attempting to negotiate by giving away Gaza and parts of the West Bank- who knew??!!??”
You mean ‘returning’ don’t you. After all
“I-RIGHT-I, We enjoy the thrill of the chase, don’t we?”
You mean you like to lie compulsively, every fascist and right wing terrorist I’ve ever heard speak is just like you. You’re a perverse and dangerous hate filled crazy group.
” Like my dear departed mother said, “Never start a fight – but IF they hit you first – HIT THEM BACK AND HIT THEM HARDER!!!!!!!!!!! I listened to MOM.”
And yet just your lie that israel was attacked, you came here and attacked first. You’re the nazi fascist, leo strauss taught you well how to be a jewish nazi.
And this kind of sick attitude is also why Israel is hated. If this is the kind of uncivilized, unsocialized and terrorist values you have no wonder you bring so much shame to your people. You are truly the terrorist among us – how sad and pathetic you truly are!
September 23rd, 2005 at 10:32 pmI wonder how Aphrodite’s dead relatives would feel about her family walking away from the holocaust only to produce nazis and nazi values from the experience. If this is what you learned from the holocaust girlfriend, then you and your fellow NeoCons are truly the stupidest group of people in the world. Shame to you and all that are like you – because you have become that evil which you claim to hate!
September 23rd, 2005 at 10:45 pmI have jewish friends and relatives – I don’t need to meet fascist NeoCons to know what a Jew is – because clearly they don’t know and neither does Aphrodite. After all, if you were going to pick a goddess, you should have at least used Ashera (a jewish goddess), instead of a greek pagan. Even referring to yourself as a pagan goddess smacks in the face of all edicts of Moses – but I’m guessing you know less about judaism than MrAlwaysWrong knows about christianity…
September 23rd, 2005 at 10:47 pmHIT THEM BACK AND HIT THEM HARDER!!!!!!!!!!! I listened to MOM.â€
comment by Ryan “golden gloves” Neat
Too bad you didn’t have a dad. That’s probably why you’re a homo. But your mommy was wrong. My dad taught me to recognize an enemy and hit him first. It’s probably why I’ve never lost a fight and I’m not a homo.
September 24th, 2005 at 10:15 amAnd yet israeli jews keep palestinians in concentration camp.
comment by Ryan “I can not tell the truth” Neat
The Billion$ Arafat and his henchmen stole would go a long way in building a nation and a place to live for the people. Too bad that’s never been what it was all about.
Those camps were built, maintained and brooded over by the PA, Hamas and every Islamic Thugocracy in the Middle East. Those people live there because that is where Arafat And Company wanted them. Period. It’s pretty hard to get happy successful people who are building a future to blow themselves up on command you know.
You have a pathetic little mind and a filthy soul. God have mercy on you.
September 24th, 2005 at 10:25 amThank you, IRI, for picking up my mantle! I am done discussing with one who has the integrity, oh never mind, he would have to look that word up and comprehension might come slowly. The filthy, vermin ridden LIAR, known to one and a few as “Ryan Neat” needs a bit of knowledge re: those “beleaguered Palestinians”. Today I heard about a Palestinian celebration “marred” when a truck carrying masked Hamas members and homemade weapons blew up, killing a huge number of people, including innocent children. Arafat was to the Palestinians what Saddam was to the Iraqi’s.
September 24th, 2005 at 3:58 pmAddendum to sentence two above: “I am done discussing with one who has the integrity,” OF A SWINE – but on second thought that is such an acute insult to SWINE – especially to one who has to tell us why Israel is hated and then gratuitously mentions his “jewish friends and relatives” – uh -huh, reminds me of those bigots who swore they had BLACK FRIENDS – sure they did!
September 24th, 2005 at 5:06 pmToday I heard about a Palestinian celebration “marred†when a truck carrying masked Hamas members and homemade weapons blew up, killing a huge number of people, including innocent children.
comment by The Goddess
Don’t mind Neato, he’s been having a rough time of it coming up with new names to call me never mind rebutting my points.
Gay guys are good for a laugh when they get real upset. I can just picture the stamping of little feet, the pouting and all the other effeminate affectations rump rangers are known for.
September 24th, 2005 at 6:25 pmOops, sorry Goddess I replied to the wrong thought of yours in the above. I meant to tell you the name we have for Pal Losers who are careless with their munitions. Those dumbasses are always prematurely setting off their bomb belts and road side bombs. That’s why we call them “splodydopes”.
September 24th, 2005 at 6:30 pmI-RIGHT-I – Is there term for the “premature bombulation” when a suicide bomber is tooo stupid to handle munitions – besides “HOORAY!!!!” ???. My glee is sorely tempered by the fact that 19 innocents were taken out by a murdering Islamofascist. Safer to watch the company one keeps…..
September 25th, 2005 at 4:28 pmI-RIGHT-I – Is there term for the “premature bombulation†when a suicide bomber is tooo stupid to handle munitions – besides “HOORAY!!!!
comment by The Goddess
I don’t know? I think premature bombulation says it all!
Bad girl!
September 25th, 2005 at 6:31 pmFunny to see two mental patients talking to each other.
The sadest delusion both of you have is that liberals support the terrorists. We don’t support YOU at all. The way you drool over death is perverse and disturbing. You are both as crazy as the islamist bombers you ridicule!
Frankly I think what both sides have done is disgusting. Hamas is a collection of psychopaths and zealots, but they are NOT the palestinians, in the same way that the two of you are not jews are christians. From where I sit, all three of you zealot groups are no different. You’re all sick bloodthirsty, greedy and psycopathic fools!
As for your belief that either of you have ever had a rational conversation on this site is entirely delusional, just as MrWrong’s belief he’s straight. Projection of your own failings on others makes you two crazy birds of the same feather – you’re both unworthy to call yourselves americans or even human beings. You don’t exhibit any traits of either group!
September 26th, 2005 at 12:30 amPlastic Wrist Bands may help. But we have to find just the right color for them to be really effective.
September 28th, 2005 at 3:13 pmExactly why I am opposed to capital punishment–not in principle but in practice. Even those who see it as an effective deterrant (which it has been proven NOT to be the case), when a person’s life is in the balance there is 0 margin for error.
September 29th, 2005 at 12:23 pm“But I do know that it’s true that if you wanted to reduce crime, you could, if that were your sole purpose, you could abort every black baby in this country and your crime rate would go down.”
William Bennett
Oh,dear. That just had to hurt. So true.
September 30th, 2005 at 4:55 pmMr. I-Right-I, you are a true ninny of the first kind, without any understanding of how the United States was set up in the first place. This country’s economic system came into its own based on the enslavement of millions of people who were brought here against their will for labor, unlike your ancestors. As you sit on your throne of white, probably male superiority, reflect on your own deficencies. The only reason that you probably have achieved anything in life is because of your skin color and sex. Your intellect sucks.
September 30th, 2005 at 6:44 pmHello Ryan Neat. Fancy seeing you here. Now before you go being a nutty lib and blurting out things like, “Hitler!, stupid redneck!”, and so on… Let me just say I think we may agree on something.
I am against the death penalty too. GASP!!! Probably not for the same reasons, but that’s neither here nor there. Who knew? We may be able to be pals after all.
Please, Ryan, go get your blood pressure medication because what I am about to say might push you over the edge… I don’t think there should be prayer in schools OR the Ten Commandments in courts rooms, either. (Close your mouth Ryan, it’s not polite to stare blankly and drool on yourself)
And here you wanted me to die a slow and painful death. I know this may come as a shock to you, but don’t worry – you will be back to blithering your nutty lib garb and calling me a “fascist, dumbass, stubborn bigot” in no time.
October 15th, 2005 at 2:45 pmStubain- I think you are a stubborn bigot dumb ass who makes sense some times but not nearly as much as MIGHTY. There….I said it in case we don’t get any kool-aid lefties to take the bait. OK, I’m done, lefties can put your tin foil hats back on…..
October 21st, 2005 at 4:33 pmI REALLI DONT APPRECIATE YOUR BLUNTNESS LET ME GUESS WHAT RACE U R WHITE
January 2nd, 2006 at 11:23 pmI REALLI DONT APPRECIATE YOUR BLUNTNESS LET ME GUESS WHAT RACE U R WHITE
January 2nd, 2006 at 11:23 pmDeath Penalty should be a big lesson for the other criminals. By death penalty we can scare thoes criminals who kill people.
January 30th, 2006 at 5:38 pmKILL THEM!! IF THEY KILL US, KILL THEM BACK…. just my opinion
May 24th, 2006 at 3:11 pmMaybe this study is right. However, statistics released by the Federal government show that a vast majority of those convicted and put on death row are white, NOT black. Only 13%are Hispanic. I cant see this as racist when more whites are convicted than blacks. Plus, I trust the FEDERAL GOVERNMENT more than some random website who God Knows if its true. Not to mention that maybe blacks actually commit worse or more crimes? Im not saying this as a racist, but, in general blacks are in poorer neighborhoods, which can lead to crime…The whole thing is just dumb. People ought to be colorblind, Race Should Not Matter. Period.
February 10th, 2007 at 7:49 amSerious Skin Care Clear
Found your blog on yahoo – thanks for the article but i still don’t get it.
August 19th, 2008 at 12:15 amadoption ark
I just can’t understand some parts of this article…
August 19th, 2008 at 4:51 pmSpace Star Wars Episode 3 Planet Mars
I didn’t agree with you first, but last paragraph makes sense for me
August 20th, 2008 at 12:54 ambirth and death date of jesus
Your site regarding %TITLE% looks very interesting to me. I found it doing a search for %KEYWORD%.
August 20th, 2008 at 5:29 am