Mumbai Terrorist Attacks

Reply
Page 22 of 46 FirstFirst ... 14 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 30 ... LastLast
  1. #211

    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    4,905
    Quote Originally Posted by climber07:
    Oh I am so so sorry....I didn't realize that you saw it on a TV program! You're right, it MUST be true! How stupid of me!

    I believe not so long ago C-SPAN also featured a panel of "experts" who presented to the National Press Club in Washington..what they called...the "Disclosure Project." Sworn affidavits of pilots and former government worker who say they have been secretly working for the US government on covering up UFO phenomenon and observed alien technology. So I guess if we must go by C-SPAN...let me be the first to say "WELCOME TO OUR ALIEN OVERLORDS!"
    So Climber007, instead we should take your word which must be indeed so much more reliable than a CIA agent. Where do you get your information? By reading Andy McNab novels?

  2. #212

    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    4,905
    Quote Originally Posted by aussiegal:
    There is such a thing as irrefutable proof. With media and technology today we watched the Mumbai attacks unfold. There will be many actual videos showing the terrorists gunning down people and many survivors who witnessed the killing. Are you telling me you don't feel comfortable sending these people to their death because you feel the evidence isn't enough.

    You simply can't understand that some people have something to live for, that they actually have great lives thus your ridiculous snide insults equating anyone who feels fear to being little girls.

    The only reason the death penalty isn't cheaper than keeping a murderer alive til he dies is because the system is set up to allow them many appeals and it takes years to finally get the go ahead.

    The only problem with the death penalty is that it relies on an unreliable legal system that often sees innocent people accused of things they didn't do. I don't approve of someone being sent to their death because they were black and in the wrong place at the wrong time but where there is irrefutable proof and a life has been taken there should be no hesitation.
    Well, you indeed sound like a whiny little girl and I must have hit a nerve since you keep mention it...

    Why don't you go and find a law book that has irrefutable proof in it? Who gets to decide that it's irrefutable? When does it get irrefutable? Videos can be altered, witnesses make mistakes...

    That's why the legal standard is beyond a reasonable doubt yet there are plenty of mistakes done...

  3. #213

    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Cramped island
    Posts
    4,939

    anyway since terrorism and crime has obviously killed alot less people than accidents in india and everywhere else in the world, why are we keeping the police ? get rid of them.


  4. #214

    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    1,006

    aww it's sad... they even killed the sniffer dog

    MUMBAI--The management of the Taj Hotel in Mumbai was warned it was a possible target, but increased security measures were eased shortly before the devastating militant attack, its owner said Sunday.

    Tata said the attackers entered through the back of the hotel.

    "They knew what they were doing, and they did not go through the front. All of our arrangements are in the front," he said.

    "The first thing they did, they shot a sniffer dog and his handler," he added. "There seems to have been a lot of pre-planning."

    The Taj's general manager lost his whole family in the attacks but was determined that it would re-open as a tribute to them and a sign the militants had not won, Tata said.


  5. #215

    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    HK
    Posts
    14,586
    Quote Originally Posted by freeier:
    anyway since terrorism and crime has obviously killed alot less people than accidents in india and everywhere else in the world, why are we keeping the police ? get rid of them.
    trying to be funny here?

  6. #216

    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Cramped island
    Posts
    4,939
    Quote Originally Posted by Mat:
    trying to be funny here?
    nope. but just pointing out what is a logical outcome if we are going along the line of argument that traffic death is alot more worst than anything else..

    in life we need to have the knowledge to know that we are free to live in our area of habitat without fear of things that are beyond our control.

    most of us are cautious against traffic accident. but we will fear terrorist attacks as that is something beyond our control of what we could have done otherwise.

    if giving up some of our freedoms and rights mean we can control the activities of terrorists better, I am sure many people that are normal would be willing to do it.

  7. #217

    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    4,905

    Abolishing rights and freedoms and implementing measures as it has been done in the US is over the top considering the minor danger that terrorism poses in the grand scheme of things. You talk about crime and terrorism in the same sentence as if they were the same thing.

    Most countries face more danger from daily crime than from terrorism yet we don't see a war on crime...It's much easier to blame islamist fanatic and put a face like Bin Laden as public enemy no 1.

    Shall we look at deaths from terrorism versus murders in most western countries? Death from terrorism is about as likely as being struck by lightning but the media and the politicians are quick to use them for the advancements of their own cause... Case and point with Iraq which had little to do with terrorism but the climate was right and Bush used that to his own advantage.

    And dear genius, road accidents are also controlled by police, laws etc...

    So your logic if you want to call it that is deeply flawed and your thinking is obviously clouded by emotions...


  8. #218

    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Park Island
    Posts
    807
    Quote Originally Posted by freeier:
    go be a volunteer in iraqi or afganistan and tell me you will follow all rules of the geneva convention to a dot...

    you are just talking it from the armchair of your comfortable room and of cos you can say all you want.


    for that matter of fact, training of the 'geneva' convention in organized military training is pretty minor.
    You are quite right of course. How absurd it is for me, as part of a debate on how the international community should deal with the ongoing problems caused by terrorism, to present any sort of argument based upon international law and fact.

  9. #219

    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Cramped island
    Posts
    4,939
    Quote Originally Posted by DanielandHayley:
    You are quite right of course. How absurd it is for me, as part of a debate on how the international community should deal with the ongoing problems caused by terrorism, to present any sort of argument based upon international law and fact.
    the fact is that law in itself is not going to solve any problem if your other party has no intention to follow and obey the laws set.

    a person that has been hungry for 2 days will just grab any food he can find and to hell with the law of ownership...

    so if we are running a paper exercise that doesn't need to consider people's emotion on the ground facing the potential life threatening assaults.. by all means yes.

    if we are on the ground with friends and team mates getting shot/killed every other day, and if geneva convention means putting yourself into higher risk because of what you need to go through to shoot a person, tell me if you want to do it when you are there.. not in the comfort of your armchair!

  10. #220

    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Cramped island
    Posts
    4,939
    Quote Originally Posted by gilleshk:
    Abolishing rights and freedoms and implementing measures as it has been done in the US is over the top considering the minor danger that terrorism poses in the grand scheme of things. You talk about crime and terrorism in the same sentence as if they were the same thing.

    Most countries face more danger from daily crime than from terrorism yet we don't see a war on crime...It's much easier to blame islamist fanatic and put a face like Bin Laden as public enemy no 1.

    Shall we look at deaths from terrorism versus murders in most western countries? Death from terrorism is about as likely as being struck by lightning but the media and the politicians are quick to use them for the advancements of their own cause... Case and point with Iraq which had little to do with terrorism but the climate was right and Bush used that to his own advantage.

    And dear genius, road accidents are also controlled by police, laws etc...

    So your logic if you want to call it that is deeply flawed and your thinking is obviously clouded by emotions...

    crime and terrorism are similar.
    tell me, what is the difference between terrorism and kidnapping ? the effect and at most time, motives are the same. the only difference is one is hugely blown up by media the other is just considered a pettycrime on the local level.

    i think what I have put up is a valid question.
    everyone here are talking as if they themselves can make all the right decision in determining what is the right level of control, the right level of rights invasion, the right level of punishment given to any criminal/terrorist..

    but in real life everything is so vague and so difficult to implement. on the ground when gun shots are exchanged.. on the streets of NY where knifes are flashed.. etc.etc..

    organized control of peace and lawfulness might at the end of the day not the best thing in the world?!

Reply
Page 22 of 46 FirstFirst ... 14 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 30 ... LastLast