To all those who say ,we should try them ,no death penalty , to  hand wringers and to the ones who say they think they are scum and we should put them away in solitary for life etc etc , sorry death is the only answer ,because if they even get a life sentence ,it will be spent at your expense ,eating 3 meals a day ,watching ,tv radicalising others and never having to work again, while the poor sods they killed ,and tortured will still be dead . go on America ,execute them and good for you .

Never mind about the blocking or not regarding the death sentence. Please can somebody give the man a descent haircut before executing him. A normal person couldn´t bear dying looking like that.

Yep!!! Get rid of them.

Failing government tosses bone to rabid right wingers.

 

Correlation between those ranting in this thread and those ranting elsewhere over government failures noted.

So the USA will not extradite one if its citizens, but will happily ask other countries to extradite theirs to the USA to get the death penalty. Somehow I smell a double standard there.

3 hours ago, nausea said:

Good question.

 

"Perhaps the real motivation is the government's desperation to avoid having to try these two men in Britain.

Cases like these are extremely difficult to prosecute because of the difficulty in obtaining evidence, finding witnesses, and establishing what crimes have been committed in which jurisdiction.

And in his letter, Mr Javid argues that a more successful prosecution is more likely in the US where laws are different to the UK." (BBC).

 

Sounds a bit Pontius Pilate'ish  to me irrespective of the final sentence, which comes over as more of an afterthought, a justification, than a real reason.

"Cases like these are extremely difficult to prosecute because of the difficulty in obtaining evidence, finding witnesses, and establishing what crimes have been committed in which jurisdiction.

And in his letter, Mr Javid argues that a more successful prosecution is more likely in the US where laws are different to the UK." (BBC)"

 

And this is the point that worries me the most.  Mr Javid prefers a system that requires less evidence - even if it results in a death penalty??!

4 hours ago, RuamRudy said:

A very bad decision by a government that has made so many bad decisions over the years. The decline of the UK continues.

 

Yes, get them back to the UK and put them in a nice luxury prison where than can help radicalize more of their fellow believers. 

 

How jolly liberal of you.

1 minute ago, Baerboxer said:

 

Yes, get them back to the UK and put them in a nice luxury prison where than can help radicalize more of their fellow believers. 

 

How jolly liberal of you.

Why is that the only alternative that you can envisage? I even mentioned in a previous post that I would happily see them secured in solitary in the deepest, darkest, most miserable prison cell possible for the rest of their lives. Nowhere did I suggest anything luxurious. I simply do not agree with the death penalty.

The death sentence would make them martyrs in their, and their supporters eyes.  That alone is enough to show that this is a bad idea.  One of the victims mothers has also come out saying that they shouldn't get the death sentence, for the same reason.  Being kept incarcerated for their whole lives makes much more sense and takes away their moment of "glory".

 

Also, as Chomper, says this could cause serious ramifications for the future and may set a dangerous precedent.

6 hours ago, RuamRudy said:

It is absolutley nothing to do with compassion, and any attempt to suggest otherwise is either a failure of your comprehension of the point, or a deliberate attempt to smear those opposed to the death penalty.

 

Lock them up in solitary in the worst cell in the lowest standard prison we have for the rest of their lives - there is nothing compassionate about my feelings towards them. However the death penalty was rightly abolished in the UK, and our government HAD a policy of not extraditing people to other countries for crimes that could result in their receiving death penalty. This is a sleazy and nasty way for the UK to wash its hands of our own problem.

BS! You have surely worked out, by now, that 'life', in the UK, means no such thing. 

37 minutes ago, dunroaming said:

The death sentence would make them martyrs in their, and their supporters eyes.  That alone is enough to show that this is a bad idea.  One of the victims mothers has also come out saying that they shouldn't get the death sentence, for the same reason.  Being kept incarcerated for their whole lives makes much more sense and takes away their moment of "glory".

 

Also, as Chomper, says this could cause serious ramifications for the future and may set a dangerous precedent.

As the saying goes, better a dead martyr... 

38 minutes ago, dunroaming said:

The death sentence would make them martyrs in their, and their supporters eyes.  That alone is enough to show that this is a bad idea.  One of the victims mothers has also come out saying that they shouldn't get the death sentence, for the same reason.  Being kept incarcerated for their whole lives makes much more sense and takes away their moment of "glory".

That is being unkind to them, give them their "moment of glory" and "martyrdom" .

   They want to be hero martyrs and get to heaven as quick as possible , their supporters get themselves a hero and  the World is rid of these people .

   Everyones a winner

they  look  a lovely  couple.............have  they  been  married  long??

8 hours ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Regardless of whether any of us believe that in this case this a good or a bad decision, it will have ramifications for future cases.

 

This decision will come back to haunt future ‘extradition requests’, in which people held by British authorities awaiting extradition to the US will argue in court that their extradition places them at risk of execution.

 

My prediction is the first person to make this argument will be Assange when he gets tossed onto the street by his Ecuadorian hosts. (An eviction that is currently being prepared).

 

Far better let these vile criminals rot their life in a US prison and protect one of the most valuable tools to fight crime and protect society, the extradition process.

Indeed. Act in haste and repent at leisure.

 

As these creatures are no longer British citizens, the issue should have been side stepped.

 

Maybe our Home Secretary is applying Sharia principles? I'll bet Amber Rudd would have acted differently.

7 hours ago, vogie said:

Happiness is a warm gun, bang bang shoot shoot.

I thought you were rather more civilised than that....

6 hours ago, vogie said:

"Alexanda Kotey and El Shafee Elsheikh are alleged to have been members of a four-man cell of Isis executioners in Syria and Iraq responsible for killing a number of high-profile western captives."

 

www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2018/jul/23/uk-will-not-oppose-us-death-penalty-for-isis-beatles

 

how some people can show compassion to people who are allegedly so evil is beyond beggars belief.

 

It is not a matter of compassion. Civilised countries just do not put people to death.

2 minutes ago, Grouse said:

It is not a matter of compassion. Civilised countries just do not put people to death.

The U.K is not putting anyone to death though

3 minutes ago, Grouse said:

I thought you were rather more civilised than that....

Being civilised is not burning a Jordanian pilot alive in a cage, being civilised is not parading men in front of cameras and holding the shackled men by the hair and cutting their heads off. I care not one jot what happens to these 'people'.

5 minutes ago, Grouse said:

It is not a matter of compassion. Civilised countries just do not put people to death.

Many would not describe these as 'people'. Death is too good for them. 

6 hours ago, RuamRudy said:

Yes, it says that in the article, but if the evidence is so overwhelming, why are British courts unable to do what US courts can?

It's cheaper if the US does it. That's the overriding reason I'll bet

54 minutes ago, Jonmarleesco said:

BS! You have surely worked out, by now, that 'life', in the UK, means no such thing. 

List of prisoners with whole-life orders

The whole life order (formerly a whole life tariff) is a court order whereby a prisoner who is being sentenced to life imprisonment is ordered to serve that sentence without possibility of parole. This order may be made in cases of aggravated murders committed by anyone who was aged 21 or above at the time of the crime. The purpose of a whole life order is for a prisoner to be kept in prison until he or she dies with almost no chance of eventual release

Fascinating and complicated debate.

 

Argument: Crimes were committed on Syrian soil, so under normal circumstances they would/should be tried and sentenced in Syria.

Pros: They would almost certainly get the mistreatment and executions they deserve, and they would be lesser martyrs having been exterminated by Muslims in a Muslim country.

Cons: Syria is seriously unstable, so there is a good chance they would be broken out of captivity, plus who do we entrust the process to – Assad?

 

Argument: They were British citizens when they committed their crimes, so they should be tried and sentenced in the UK

Pros: They would spend the rest of their lives in jail

Cons: They will spend all their time spreading their hate and disgusting ideology across the prison community, radicalising others, plus there is always a danger some leftie fools will get them released early in 20 years time claiming they have repented.

 

I’m quite happy for the US to deal with this. And whatever the moral rights or wrongs, I am shocked that people like Dianne Abbot can display so much anger at the possibility of these two animals being executed.

 

What they did was so bad that moral arguments should go out of the window. As far as I’m concerned, the slower, more painful their deaths the better.

48 minutes ago, sanemax said:

That is being unkind to them, give them their "moment of glory" and "martyrdom" .

   They want to be hero martyrs and get to heaven as quick as possible , their supporters get themselves a hero and  the World is rid of these people .

   Everyones a winner

Interesting that you think they should get their reward for that they have done.  All the other potential terrorists will be chomping at the bit to have a go but in your world that is OK I suppose?

2 minutes ago, dunroaming said:

Interesting that you think they should get their reward for that they have done.  All the other potential terrorists will be chomping at the bit to have a go but in your world that is OK I suppose?

We can live in hope that once they have been dispatched to meet their maker, that just one of them might come back as a ghost and tell all the other terrorists / jihadi's that it is all a load of shoite, they are not martyr's, there is no pile of virgins, they are just dead, and put some of them off becoming terrorists or jihadi's in the first place.

 

Sadly, I do not see that happening anytime soon.

30 minutes ago, Grouse said:

It's cheaper if the US does it. That's the overriding reason I'll bet

How do you work that out ?

 

They are both in Syria, they have both been stripped of UK Citizenship which means they both hold another Nationality.

 

Nothing to do with the UK, let the Syrians, the Country of their other Nationality or the US, who are currently holding them deal with them.

Edited July 24, 20187 yr by The Renegade

1 hour ago, dunroaming said:

Interesting that you think they should get their reward for that they have done.  All the other potential terrorists will be chomping at the bit to have a go but in your world that is OK I suppose?

And you think that all the future potential terrorists will decide not to become a terrorist because they may end up in jail and not get the death penalty ?

3 hours ago, vogie said:

Being civilised is not burning a Jordanian pilot alive in a cage, being civilised is not parading men in front of cameras and holding the shackled men by the hair and cutting their heads off. I care not one jot what happens to these 'people'.

Don't misunderstand me. These creatures are an abomination and I would show no compassion to them at all. However, civilised people do not put others to death.

12 minutes ago, Grouse said:

Don't misunderstand me. These creatures are an abomination and I would show no compassion to them at all. However, civilised people do not put others to death.

So your answer to these barbarians is 3 square meals a day, Sky TV, having to have to call them mister, no I'm sorry grouse I just don't buy into that. 

 

"However, civilised people do not put others to death."

 

I think many civilised people would disagree with you when it comes to these monsters.

2 minutes ago, vogie said:

So your answer to these barbarians is 3 square meals a day, Sky TV, having to have to call them mister, no I'm sorry grouse I just don't buy into that. 

 

"However, civilised people do not put others to death."

 

I think many civilised people would disagree with you when it comes to these monsters.

The problem is, what happens when the definition of what constitutes ‘a monster’ changes?

 

Today a viscous killer, tomorrow a political enemy!

3 hours ago, The Renegade said:

How do you work that out ?

 

They are both in Syria, they have both been stripped of UK Citizenship which means they both hold another Nationality.

 

Nothing to do with the UK, let the Syrians, the Country of their other Nationality or the US, who are currently holding them deal with them.

They were British citizens when the crimes were committed. Normally they would end up being subject to British justice. If the Americans deal with it, it saves U.K. Ltd money. OK?