Zacarias Moussaoui Verdict

[ViciouS]

Don?t let him get his 70 virgins early! Let him live! He planed on dying for his cause if he lives he fails.... I hope the judge gives him life.

Edit* Flight 93 Black Box tape played. Wow the courage of the passengers, and the stupidity of the hijackers. Very moving transcript, it makes me angry and sad, but i still want this guy to rot in jail and be degraded everyday of the rest of his pitiful life.

EDIT2 No Virgins! HE IS STUCK IN A CELL! until he dies of natural miserable causes, or from an over excited cell mates aggressive sodomizing! No early heroic Jihad death!

Edit 3) Now he is trying to get a different trial and not plead guilty. He wanted death now he is ashamed and wants a jury to convict him.

Story

Verdict

He shoots as well as he flies!

Asking for a mulligan!

 

[ntdz]

There are no 70 virgins, there is no heaven for him. Kill him.

 

[ViciouS]

Originally posted by: ntdz
There are no 70 virgins, there is no heaven for him. Kill him.

You want him to make the other extremist proud and let him fufill his duties? HE WANTS TO DIE? Dont be ignorant let him live its a much worse punishment!

 

[daveshel]

There is no need to make him a martyr - let him rot and be forgotten.

 

[EagleKeeper]

Either way, he will probably get it in prison.

Some ACLU style lawyer will attempt to get any sentence reversed

 

[ntdz]

Originally posted by: ViciouS

Originally posted by: ntdz
There are no 70 virgins, there is no heaven for him. Kill him.

You want him to make the other extremist proud and let him fufill his duties? HE WANTS TO DIE? Dont be ignorant let him live its a much worse punishment!

It might be a worst punishment for him, but I still say kill him. He doesn't deserve to be alive.

 

[ViciouS]

Originally posted by: ntdz

Originally posted by: ViciouS

Originally posted by: ntdz
There are no 70 virgins, there is no heaven for him. Kill him.

You want him to make the other extremist proud and let him fufill his duties? HE WANTS TO DIE? Dont be ignorant let him live its a much worse punishment!

It might be a worst punishment for him, but I still say kill him. He doesn't deserve to be alive.

I understand that to you think death=a bad thing, but Moussaoui its a good thing, you dont see this? DEATH = GREAT REWARDS AND FULFILLMENT for Moussaoui

 

[ntdz]

Originally posted by: ViciouS

Originally posted by: ntdz

Originally posted by: ViciouS

Originally posted by: ntdz
There are no 70 virgins, there is no heaven for him. Kill him.

You want him to make the other extremist proud and let him fufill his duties? HE WANTS TO DIE? Dont be ignorant let him live its a much worse punishment!

It might be a worst punishment for him, but I still say kill him. He doesn't deserve to be alive.

I understand that to you think death=a bad thing, but Moussaoui its a good thing, you dont see this? DEATH = GREAT REWARDS AND FULFILLMENT for Moussaoui

Yeah, until he actually dies and his existence fades into nothingness. I totally understand your point of view, and obviously he would rather die than live. However, I don't care about what he wants, I just don't believe he should be alive.

 

[3chordcharlie]

Originally posted by: EagleKeeper
Either way, he will probably get it in prison.

Some ACLU style lawyer will attempt to get any sentence reversed

Why would they do that?

I haven't followed this closely, but did he get a trial? It sure sounds like he's admitted involvement, so why would a conviction be appealed?

 

[3chordcharlie]

Originally posted by: ntdz

Originally posted by: ViciouS

Originally posted by: ntdz

Originally posted by: ViciouS

Originally posted by: ntdz
There are no 70 virgins, there is no heaven for him. Kill him.

You want him to make the other extremist proud and let him fufill his duties? HE WANTS TO DIE? Dont be ignorant let him live its a much worse punishment!

It might be a worst punishment for him, but I still say kill him. He doesn't deserve to be alive.

I understand that to you think death=a bad thing, but Moussaoui its a good thing, you dont see this? DEATH = GREAT REWARDS AND FULFILLMENT for Moussaoui

Yeah, until he actually dies and his existence fades into nothingness. I totally understand your point of view, and obviously he would rather die than live. However, I don't care about what he wants, I just don't believe he should be alive.

I think it goes farther though - dead or alive, Moussaoui is irrelevant, except as a martyr, So why make him one?

 

[Tom]

I agree, no reason to make him heroic, or a victim, in someone's eyes.

 

[CaptnKirk]

Giant VegaMatic

 

[ntdz]

Originally posted by: 3chordcharlie

Originally posted by: ntdz

Originally posted by: ViciouS

Originally posted by: ntdz

Originally posted by: ViciouS

Originally posted by: ntdz
There are no 70 virgins, there is no heaven for him. Kill him.

You want him to make the other extremist proud and let him fufill his duties? HE WANTS TO DIE? Dont be ignorant let him live its a much worse punishment!

It might be a worst punishment for him, but I still say kill him. He doesn't deserve to be alive.

I understand that to you think death=a bad thing, but Moussaoui its a good thing, you dont see this? DEATH = GREAT REWARDS AND FULFILLMENT for Moussaoui

Yeah, until he actually dies and his existence fades into nothingness. I totally understand your point of view, and obviously he would rather die than live. However, I don't care about what he wants, I just don't believe he should be alive.

I think it goes farther though - dead or alive, Moussaoui is irrelevant, except as a martyr, So why make him one?

They already have thousands of martyrs, one more wont make a difference.

 

[classy]

Originally posted by: ntdz
There are no 70 virgins, there is no heaven for him. Kill him.

Agreed

 

[theeedude]

This guy wants to be a Martyr. We need a scapegoat. So it's a win win situation.
My main concern is the right to non self-incrimination. Does it still exist or not? If exercising that right can lead to the death penalty, it's hard to argue that it still exists.

 

[3chordcharlie]

Originally posted by: ntdz
They already have thousands of martyrs, one more wont make a difference.

I'm not so sure, I'm willing to bet he'll make a lot of headlines in the ME the day he's killed.

Although I don't support the death penalty for anyone, at any time, I'm aware that this is a poor basis for making this argument; many people have no objections, and guilt is pretty firmly established. So the argument is that this is a vindictive, emotional response, which does nothing to protect anyone, will probably exacerbate, to at least some small degree, the situation in the ME, and historically, won't even save any money.

****Warning!!! Fallacious argument ahead****
If one person is 'inspired' by Moussaoui's death to become a suicide bomber, and one innocent person dies as a result, was it still worth killing Moussaoui?

 

[ntdz]

Originally posted by: senseamp
This guy wants to be a Martyr. We need a scapegoat. So it's a win win situation.
My main concern is the right to non self-incrimination. Does it still exist or not? If exercising that right can lead to the death penalty, it's hard to argue that it still exists.

What? He admitted all of this, they didn't force him to testify. He never took the 5th...

 

[ntdz]

Originally posted by: 3chordcharlie

Originally posted by: ntdz
They already have thousands of martyrs, one more wont make a difference.

I'm not so sure, I'm willing to bet he'll make a lot of headlines in the ME the day he's killed.

Although I don't support the death penalty for anyone, at any time, I'm aware that this is a poor basis for making this argument; many people have no objections, and guilt is pretty firmly established. So the argument is that this is a vindictive, emotional response, which does nothing to protect anyone, will probably exacerbate, to at least some small degree, the situation in the ME, and historically, won't even save any money.

****Warning!!! Fallacious argument ahead****
If one person is 'inspired' by Moussaoui's death to become a suicide bomber, and one innocent person dies as a result, was it still worth killing Moussaoui?

Responding to the fallacious argument:

No, it was not. However, I would tend to think that if Moussaoui's death causes them to become a suicide bomber, other terrorists dying would have the same effect anyway.

 

[Meuge]

Originally posted by: ntdz
There are no 70 virgins, there is no heaven for him. Kill him.

I disagree. The death penalty is a barbaric practice that should no longer be tolerable by the society. If the person is incarcerated, they are no longer a threat... and the latter is the only condition under which a society should be allowed to kill (well, that's really the only condition under which anyone should be allowed to kill).

If our court system was 100% accurate in convicting only the guilty, there may be some room for debate... but as long as innocent people are sure to be killed, it's unforgivable.

 

[theeedude]

Originally posted by: ntdz

Originally posted by: senseamp
This guy wants to be a Martyr. We need a scapegoat. So it's a win win situation.
My main concern is the right to non self-incrimination. Does it still exist or not? If exercising that right can lead to the death penalty, it's hard to argue that it still exists.

What? He admitted all of this, they didn't force him to testify. He never took the 5th...

I am talking about the original "crime" of not telling the FBI agents he was part of 9/11 conspiracy. He has the right to remain silent. Since they didn't offer him immunity for his testimony, he would have incriminated himself by doing so. So he exercised his right to remain silent and not self incriminate, and is probably going to get the death penalty for doing so. So I don't think you can argue that there is such a right if you can get death for exercising it.

 

[ntdz]

Originally posted by: senseamp

Originally posted by: ntdz

Originally posted by: senseamp
This guy wants to be a Martyr. We need a scapegoat. So it's a win win situation.
My main concern is the right to non self-incrimination. Does it still exist or not? If exercising that right can lead to the death penalty, it's hard to argue that it still exists.

What? He admitted all of this, they didn't force him to testify. He never took the 5th...

I am talking about the original "crime" of not telling the FBI agents he was part of 9/11 conspiracy. He has the right to remain silent. Since they didn't offer him immunity for his testimony, he would have incriminated himself by doing so. So he exercised his right to remain silent and not self incriminate, and is probably going to get the death penalty for doing so. So I don't think you can argue that there is such a right if you can get death for exercising it.

I thought he admitted in court to being part of 9/11 and originally part of the shoebomber plot? I don't think he exercised his right to remain silent...

 

[3chordcharlie]

Originally posted by: ntdz

Originally posted by: senseamp

Originally posted by: ntdz

Originally posted by: senseamp
This guy wants to be a Martyr. We need a scapegoat. So it's a win win situation.
My main concern is the right to non self-incrimination. Does it still exist or not? If exercising that right can lead to the death penalty, it's hard to argue that it still exists.

What? He admitted all of this, they didn't force him to testify. He never took the 5th...

I am talking about the original "crime" of not telling the FBI agents he was part of 9/11 conspiracy. He has the right to remain silent. Since they didn't offer him immunity for his testimony, he would have incriminated himself by doing so. So he exercised his right to remain silent and not self incriminate, and is probably going to get the death penalty for doing so. So I don't think you can argue that there is such a right if you can get death for exercising it.

I thought he admitted in court to being part of 9/11 and originally part of the shoebomber plot? I don't think he exercised his right to remain silent...

I'm confused about this too.

Your right not to self-incriminate isn't a ban on you doing so if you so choose.

 

[theeedude]

Originally posted by: ntdz

Originally posted by: senseamp

Originally posted by: ntdz

Originally posted by: senseamp
This guy wants to be a Martyr. We need a scapegoat. So it's a win win situation.
My main concern is the right to non self-incrimination. Does it still exist or not? If exercising that right can lead to the death penalty, it's hard to argue that it still exists.

What? He admitted all of this, they didn't force him to testify. He never took the 5th...

I am talking about the original "crime" of not telling the FBI agents he was part of 9/11 conspiracy. He has the right to remain silent. Since they didn't offer him immunity for his testimony, he would have incriminated himself by doing so. So he exercised his right to remain silent and not self incriminate, and is probably going to get the death penalty for doing so. So I don't think you can argue that there is such a right if you can get death for exercising it.

I thought he admitted in court to being part of 9/11 and originally part of the shoebomber plot? I don't think he exercised his right to remain silent...

But what was he charged with? Not warning the FBI that he was part of 9/11 while he was in custody before 9/11. But if he warned them, he would have incriminated himself back then, and he had the right to remain silent. So he is going to be executed for exercising his right to remain silent and not telling them anything.

 

[conehead433]

How much he was actually involved is pretty questionable. I find it hard to believe that a jury could believe that any knowledge he might have provided would have stopped 9-11 from happening when you consider how poorly our government treated similar information regarding knowledge that pertained to several of the hijackers who were enrolled at flight schools, and additionally how poorly different agencies shared information. Finding someone guilty for the death of a person or persons in this case is a strtetch. Don't get me wrong I think Moussaoui is a thug who was somewhat involved, but I think he actually made his limited involvement grandiose for whatever demented reason. If the charges stick it's far cheaper for taxpayers to let him rot in jail (100K per year) versus nearly 1 million per year for an inmate on death row. And certainly it would be a waste of money for him to go through all the appeals procedures. If he lives another 40 years in jail that's 4 million; around 10 million on death row.

 

[Moonbeam]

Originally posted by: Meuge

Originally posted by: ntdz
There are no 70 virgins, there is no heaven for him. Kill him.

I disagree. The death penalty is a barbaric practice that should no longer be tolerable by the society. If the person is incarcerated, they are no longer a threat... and the latter is the only condition under which a society should be allowed to kill (well, that's really the only condition under which anyone should be allowed to kill).

If our court system was 100% accurate in convicting only the guilty, there may be some room for debate... but as long as innocent people are sure to be killed, it's unforgivable.

Yes Yes Yes and even in the case of 100% certainty I don't think there is a debate. You cannot make murder the punishment for murder because no matter how you cut it, that's what capital punishment is.