The Testimony of Germany and the Terrorists Trial
Germany wants to ensure that it will not provide any evidence against the terrorists that would be used to apply the death penalty in the upcoming trial in New York. And I think that is the right and moral thing to do.
For those reading my blog for the first time, let me make clear: nothing would please me more than to see Islam disappear from the face of this planet, just as I'm ecstatic that Aztecs are no longer sacrificing virgins to appease their Sun God. I wouldn't object if our government decided to water-board Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and his merry band of men for the rest of their lives. Despite this, I view the death penalty as just as savage as most of the commands in the Qur'an.
While I agree with Blogger Smooth Stone that this thing is going to be a freaking circus (and I rarely disagree with her on other subjects), I have to differ with her view on the death penalty, even for these animals who certainly do not deserve any Constitutional guarantees that should only be accorded to citizens of this country.
I left this comment to her article Germany to Send Observer to 9/11 Trial:
2,000 years ago the Rabbis made the application of the death penalty so difficult that they effectively banned it.
Indeed, except for Eichmann, Israel has not executed any other person, no matter how many Jewish women and children the terrorist might have killed. I doubt they will ever again execute anyone.
We usually agree on many subjects, but on this one, I side with the Germans, they should not give any testimony that might lead to the death penalty. It’s time that all mankind finally outlawed the practice.
I lost 98%+ of all my relatives because of the Nazis. I never felt closure nor was my urge for revenge satisfied by the Nuremberg executions.
We no longer stone children to death (except of course, savage Muslims) for disobeying parents because we are no longer so cruel of heart. I know for a 100% certainty that a few hundred years from now capital punishment will be viewed as a barbaric remnant of our ancient and primitive past.
I have written before that if anyone harmed a member of my family I would certainly want to remove the skin from the perpetrator while very slowly lowering him into a vat of boiling oil so that his death would not come for hours.
Notwithstanding that sentiment, I also admit that I would gladly gouge out the eyes of the bank teller who just sits there gabbing instead of tending to business; that I would cream in my pants if I could bash in the head of that guy at the checkout counter who is so stupid that he’s holding up the entire line.
I cannot tell you the joy it would give me to poke a stick into the ass of that idiot waiter who can’t bring me my order on time.
My heart would flutter in happiness if I could simply shoot in the face that meter-maid who stood like a vulture waiting for my last minute to expire to ticket me.
But such savage thoughts should not be acted out by a civilized people.
This was a government sanctioned, legal execution and indeed not one of those executed ever went on to assassinate another Nazi, so in that sense it was the morally right thing to do, from the Nazi point of view. I suppose I should also mention that the relatives of Heydrich were probably quite pleased to get some sort of closure over his murder, and that was a good thing. As for deterrence, the calculated wholesale slaughter apparently did cool both the conquered populace and the enemies of Germany on enthusiasm for further assassinations [ExecutedToday.com].
So there you have it: all of the reasons people support the death penalty:
- the government has the right to execute people.
- It prevents those executed from committing future killings.
- Provides closure to surviving victims or loved ones.
- It deters others not executed from future acts of murder.
- A few innocents may die but it is better than letting one guilty person go free.
So why do we consider the slaughter at Lidice, the legal administration of the death penalty, a brutal, savage and uncivilized act? Aren't the reasons I gave just as valid as those given by death penalty advocates today?
