"I took explosives on to underground but didn't mean to kill anyone"
- Thread starter energy
- Start date
It's possible. It will be up to a jury to decide when they have seen all the evidence and heard both sides of the case.energy said:So says the terrorist imprisoned in Italy.
He also claims to be a pacifist -- he "only wanted to scare people."
So says C4 news.
He must have a fairly low opinion of us, if he expects us to believe this.
I supposed he'll claim the explosives not blowing up was intensional.
A comment to those saying "shoot him" etc: this guy hasn't even actualy killed someone - far less than a fair number of IRA people who still haven't faced trial for the murders they committed.
Surely he should only get the same sentence as anyone else who has done a similar crime? He can't be tried for the 7/7 bombings or any other attacks that have happened elsewhere, only for what he actually did himself. Presumably "attempted murder"?
Bob_the_lost said:No, a trial, then max security prison for life. Make them live and know they failed...
Killing is too good for them.
Lock em in a room with a born again
TeeJay said:
Attempted murder? Possession of explosives with intent to endanger life? Conspiracy to cause explosions? Conspiracy to commit murder? Membership of a proscribed organisation (if they can prove it)? Various charges associated with obtaining the explosives? Doubtless various terrorist offences. There're enough there to sentence him to life several times over if he's found guilty.
Life imprisonment
Thats about 20 years isn't it?
Arm the police, being the only unarmed force in Europe is a joke
Fight the terrorists....erm, with large sticks
Thats about 20 years isn't it?
Arm the police, being the only unarmed force in Europe is a joke
Fight the terrorists....erm, with large sticks
Bob_the_lost
Elsewhere
Can't you get consecutive life sentences though? Or is that a different country?
Nemo said:
Well, lets arm them for the rest of the freaks out there, more so in London.
I think they should be released. Into the general wing, where the wardens should turn their back .
Rocket Romano said:
What? You think they should be killing more Brazillian electricians. Tell me, how many actual terrorists have been shot by the police recently?
Now you're just being silly. You're telling me that people who were prepared to undertake 'martyrdom operations' should be, er... given a chance at 'martyrdom.'
Bob_the_lost
Elsewhere
Arming all the police to prevent terror attacks is stupid, the odds of it preventing an attack are tiny. If you want to arm coppers in general try arguing it with a good example 
JHE
.
Yup, many people are allowed out on licence. If it's a life sentence, they then remain on licence for the rest of their lives - unless they step out of line, in which case they are put back into prison. It doesn't take much to get your licence revoked.TeeJay said:
Not everyone is allowed out. Some people die in prison - or Broadmoor/Rampton-type 'hospitals' - because the parole board is never convinced that they are safe to let out and/or because the courts (or, until recently, the Home Sec) want to make an example of them.
Assuming the would-be bombers are sentenced to life, they will be very lucky ever to get out.
In any case, the important thing from my POV is not that the would-be bombers never get out, but that they are tucked up in prison for a very long time (20 years+?) and only ever get out if it is very clear they are no longer dangerous.
Nemo said:
Did I say kill them? That would be easy, just hurt them
Being soft and understanding, like that wanker of a mayor in London won't help
Allowing rallies promoting and demanding a radical muslim government in the muslim world to take place in London is a joke
spring-peeper
Well-Known Member
omg, someone who is more nieve than me!
"When they asked me to plant explosives, they promised that they wouldn't explode."
<shakes head in disbelief>
I wonder if he's thinking. "That was not very nice of them. Next time I try to help them, I'll ask for those toy explosives like I see at the toy shop."
"When they asked me to plant explosives, they promised that they wouldn't explode."
<shakes head in disbelief>
I wonder if he's thinking. "That was not very nice of them. Next time I try to help them, I'll ask for those toy explosives like I see at the toy shop."
Rocket Romano said:
Yeah, because being hard and unyielding has worked so well thus far.
So you're saying that legal organisations, however odious, shouldn't have the right of freedom of speech and assembly. My, how nice it would be if I could trust the powers that be as much as you do.
Nemo said:Yeah, because being hard and unyielding has worked so well thus far.
He certainly wouldn't know, he hasn't tried it yet. Odious PR PC loving wanker. Please can I come back in Mr Blair, I'll lick Cherie out for you
If this was the far right or the far left demonstrating there'd be a huge thread whining about it, but there's not, so it MUST be freedom of speech
Rocket Romano said:
I didn't mean Ken Livingstone, I meant the west's posture towards Islam in general. Anyway, what do you object to about what Livinstone has been saying? Do you think that London shouldn't welcome people with open arms?
Doesn't freedom of speech include being able to say things that people don't want to hear?
Bernie Gunther
Fundamentalist Druid
Here's a question. Which is the problem that we can solve, jihadi doctrine existing or someone who listens to it deciding to become a suicide bomber?
JHE said:
Kenneth
Similar threads
