Sri Lanka rejects US-sponsored UNHRC resolution

The United States-sponsored resolution against Sri Lanka over war crimes in the island nation was adopted by the United Nations Human Rights Commission (UNHRC) with India voting in its favour on Thursday.

While 25 nations voted in favour of the resolution, it was opposed by 13 others. There were as many as eight abstentions. Pakistan opted to go with Sri Lanka.

In his address at the UNHRC during the discussion on "Promoting reconciliation and accountability in Sri Lanka", the Indian envoy to the UN -- Dilip Sinha -- called for an independent and credible investigation into Sri Lankan war crimes.

"India believes that the report of the LLRC and its findings and recommendation provides a window of opportunity to forge a consensual way forward towards a lasting political settlement through genuine national reconciliation and the full enjoyment of human rights by all its citizens. We note with concern the inadequate progress by Sri Lanka in fulfilling its commitment to this Council in 2009. Further, we call on Sri Lanka to move forward on its public commitments, including on the devolution of political authority through full implementation of the 13th Amendment and building upon it," Sinha said.

"India has always been of the view that the end of the conflict in Sri Lanka provided a unique opportunity to pursue a lasting political settlement, acceptable to all communities in Sri Lanka, including the Tamils. We call for effective and timely implementation of all the constructive recommendations contained in the LLRC report, including those pertaining to missing persons, detainees, disappearances and abductions, reduction of 'high security zones', return of private lands by the military and withdrawal of the security forces from the civilian domain in the Northern Province. We reiterate our call for an independent and credible investigation into allegations of human rights violations and loss of civilian lives. We urge Sri Lanka to take forward measures to ensure accountability. We expect these measures to be to the satisfaction of the international community," he said.

"As Sri Lanka's closest neighbour, India remains engaged in a substantial way in the relief, resettlement, rehabilitation and reconstruction process in that country. Our efforts have contributed to the resettlement of Internally Displaced Persons and the rebuilding of infrastructure and development, especially in the Northern and the Eastern Provinces of Sri Lanka," Sinha said.
Why India didn't move amendments to resolution

According to sources, Sinha met the US permanent representative and conveyed to him amendments India proposed. The US representative said, it would not be possible to include those amendments as the US had already reached a consensus with the countries supporting its resolution after wide ranging consultations. Adding amendments at the last minute would erode that consensus, he said.

Source: India votes against Sri Lanka in UNHRC, 25 votes in favour of resolution, 13 against : North, News - India Today

Finally, Indian Govt. submitted itself to the people pressure on Srilankan issue.

Update:

Sri Lanka rejects US-sponsored UNHRC resolution

Sri Lanka on Thursday rejected a US-sponsored resolution at UN Human Rights Council and said it understood the domestic political compulsions of India for voting against Colombo.
The UN Human Rights Council today adopted the US-sponsored resolution on human rights violation in Sri Lanka with 25 countries, including India, voting in favour of the document in the 47-nation strong body.

While 13 countries, including Pakistan, voted against, eight member-states abstained from voting. Gabon, a member-country could not vote due to voting rights issue.

The Sri Lankan external affairs minister G L Peiris told the parliament here immediately after the resolution was adopted with Indian support that the US resolution was counterproductive as it had only highlighted the negatives whilst completely ignoring the progress made since the end to the war.

People here (are more interested and) often comment on killing-of-2-kerala-fishermen-by-2-italian-marines, than the mass-murder-of-eelam-people-by-srilankan-government. The voting of Indian govt. against Srilankan govt. is a big step ever taken by Indian govt. with the pressure from political parties, as well as from students from tamilnadu & parts of India.

It's sad to see 0 comments on such a sensitive matter.

People don't have to see that it's specific to Tamils and we (whether north/south india) don't have anything to say/discuss on it.
Think it from the humanitarian perspective on the mass-murder-of-innocent-people in the names of war-crimes.

If none is interested, mods please delete this thread in a day or two.

W

discussion on topics like these require some detailed background knowledge which i am afraid to say you won't find on technology discussion forums.it is a complex issue related to a foreign country in whose affairs India intervened by sending armed forces(1st & last instance of its type) & further complicated the situation instead of improving it.there is also geopolitical issue to be considered vis-a-vis china & pakistan not to mention India's own policy of not intervening in another country's internal matters(aka Kashmir issue).always keep in mind that in politics nation's own interest always have to be given top priority over anything else which sadly India keeps forgetting.not even India is a saint when it comes to human rights abuses against its own people.

We know very little about these incidents, very very little, and hence its unwise to comment on it, whether there was truly a mass murder or whether it was an act of self defense, as much as we would like to condemn Sri Lankan government we also have to keep in mind they have every right to defend their country, if we go against Sri Lanka just because they attacked the LTTE who by heritage are Indian then its the same as Pakistani's defending terrorists in Kashmir, let the events unfold slowly and see what happens, and afaik Sri Lanka holds a very important key to India's future, our worst enemy is not Pakistan but China, not just in the economic sense, and we cannot allow China to set up shop in Sri Lanka, we would have enough hard time defending ourselves against Chinese forces from the north if a war ever breaks out in future but an attack from South could cripple our marine defense as well, India shouldn't be aggressive in this matter based on some pictures etc, for all we know those people could have been killed when LTTE took them hostage and used them as shields as well as the possibility of Sri lankan forces actually committing mass murder, our government should watch and observe.

No offense to anyone

PS: India shouldn't be involved based on the fact we have not even been able to root out the Domestic Terrorists, neither by force nor by diplomacy, we should be the last people to comment on resolution of terrorism. Its not recommended to be surrounded by enemies, in north we have Pakistan and China, Bangladesh is ready to turn coat at any moment and Nepal/Bhutan is in significant, Myanmar will sell to the highest bidder(read: The chinese), we don't need to lose our only ally atm, we simply can't afford to.

whitestar_999 said:
discussion on topics like these require some detailed background knowledge which i am afraid to say you won't find on technology discussion forums.it is a complex issue related to a foreign country in whose affairs India intervened by sending armed forces(1st & last instance of its type) & further complicated the situation instead of improving it.there is also geopolitical issue to be considered vis-a-vis china & pakistan not to mention India's own policy of not intervening in another country's internal matters(aka Kashmir issue).always keep in mind that in politics nation's own interest always have to be given top priority over anything else which sadly India keeps forgetting.not even India is a saint when it comes to human rights abuses against its own people.

^This.
Relations b/w Lanka and India totally deteriorated when the Lankans gave re-fueling rights to paki fighter planes during the 1971 war. In return our politicians gave away an island to Lanka hoping to secure their friendship :pullhair:

. (A huge country like us giving territory to a small island like Lanka..ridiculous)

There was also wide spread atrocities being committed against the Tamils at this time by the majority Sinhalese. To teach the Lankans a lesson, R&AW began training and funding the LTTE.

The Lankans deserved the pounding they got at the hand of the LTTE. Period.

^ Videos released by Channel4 literally showed Srilankan army people killing innocent eelam civilians blindfolding. It's a war ethics to not touch women/children though whatever happens, during fight. But here, the women were raped and brutally killed. Even the newborns and children were killed. Some of the images that i've seen really shook me to the deep.

Srilanka is an opportunistic ally. It's like "You can be my friend, until you nose it in my private matters though it's bad".

W

Gearbox said:
^ Videos released by Channel4 literally showed Srilankan army people killing innocent eelam civilians blindfolding. It's a war ethics to not touch women/children though whatever happens, during fight. But here, the women were raped and brutally killed. Even the newborns and children were killed. Some of the images that i've seen really shook me to the deep.

Srilanka is an opportunistic ally. It's like "You can be my friend, until you nose it in my private matters though it's bad".

it's really ironic that you & many here are blasting srilanka but don't even know that long before lanka & gaddafi bombed their own people Indian air force bombed Aizawl,now Mizoram's capital,to crush the Mizo insurgency back in 1966 & that was just the beginning of the brutal offensive.it's like Pakistan scolding Sudan for exporting terror.like i said before India has no right to meddle in another country's affair when it had done the same in past.like it is said "charity begins at home",India first must treat its own people with respect & then start preaching to others about human rights/treating their own people.
Gaddafi in Mizoram | Opinion | Times Crest

whitestar_999 said:
it's really ironic that you & many here are blasting srilanka but don't even know that long before lanka & gaddafi bombed their own people Indian air force bombed Aizawl,now Mizoram's capital,to crush the Mizo insurgency back in 1966 & that was just the beginning of the brutal offensive.it's like Pakistan scolding Sudan for exporting terror.like i said before India has no right to meddle in another country's affair when it had done the same in past.like it is said "charity begins at home",India first must treat its own people with respect & then start preaching to others about human rights/treating their own people.
Gaddafi in Mizoram | Opinion | Times Crest

ironically RAW - indias secret intelligence unit trained LTTE tigers who later killed Rajiv Gandhi.

also it happened in 1970's . America bombed Japan ... but thats done with . you move on...

Gearbox said:
^ Videos released by Channel4 literally showed Srilankan army people killing innocent eelam civilians blindfolding. It's a war ethics to not touch women/children though whatever happens, during fight. But here, the women were raped and brutally killed. Even the newborns and children were killed. Some of the images that i've seen really shook me to the deep.

Srilanka is an opportunistic ally. It's like "You can be my friend, until you nose it in my private matters though it's bad".

it is war ethics but it happens everywhere, in a war there is always collateral damage

india is not able to resolve many of her issues, but that does not mean that she does not have the right to address concerns of people who belong to this community and have their roots in india

even countries like america havent been able to resolve so many issues, but it pokes its fingers in every hole...

B

The issue is such a mess, starts with educational reform which turned into an armed conflict leading to formation of LTTE and other activist groups. Then India supported it due to pressure from indian tamils, the increase in conflict caused flood of Tamil refugees to Tamil nadu and AP. Then the Indian tamils pressured indian gov to stop the refugee. India signed peace accord with srilanka which gives autonomus right to tamil majority part of srilanka and appointed a Moderate leader from the activist groups head it. LTTE did not like this and attacks the IPKF which was participating in relief efforts in the region till then (they killed the soldiers by putting burning tyres around their necks). This started the fight between the LTTE and IPKF and the 'Crazy" part is that the Sri Lankan government under Premadasa supported the LTTE with money and Arms this time (Amazing that Sri Lanka was one of the Last countries to declare LTTE a terrorist org and India was the first).
Then LTTE killed India PM and then kilLed the Sri lankan primier who supported them. Then being fools they are stared an out right war with gov and got their ass kicked, all this time killing thousands of Tamils and other civilians as part of ethnic cleansing and by using them as human sheilds. Finally the LTTE surrenders.
Then the Srilankan government, under the guise of the rehabilitation program of rebel millitants starts mass killings, rape etc.... of the LTTE who did the same themselves.
Now decide which side is correct and which is wrong.
And before you say about the women and child killings, most of them were innocents as per the Tamils and millitants according to the Srilankans.. and since the women and child wing of LTTE was supposed to one of the most of ruthless terrorist groups. Do you still think killing of a child who does not have any innocence left in him due to the years of wars and has become a ruthless animal; is any different from a killing a grown up terrorist ?!!
I would be amazed to find anything human in a region which has so got used to war and evil...

whitestar_999 said:
discussion on topics like these require some detailed background knowledge which i am afraid to say you won't find on technology discussion forums.it is a complex issue related to a foreign country in whose affairs India intervened by sending armed forces(1st & last instance of its type) & further complicated the situation instead of improving it.there is also geopolitical issue to be considered vis-a-vis china & pakistan not to mention India's own policy of not intervening in another country's internal matters(aka Kashmir issue).always keep in mind that in politics nation's own interest always have to be given top priority over anything else which sadly India keeps forgetting.not even India is a saint when it comes to human rights abuses against its own people.

True. But no other country has a better track record than ours in the region with regards to "human rights".

^Two Words
Saudi Arabia

CommanderShawnzer said:
^Two Words
Saudi Arabia

you mean that sarcastically? ironically after the ayodhya riots planning the 1993 bombay blasts only led to a disgraced position of muslims throughout the world.

CommanderShawnzer said:
^Two Words
Saudi Arabia

If that wasn't sarcasm, then something is wrong with you. They behead people in public...that is a basic violation of human rights.

Extreme Gamer said:
If that wasn't sarcasm, then something is wrong with you. They behead people in public...that is a basic violation of human rights.

they treat women like ****, preach islam and yet the rulers and shiekhs enjoy immunity.

NoasArcAngel said:
they treat women like ****, preach islam and yet the rulers and shiekhs enjoy immunity.

Very true. But I think right to a "fair" (for lack of a better word in my head) manner of execution is more important. That doesn't mean your points are not important. Personally, I condemn capital punishment no matter the crime committed. I think a living hell is a better punishment than an escape through death.

The Saudi Arabia thing was sarcastic
.
.
.
.
.
.
was it so difficult to understand?

CommanderShawnzer said:
The Saudi Arabia thing was sarcastic
.
.
.
.
.
.
was it so difficult to understand?

Text doesn't indicate tone, so yes.

W

I think a living hell is a better punishment than an escape through death.

interesting.so according to this viewpoint capital punishment is more humane & therefore human rights activists should have no problems with giving capital punishment to those who have been awarded life sentence.see this is what happens when you try to bound law based on parameters like age,mental state,social status,family upbringing instead of judging each crime independently based solely on crime committed.a heinous crime deserves strict punishment including capital punishment no matter what the age,sex,mental state,family history,.... of accused is.i wonder how many human rights activists opposing death penalty would condemn death sentence given to someone like Hitler or Mussolini had they been captured alive.it is complete nonsense that a brutal rapist murderer can get away easily just because he was 3-4 months short of becoming 18 when he committed crime or a 80 yr old nazi war criminal who sent hundreds of people to their death gets just a wrist on slaps because according to court he is too old to be given a sentence.well i do believe in law of Karma & rest assured all this will come back to haunt human society in some form in future.

Extreme Gamer said:
think a living hell is a better punishment than an escape through death.

Guantamo Bay :twisted:

CommanderShawnzer said:
Guantamo Bay

that is worse than hell. heard of waterboarding?

whitestar_999 said:
interesting.so according to this viewpoint capital punishment is more humane & therefore human rights activists should have no problems with giving capital punishment to those who have been awarded life sentence.see this is what happens when you try to bound law based on parameters like age,mental state,social status,family upbringing instead of judging each crime independently based solely on crime committed.a heinous crime deserves strict punishment including capital punishment no matter what the age,sex,mental state,family history,.... of accused is.i wonder how many human rights activists opposing death penalty would condemn death sentence given to someone like Hitler or Mussolini had they been captured alive.it is complete nonsense that a brutal rapist murderer can get away easily just because he was 3-4 months short of becoming 18 when he committed crime or a 80 yr old nazi war criminal who sent hundreds of people to their death gets just a wrist on slaps because according to court he is too old to be given a sentence.well i do believe in law of Karma & rest assured all this will come back to haunt human society in some form in future.

a living hell is a better punishment than quick death. it makes you repent your actions and gives you a chance to change.

read about unit 731, there are more complicated issues at hand, the picture is not white and black. During world war 2 when nazi concentration camps were set up and the unit 731 ran they conducted many experiments which helped in gathering data which would eventually led to increased longevity which will help millions of people in the next generation and save their lives. You may argue that their actions were wrong, but many of them were given diplomatic immunity and became researchers in America. apart from that, the americans bombed japan with a nuclear bomb yet the perpetrators did not get any punishment. This was worse than what hitler did. It made life unbearable for another 100 years.

If you are talking about the crimes, dont confuse the present and the past.

whitestar_999 said:
interesting.so according to this viewpoint capital punishment is more humane & therefore human rights activists should have no problems with giving capital punishment to those who have been awarded life sentence.see this is what happens when you try to bound law based on parameters like age,mental state,social status,family upbringing instead of judging each crime independently based solely on crime committed.a heinous crime deserves strict punishment including capital punishment no matter what the age,sex,mental state,family history,.... of accused is.

Erm life imprisonment isnt living hell. Just because most Indian prisons suck doesn't mean the condition is the same everywhere in the world. How can you assume that life imprisonment is worse than death penalty when I didn't elaborate on my POV?

I think criminals that get the death penalty should be treated like animals, and not executed. Human rights clauses should include a dehumanization clause for these rarest of rare conditions, so that human rights unfairly enjoyed by these scumbags can be revoked.

CommanderShawnzer was pretty close to what I think people currently awarded capital punishment deserve. I think the burner has to be cranked at a much higher level than Guantanamo bay has to offer.

i wonder how many human rights activists opposing death penalty would condemn death sentence given to someone like Hitler or Mussolini had they been captured alive.it is complete nonsense that a brutal rapist murderer can get away easily just because he was 3-4 months short of becoming 18 when he committed crime or a 80 yr old nazi war criminal who sent hundreds of people to their death gets just a wrist on slaps because according to court he is too old to be given a sentence.well i do believe in law of Karma & rest assured all this will come back to haunt human society in some form in future.

Mussolini was captured and executed by a firing squad...and his corpse was displayed in public. in fact he was happy to die, baring his chest in front of his executioners if a story I read in a book is to be believed. I think he should have been treated like the Jews were treated under Hitler's reign.
Just because one child commits a brutal murder all children should suffer according to you?
Karma? Come on, don't be silly. There is no such thing as rebirth. Consciousness is a result of the quantum nature of the human mind. Once you die, your mental circuits stop functioning. In fact, IMHO death could probably be compared to a computer shutting down and the parts rusting away.

Extreme Gamer said:
Erm life imprisonment isnt living hell. Just because most Indian prisons suck doesn't mean the condition is the same everywhere in the world. How can you assume that life imprisonment is worse than death penalty when I didn't elaborate on my POV?

I think criminals that get the death penalty should be treated like animals, and not executed. Human rights clauses should include a dehumanization clause for these rarest of rare conditions, so that human rights unfairly enjoyed by these scumbags can be revoked.

CommanderShawnzer was pretty close to what I think people currently awarded capital punishment deserve. I think the burner has to be cranked at a much higher level than Guantanamo bay has to offer.

guantanamo bay is actually near the death level.... the torture which people go through there can almost kill

Extreme Gamer said:
Erm life imprisonment isnt living hell. Just because most Indian prisons suck doesn't mean the condition is the same everywhere in the world. How can you assume that life imprisonment is worse than death penalty when I didn't elaborate on my POV?

I think criminals that get the death penalty should be treated like animals, and not executed. Human rights clauses should include a dehumanization clause for these rarest of rare conditions, so that human rights unfairly enjoyed by these scumbags can be revoked.

CommanderShawnzer was pretty close to what I think people currently awarded capital punishment deserve. I think the burner has to be cranked at a much higher level than Guantanamo bay has to offer.

you know,once i read in a newspaper that prisoner's in Chennai get Roast Chicken every sunday.

NoasArcAngel said:
guantanamo bay is actually near the death level.... the torture which people go through there can almost kill

Not good enough. It has to be a bit more than that.

CommanderShawnzer said:
you know,once i read in a newspaper that prisoner's in Chennai get Roast Chicken every sunday.

I did say most didn't I?

Extreme Gamer said:
Not good enough. It has to be a bit more than that.

I did say most didn't I?

they use waterboarding man.. i cant think of anything worse than that.

NoasArcAngel said:
they use waterboarding man.. i cant think of anything worse than that.

Castration, nail-tearing, the rack, crucifixion are ranked higher in my books. Remember, you can be as imaginative as you want. Torture has limitless possibilities :twisted:

WARNING: DONT BLAME ME FOR WHAT YOU READ IN THE SPOILER. YOU HAVE BEEN WARNED. I'M NOT RESPONSIBLE.

A really thin, hard metal rod heated to white hot, and shoved inside a penis for example.

Extreme Gamer said:
Castration, nail-tearing, the rack, crucifixion are ranked higher in my books. Remember, you can be as imaginative as you want. Torture has limitless possibilities

WARNING: DONT BLAME ME FOR WHAT YOU READ IN THE SPOILER. YOU HAVE BEEN WARNED. I'M NOT RESPONSIBLE.

A really thin, hard metal rod heated to white hot, and shoved inside a penis for example.

lol, thats ummm physical torture..... and im sure there are worse things than that.... read unit 731 (gewgle), but then again its too much lol.... why not just give them pain some morphine and repeat that cycle again :twisted:

there are some ways, including physical and drugs which cause damage by fiddling with the CNS. inducing pain without actually deforming the body.

NoasArcAngel said:
lol, thats ummm physical torture..... and im sure there are worse things than that.... read unit 731 (gewgle), but then again its too much lol.... why not just give them pain some morphine and repeat that cycle again

Who cares whether it's physical, mental or both. Make the scum wish for death, and deny them that. Force them to eat the dead bodies of their kind too.

Anyway, no more off-topic or mods will close the thread.

^right.the post here are getting too metallic

W

Extreme Gamer said:
Erm life imprisonment isnt living hell. Just because most Indian prisons suck doesn't mean the condition is the same everywhere in the world. How can you assume that life imprisonment is worse than death penalty when I didn't elaborate on my POV?

I think criminals that get the death penalty should be treated like animals, and not executed. Human rights clauses should include a dehumanization clause for these rarest of rare conditions, so that human rights unfairly enjoyed by these scumbags can be revoked.

CommanderShawnzer was pretty close to what I think people currently awarded capital punishment deserve. I think the burner has to be cranked at a much higher level than Guantanamo bay has to offer.

Mussolini was captured and executed by a firing squad...and his corpse was displayed in public. in fact he was happy to die, baring his chest in front of his executioners if a story I read in a book is to be believed. I think he should have been treated like the Jews were treated under Hitler's reign.
Just because one child commits a brutal murder all children should suffer according to you?
Karma? Come on, don't be silly. There is no such thing as rebirth. Consciousness is a result of the quantum nature of the human mind. Once you die, your mental circuits stop functioning. In fact, IMHO death could probably be compared to a computer shutting down and the parts rusting away.

looks like you completely misunderstood my post.i am not assuming or saying anything except that punishment should be appropriate in respect to crime committed so if a particularly brutal/inhumane punishment is given for an inhumane crime then it is alright in my opinion.also someone who can rape a young girl & then cut her organs open by blunt object is not a children in my eyes no matter his age & all those who thinks them as children needs to get their heads checked for anomalies.

B

These days I feel that the Blackstone's formulation of " It is better that ten guilty persons escape than that one innocent suffer" is B.S... It should have been the other way around... Coz what we have in plenty in the World now is people and what we have the least is Humanity.

Humanity dies with the fallen. In these days, war ethics is becoming a bluff. For example, the beheading of indian soldiers by pakistan soldiers.
Coming back to SL, I see a light of hope for eelam as people (activist groups, non-political movements, especially COLLEGE STUDENTS) here in TN are still demonstrating rigorously to the Indian govt (i.e., INC) pushing them to take a STAND against SL though India says "SL is our neighbor country". INC is struggling a lot b/w the pressures on both sides (TN-people & SL-govt).

Am sure, INC won't win in the next election because of the ever-silent-PUPPET and the shadowy-behind-the-curtains-PUPPETEER.

whitestar_999 said:
looks like you completely misunderstood my post.i am not assuming or saying anything except that punishment should be appropriate in respect to crime committed so if a particularly brutal/inhumane punishment is given for an inhumane crime then it is alright in my opinion.also someone who can rape a young girl & then cut her organs open by blunt object is not a children in my eyes no matter his age & all those who thinks them as children needs to get their heads checked for anomalies.

Then according to you, a misguided youth doesn't even deserve a chance to be given correct guidance. How do you know that the boy in question didn't have bad influence around him? By your opinion all the child soldiers in the world between the age of 15 and 18 should be executed without any thought as to the circumstances they were placed in, and if they were 14 years 9 months they should be treated as 15 years old and given the same punishment.

Also, you did not understand my post even though I understood yours perfectly. How would the child be considered an adult if the law did not have any provision for it? If you ask the govt. to change the law, then you put other juvenile delinquents at risk too you know.

A crime has to be evaluated holistically, that is why judges are humans. Otherwise computers could easily replace human judges and the system would be sped up by at least 15-20% in the worst case scenario, which would help the Indian judiciary A LOT.

W

Extreme Gamer said:
Then according to you, a misguided youth doesn't even deserve a chance to be given correct guidance. How do you know that the boy in question didn't have bad influence around him? By your opinion all the child soldiers in the world between the age of 15 and 18 should be executed without any thought as to the circumstances they were placed in, and if they were 14 years 9 months they should be treated as 15 years old and given the same punishment.

Also, you did not understand my post even though I understood yours perfectly. How would the child be considered an adult if the law did not have any provision for it? If you ask the govt. to change the law, then you put other juvenile delinquents at risk too you know.

A crime has to be evaluated holistically, that is why judges are humans. Otherwise computers could easily replace human judges and the system would be sped up by at least 15-20% in the worst case scenario, which would help the Indian judiciary A LOT.

ironic that you did a good twisting of my words but didn't understood my post.where did i say that all juveniles/not adults be treated with same stick?in fact my starting point was that criterion should only be crime committed.here let me make it clear to you:
case 1:child orphaned at the age of 9 in a civil war & then joined a local militia to survive.undergoes brutal military training for 5 years & come out as a killing machine murdering dozens of civilians.captured & tried by court.
my opinion:guilty but under circumstances not eligible for death penalty or life sentence but based on psychological evaluation can be given appropriate jail time minimum of which must be 7 years.

case 2:child orphaned at the age of 9 in a civil war promises himself revenge on opposing side.joined a local militia to achieve his aim.undergoes brutal military training for 5 years & come out as a killing machine brutally murdering dozens of opposing side civilians especially infant children all out of hatred.captured & tried by court.
my opinion:guilty with no leniency.eligible for capital punishment or at least life sentence but nothing less.

according to you both should get chances to reform & a light sentence of 3-4 years at max.though if both had been adults you have no problems with harsh sentence.look up some USA laws where there is a provision to treat minors(less than 17/18 years of age) as usual offenders if the crime committed is heinous in nature.this is what i am talking about.a blanket immunity to all juvenile offenders no matter how heinous the crime being committed is nothing but just a mockery of law.a mere addition of clause which states that in exceptional cases minors can be treated as adults(like in USA) will not result in every juvenile being offered harsh sentences just like death penalty in exceptional cases doesn't result in handing down of capital punishment in many cases.

whitestar_999 said:
ironic that you did a good twisting of my words but didn't understood my post.where did i say that all juveniles/not adults be treated with same stick?in fact my starting point was that criterion should only be crime committed.here let me make it clear to you:
case 1:child orphaned at the age of 9 in a civil war & then joined a local militia to survive.undergoes brutal military training for 5 years & come out as a killing machine murdering dozens of civilians.captured & tried by court.
my opinion:guilty but under circumstances not eligible for death penalty or life sentence but based on psychological evaluation can be given appropriate jail time minimum of which must be 7 years.

case 2:child orphaned at the age of 9 in a civil war promises himself revenge on opposing side.joined a local militia to achieve his aim.undergoes brutal military training for 5 years & come out as a killing machine brutally murdering dozens of opposing side civilians especially infant children all out of hatred.captured & tried by court.
my opinion:guilty with no leniency.eligible for capital punishment or at least life sentence but nothing less.

according to you both should get chances to reform & a light sentence of 3-4 years at max.though if both had been adults you have no problems with harsh sentence.look up some USA laws where there is a provision to treat minors(less than 17/18 years of age) as usual offenders if the crime committed is heinous in nature.this is what i am talking about.a blanket immunity to all juvenile offenders no matter how heinous the crime being committed is nothing but just a mockery of law.a mere addition of clause which states that in exceptional cases minors can be treated as adults(like in USA) will not result in every juvenile being offered harsh sentences just like death penalty in exceptional cases doesn't result in handing down of capital punishment in many cases.

you didn't say it, but your words implied it/were not clear enough on the matter. And I didn't say that all juveniles deserve the same stick...and by your previous posts, both case 1 and case 2 deserve the same treatment- both murdered countless civillians. Also, you totally chose to ignore the fact that most case 2 criminals are actually brainwashed. those that actually do it to survive are not as common as those that are encouraged to do so.

I oppose the death penalty in principle. so there. I would oppose capital punishment even if it was a scumbag who committed genocide. I would oppose death penalties for all of the Nuremberg convicts too. I would oppose death penalties for even traitors.

whitestar_999 said:
ironic that you did a good twisting of my words but didn't understood my post.where did i say that all juveniles/not adults be treated with same stick?in fact my starting point was that criterion should only be crime committed.here let me make it clear to you:
case 1:child orphaned at the age of 9 in a civil war & then joined a local militia to survive.undergoes brutal military training for 5 years & come out as a killing machine murdering dozens of civilians.captured & tried by court.
my opinion:guilty but under circumstances not eligible for death penalty or life sentence but based on psychological evaluation can be given appropriate jail time minimum of which must be 7 years.

case 2:child orphaned at the age of 9 in a civil war promises himself revenge on opposing side.joined a local militia to achieve his aim.undergoes brutal military training for 5 years & come out as a killing machine brutally murdering dozens of opposing side civilians especially infant children all out of hatred.captured & tried by court.
my opinion:guilty with no leniency.eligible for capital punishment or at least life sentence but nothing less.

according to you both should get chances to reform & a light sentence of 3-4 years at max.though if both had been adults you have no problems with harsh sentence.look up some USA laws where there is a provision to treat minors(less than 17/18 years of age) as usual offenders if the crime committed is heinous in nature.this is what i am talking about.a blanket immunity to all juvenile offenders no matter how heinous the crime being committed is nothing but just a mockery of law.a mere addition of clause which states that in exceptional cases minors can be treated as adults(like in USA) will not result in every juvenile being offered harsh sentences just like death penalty in exceptional cases doesn't result in handing down of capital punishment in many cases.

if you are considering gun totting 9 year olds from africa and the 16-17 year olds who comitted attrocities in America as adults, you are sadly mistaken. The basic assumption wrong with your theory / statement is that you are considering children by physical factors like age and size and not on mental capacity. humans who have gone through this amount of trauma and torture and not adults, their mental capacities are limited / brainwashed

yes they should get a chance to reform. The law is not there to execute humans, its to make them change as people. The second example you mentioned has a simple opinion under court of law.. the child was small, his thinking was polarized and he was probably brain washed, so he needs to be rehabilitated and provided a chance to change his life.

talking about USA, where 17 year olds can buy guns without permits.... and conceal them ( take them to school without the need to inform their parents )

the law is simple: to protect the innocent and punish the guilty

punish the guilty, and punishment does not mean to kill them, else it should be "kill the guilty"

and the child soldiers example which extreme_gamer gave is an answer to your all your queries, and its a very valid answer.

B

^^ though your ideology is saint like, i feel you are living in a dream world. You need to understand that some people grow faster mentally than others, age has nothing to do with it. The things you experience in life.. good or bad... help towards the growth which may be positive or negative.
Your ideology could have been usefull long time back, but now when the earth is bustling with more humans and less humanity.... we could do away with the so called "Humans" with capital punishment in order to keep the rest sane and cautious. If the guys who did the rape in Delhi would have been shot dead in an encounter, there would have been less incidents instead of more after the horrible incident happened.
You dont need to give chance to people who think that way.

An idea is the most wonderfull thing and Horrible thing in the world... every thing good or bad has started with one and spread to many... from the first person who commited rape or started a charity....
So the way to kill bad ideas from the society is to kill the people who have them.
I know it sounds Radical.. buts it better and simpler that way to put a stop to all this BS.

Bhargav Simha said:
^^ though your ideology is saint like, i feel you are living in a dream world. You need to understand that some people grow faster mentally than others, age has nothing to do with it. The things you experience in life.. good or bad... help towards the growth which may be positive or negative.
Your ideology could have been usefull long time back, but now when the earth is bustling with more humans and less humanity.... we could do away with the so called "Humans" with capital punishment in order to keep the rest sane and cautious. If the guys who did the rape in Delhi would have been shot dead in an encounter, there would have been less incidents instead of more after the horrible incident happened.
You dont need to give chance to people who think that way.

An idea is the most wonderfull thing and Horrible thing in the world... every thing good or bad has started with one and spread to many... from the first person who commited rape or started a charity....
So the way to kill bad ideas from the society is to kill the people who have them.
I know it sounds Radical.. buts it better and simpler that way to put a stop to all this BS.

im not living in the dream world, my feet are on terra firma. you mentioned if they had been killed, have you wondered that the "if" you are talking about could change the entire course of humanity...? if einstein hadnt developed his theory, if newton would not have discovered gravity, if maxwell did not give his equation... these "ifs" possible alter the future from there on....

that way why is rape a act which deserves capital punishment? execute even small time robbers and crooks, execute teachers for misconduct, execute anyone who does anything wrong. if you really want to start a revolution do this. Take up arms and blow-up every jail and kill and humiliate all the families of the people who have done wrong things...

that way why is rape a act which deserves capital punishment? execute even small time robbers and crooks, execute teachers for misconduct, execute anyone who does anything wrong. if you really want to start a revolution do this. Take up arms and blow-up every jail and kill and humiliate all the families of the people who have done wrong things...

This.

And remember, an eye for an eye makes the whole world blind. Nobody has the right to decide whether another person should live or die. The worst criminals should be dehumanized and not executed if they don't reform.

W

Extreme Gamer said:
This.

And remember, an eye for an eye makes the whole world blind. Nobody has the right to decide whether another person should live or die. The worst criminals should be dehumanized and not executed if they don't reform.

do some study on mental trauma of rape victims.equating rape with crimes like robbery,murder etc is completely wrong but i guess this answer is to be expected from a typical male perspective.let me tell you that no man can truly understand the trauma of a rape.given an option i would rather see rapist sent to death rather than a murderer because at least murderer's victim rest in peace compared to the woman who is mentally scarred for life.

nobody has the right to decide that no human deserves to die.hoping for a world where no human deserves to die is same as wishing for a life in paradise.there always were & always will be humans who deserve capital punishment & fortunately there were & always will be humans to carry out this duty for the sake of justice.

whitestar_999 said:
do some study on mental trauma of rape victims.equating rape with crimes like robbery,murder etc is completely wrong but i guess this answer is to be expected from a typical male perspective.let me tell you that no man can truly understand the trauma of a rape.given an option i would rather see rapist sent to death rather than a murderer because at least murderer's victim rest in peace compared to the woman who is mentally scarred for life.

nobody has the right to decide that no human deserves to die.hoping for a world where no human deserves to die is same as wishing for a life in paradise.there always were & always will be humans who deserve capital punishment & fortunately there were & always will be humans to carry out this duty for the sake of justice.

you have some seriously polarized views man, you talk about crimes... as someone has said no work is big or small similarly no crime is big or small you cant judge a crime by its magnitude, a crime is a crime wether rape or small robbery. secondly you did not see the bigger point that if you consider petty theft to be small crimes then its like stepping stone for crime, you start with theft and reach the top of the ladder

You talk about feelings of rape victims, mental trauma.....and i being a sexist. Let me tell you i am not, and you are blind. Rapes also happen to men, obviously not on such a large magnitude but they do.

you call justice executing people who are fathers / mothers of small 4 year old children. you are crushing their dreams to ever see their parents again. ..... tell me if this isnt mental trauma above all then what is ? being orphaned at a young age thanks to your (law) roaming around, without proper education / social attachment.

not only them brothers/ sisters/ children. arent the hopes and lives and dreams of those people crushed? you are destroying one whole family for the sake of justice of a single person.

and as if the capital punishment will change anything, it will only make matters worse. By hanging the perpetrator you cant give back the respect of womanhood ( in rape cases ) back to the victim. The only solace will be, that the person has died. The most effective and long term solution to this problem is to adopt a more open view towards sexuality and allow meeting of opposite sexes freely. Also use education as means to talk about such issues in rural and backward areas and uneducated people.

if you call that law, then you should be sitting in the parliament.

and this is why the law does not give death to anyone and everyone. Capital punishment was the norm in the times of "Rajwadas" not anymore.

its for people like you to understand that extremists views are not required here, nor are hardline religious laws. The only way for mankind to lead life peacefully is to adopt a moderate view.

whitestar_999 said:
do some study on mental trauma of rape victims.equating rape with crimes like robbery,murder etc is completely wrong but i guess this answer is to be expected from a typical male perspective.let me tell you that no man can truly understand the trauma of a rape.given an option i would rather see rapist sent to death rather than a murderer because at least murderer's victim rest in peace compared to the woman who is mentally scarred for life.

nobody has the right to decide that no human deserves to die.hoping for a world where no human deserves to die is same as wishing for a life in paradise.there always were & always will be humans who deserve capital punishment & fortunately there were & always will be humans to carry out this duty for the sake of justice.

You are walking down the road. A group of female goons surround and kidnap you. Then they bash you up and forcibly **** you one by one or even together, occasionally stuffing blunt objects into a certain place. Are you raped or not? I think I would consider myself gangraped in that situation. But the law would be against me...

Feminists please don't bash me up for writing this, I am not saying this happens in a widespread manner, but there have been cases where a man was raped by a woman or even a child by a woman but those cases were dismissed because the law at that time, and even now doesn't recognize forcibly ****ing a man or boy as rape (there was one article a few years ago in the telegraph kolkata but I wouldn't be able to give specifics). For true equality the law has to treat moth male and female criminals in exactly the same manner, irrespective of the crime. Women do not deserve more lenient treatment and men don't deserve stricter treatment.

As far as a woman overcoming rape is concerned, they are unable to get over the trauma because of the social stigma involved. Over here, people distance themselves from you when they get to know that you're a victim. "Oh, she's that rape victim. Lets not go near her."
In better educated nations, they actually come forward to support a victim during that time of need. If I remember correctly, there was a tamil film (fictional I think) about a rape victim. instead of taking the scmbag to jail, she marries the rapist because culture dictates that a woman is bound to the man she gets ****ed by. Don't ask me for the name, I read an article on rape in sify.com which mentioned this film. Evidence enough for you?

NoasArcAngel said:
you have some seriously polarized views man, you talk about crimes... as someone has said no work is big or small similarly no crime is big or small you cant judge a crime by its magnitude, a crime is a crime wether rape or small robbery. secondly you did not see the bigger point that if you consider petty theft to be small crimes then its like stepping stone for crime, you start with theft and reach the top of the ladder

You talk about feelings of rape victims, mental trauma.....and i being a sexist. Let me tell you i am not, and you are blind. Rapes also happen to men, obviously not on such a large magnitude but they do.

you call justice executing people who are fathers / mothers of small 4 year old children. you are crushing their dreams to ever see their parents again. ..... tell me if this isnt mental trauma above all then what is ? being orphaned at a young age thanks to your (law) roaming around, without proper education / social attachment.

not only them brothers/ sisters/ children. arent the hopes and lives and dreams of those people crushed? you are destroying one whole family for the sake of justice of a single person.

and as if the capital punishment will change anything, it will only make matters worse. By hanging the perpetrator you cant give back the respect of womanhood ( in rape cases ) back to the victim. The only solace will be, that the person has died. The most effective and long term solution to this problem is to adopt a more open view towards sexuality and allow meeting of opposite sexes freely. Also use education as means to talk about such issues in rural and backward areas and uneducated people.

if you call that law, then you should be sitting in the parliament.

and this is why the law does not give death to anyone and everyone. Capital punishment was the norm in the times of "Rajwadas" not anymore.

its for people like you to understand that extremists views are not required here, nor are hardline religious laws. The only way for mankind to lead life peacefully is to adopt a moderate view.

Amen! I like what you say about capital punishment and a woman's respect. But raped or not raped, i would treat a woman with the same amount of respect, and maybe a treat the victim a bit better than I would treat the non-victim. And I think a rapist who reforms, apologizes and seeks forgiveness from the victim and goes the extra mile to help her overcome her trauma does a much better job progressing the country than a corpse/ashes that do...nothing whatsoever except maybe turn into unusable fertilizer/ medical specimens.

However, I'd disagree about moderate view. IMHO people need a flexible view rather than a moderate one. No matter how moderate, if you cant evolve your views over time, you are the scum who hold the species back. For example, Muslims can eat beef but not pork while Hindus can do exactly the opposite, provided you go by the religion. So who's right, who's wrong? A moderate would say "My religion is correct, but I'm okay if the other person's religion permits him." A flexible person would say, "Both people are wrong, and it's okay to eat both. Religious contradictions about the way you live your life makes absolutely no sense."

On another note, while debating this topic, this idea struck me that with evolution, man seems to be becoming very inflexible in thought, and our decline as a species over time will be because of this rigidity. I'm not saying this as a word of fact. This is only an idea that I churned up, and I'm still pondering over its validity.

W

well nothing you wrote was unexpected & all of it was along my predicted lines(i was hoping for the infamous american prison rape example though considering the popularity of US shows/movies here) so i guess for me it is time to end this discussion.let's not get away any further from the topic of this thread.India made a diplomatic mistake with regard to Sri Lanka & will have to bear the cost in some way in future.

NoasArcAngel said:
no crime is big or small you cant judge a crime by its magnitude, a crime is a crime whether rape or small robbery.

though i quote your line, this post is not necessarily to you.
the judiciary does dispense off 'justice' keeping in view the nature/level/circumstances of a crime ('niji muchalke par chhodna'/'performing social-work'/'some amount of time in prison'/'tadeepaar karna'/'life imprisonment'/'death', etc.), and practically speaking, we people, in general (including law-bearers as well), also view crimes according to their nature and try to 'find' the magnitude in each ("he committed a theft and was caught to be tried in court. hmmm...."; "what?! he committed a series of murders out of greed and is still unrepentant?! he should be hanged!"; "these corrupt politicians will do just anything to fill their coffers! they should be shot dead in full-public view!"; "the terrorists/naxalites are killing off civilians and our forces without any remorse. they should be terminated with an iron-will & hand!", etc.). perhaps has to do with human-mentality, but like as in any other case, generalisation should be avoided. so assuming the same yardstick for all would be a little odd, like either killing all or providing the same punishment to all, or pardoning all. discretion should be exercised, based on whether the perpetrator shows any signs of remorse, or is hardened, or seeks pleasure, etc.
many-a-times i feel this concept of catching criminals and shoving them in prisons humorous, like in, what purpose does it actually solve other than shifting a criminal from one place of residence to the other, and at times curbing their 'freedom' in this manner? its like a temporary solution (though practically speaking, we need such a solution as well, to keep in check the ever-rising crime-rate without taking too much time when everywhere we have are crimes and criminals waiting to be tried). may be some may feel afraid of the prison-life and desist committing crimes in future (though i suspect this for most), but what should be more sensible to practice is 'active reformation' for most of them (but then again, 'time' is a critical factor to consider this too i suppose, though some prisons are doing a very good job at this!).

Extreme Gamer said:
And I think a rapist who reforms, apologizes and seeks forgiveness from the victim and goes the extra mile to help her overcome her trauma does a much better job progressing the country than a corpse/ashes that do.

even i think similarly. rahul bose had said something similar a while back and received flak for it.

whitestar_999 said:
well nothing you wrote was unexpected & all of it was along my predicted lines(i was hoping for the infamous american prison rape example though considering the popularity of US shows/movies here) so i guess for me it is time to end this discussion.let's not get away any further from the topic of this thread.India made a diplomatic mistake with regard to Sri Lanka & will have to bear the cost in some way in future.

true.
we already have so 'friendly' neighbours surrounding us...

@ghor if you are quoting just for the sake of quoting, then dont post such replies.
shoving people in prisons is not as simple as moving them to some place of residence.. maybe you think its a temporary living situation with an ac room, free food and TV.

neighbours? look around you... which country has had close allies except some western nations? and why should we expect better? after all those are the people with the most open minded and moderate views.

(you've graced this thread with your replies, agreeable to others or not. let me add in 1-2 of mine as well which may be agreeable or not.)

perhaps i didn't write it in a lucid manner earlier. though a crime is a crime and is treated so as per codified law without much delving into circumstances leading to one, but the judiciary as well as common man/human's viewpoint sees it as per its nature & magnitude too.

regarding imprisonment, ofcourse it is a temp. solution! do you really think that most people actually come 'reformed' out of the prisons? perhaps weary/bitterer/disappointed/nastier, etc. at best, most certainly. facilities are for the influential criminals, that's not the point. none comes out wiser (generally). it just feels like criminals get caged for a while, pay for their freedom (whichever way; treated well, abused, etc.), and when done with it, are left back to fend for themselves any which way (though innocents put behind bars wrongly pay heavily for this). and the main motive behind curbing crime, ie, 'reformation', is getting overshadowed in all this. my stress was more on the 'reform' part. but anyway, this nation is waiting for implementation of law & police-reforms for decades on, and am stressing on criminal-reformation!

and it would be better to stay limited to our grounds in the present context. we lose an ally at our own peril, and we know what perils we face, one like which a long-ignoring western giant tasted first-hand more than a decade back. let's for once spare ourselves bending over backwards to accommodate every whim & attack & what-nots, after being more than enough moderate & open-minded to these very same crooked neighbours for years in order to expect better (better ties/relations/future), and make an effort to tell them & others as well assertively where they are blundering & at the cost of what/whom!

B

NoasArcAngel said:
not only them brothers/ sisters/ children. arent the hopes and lives and dreams of those people crushed? you are destroying one whole family for the sake of justice of a single person.

You are thinking about the families of a single person who did crimes, but what about the families of people who are effected by it.. dont they suffer mental trauma. And if the criminal is left alone giving a nominal punishment ( many of the criminals know what the punishment, but still do the crime), what about the families of the people who will be affected when they come out.

You say that the wife and children miss will their rapist father.. I feel it will be a serious warning for anyone who thinks of doing such crimes.

If you read about the biggest criminals and rapists in this country ex the dandupalya gang etc... they affect more families and the society as a whole... these criminals give new ideas to other people of weaker or sadistic mids; which lead them to perform more crimes.

The reason I feel capital punishment is required in todays society, is because due to the news coverage every criminal act gets.. there are people who want to imitate the acts...
When you think about the society on a larger scale you will understand why the capital punishment is important.... beacuse it would not hurt the society to miss a few criminals as much as it would hurt to have a majority of people living in fear, doubt, pain and anger.
And it would help lower the population as well...