Well in some ways it's correct actually. Drug dealers ruin far more lives in Australia and overseas than terrorists do, yet the politicians are hypocritical enough to say a terrorist should be executed but drug dealers shouldn't. That is very hypocritical.

There is however in that tape many points which were very illogical, Shapelle Corby was caught with 4kg of marijuana, from my undersanding the other guy who got executed  that was mentioned had herion I think. There is a big difference between heroin and marijuana and governments class them as different categories of drugs. Australia did make too much of a big deal, she received a fair trial and it was proven beyond reasonable doubt that she had trafficked drugs so it is inappropriate for the Australian government to interfere as well as Australians to expect that she be let off for her crime. But having said that the punishment she did get which initially was 15 years in jail but was boosted to 20 after her appeal failed was fair. She shouldn't have done it and people like her are scum. But I don't feel the death sentence would have been applicable from the Indonesian side even without interference, in fact I personally believe that she was given a harsher sentence for the trouble that she caused in the courtroom and the farce that she made of the whole thin in addition to the Australian public's behaviour towards it.

Quote:


Since the Australian Muslim community don't even know who this "Sheikh Harun" is, and even ASIO express doubts about his identity/authenticity, this post isn't really worth the electrons you typed it in.

Malik Shakur wrote on Jul 26^th, 2008 at 6:52pm:




Sure they do

Did you hear that Victa have brought out a new lawnmower? The Victa Schapelle holds 4kg of grass and comes with a 20 year guarantee.

Malik Shakur wrote on Jul 27^th, 2008 at 5:02pm:


If you mean strictly illegal drugs when you talk about drug dealers than no they don't the statement is idiotic.

You can't compare people dying by willingly taking drugs to people dying by unwillingly being blown up, shot or decapitated.

You can?

Can you also see the comparative similarities between geology and aquaculture?

guys,
the only one to blame for taking drugs is the taker.
legalizing them will take the dealer - middle man - out of the frame.
a lot of resources that could be used elsewhere are chewed up snaring dealers.
no gov't will ever stop the drug trade.

as for the bali bomber/s.

these individuals planned the murder of other human beings.
death is too good for them.

DR9.

Let us not forget that evil, rat faced little cleric, who is now free to keep preaching his murderous hate.

I can understand emotional, and psychologically programmed, young men, never pausing long enough to  reflect deeply on what they were actually doing.
Their teacher however, is a force of evil, and the most dangerous of them all, and is free to recruit more emissaries of hatred in the name of his god.

Throughout much of the muslim world he is now feted openly by the zealots, and privately, by many more, although they would not admit it to an infidel.

Welcome to OzPolitic, bluebird and Exotic Cheese.

Malik:

Drug dealers ruin far more lives in Australia and overseas than terrorists do

One terrorist causes far more harm than one drug dealer. Do you think that because the Bali bombers come from a smaller group of 'troublemakers' they are better people? This is an absurd conclusion.

freediver wrote on Jul 28^th, 2008 at 8:11pm:


What's more absurd is your idiotic assumption of me FD, where on earth did I say that?

It was really interesting to read people's opinions on this matter.
In my opinion I do believe drug dealers do ruin far more lives than overseas terrorists do. Whether its the one who sells heroin or the one that sells marijuana. My reason for saying this is that most people once they've had their first hit of heroin they become addicts, you see them all over the place, their lives are ruined. The ones that are lucky enough to realise that they have a problem very seldom are able to kick the habit and go on to live a happy & healthy life. As for ones that sell marijuana well, we can say its a soft drug, only a bit of grass. That bit of grass is the stepping stone to harder drugs in most cases, because after a while the pots not strong enough. How many of these drug addicts actually clean themselves up? Lets be a little realistic. Most usually spend their life off their head that they just get stuck in the cycle and it becomes a normal part of life for them, so they hook up with another addict have kids because well, why wouldn't they its all a big haze and the next thing you know the kid had its first taste of a joint at the age of 10 and its first hit of heroin by the time they're twelve all because that's all they grew up to know because that's what their parents did. Give it a little time those kids are teenagers they left school at the age of 13 because well why get an education when you can spend the rest of your life bumming around and scoring your next hit of what one may think is reality but its not. They wouldn't know real life if it kicked them in the face. And then their kids have the same lifestyle. And their kids. It happens but it not often that a child breaks out of the lifestyle that it grew up with.But this is how it all starts, the temptation to try any sort of drug is the first step in ruining ones life. So this in fact has ruined thousands and thousands of lives and their kids too. So as far as I am concerned the amount of people killed during the blast is no where near as many as the lives that would be ruined by the drugs that Shapelle tried to take into Bali.

Quote:


People who sell marijuana ruin lives? You have a firm grasp of reality.

Quote:


No, they don't.

Quote:


No, it isn't.

Quote:


Ok here is being realistic; I have smoked cannabis on and off since I was 15 years old. I have also tried heroin, meth/amphetamine, cocaine, mdma and a number of different psychedelics including mushrooms and dmt. I have never used cigarettes, alcohol or coffee for prolonged periods of time. 

Quote:


I have three bachelors degrees, one masters degree, a wonderful home life, loving family and friends, run/gym 6 days a week, have no mental or physical defects, enjoy the career/job I'm in and so on and so forth.

Oh sh.it maybe I'm just high on the heroin/marijuana and imagined all that? If only I hadn't taken that first step.

Quote:


You just described poverty.

Quote:


....

Quote:

freediver wrote on Jul 29^th, 2008 at 11:43am:


How about you put the whole sentence there FD instead of misrepresenting what I said.

Quote:


I was referring to the the fact that the government would put a terrorist to death, yet they wouldn't put a drug dealer to death when the damage that drug dealers do all over the world is far worse than what terrorists do. I never said that I consider terrorists any better, both are scum.

Quote:


The annual global deaths attributed to illegal drugs is so low its almost unmeasurable compared to terrorism.

Terrorism is direct aggression.
Drugs are selling a product to a market.

The number of deaths attributed to terrorism (post 9/11) 2001-2004 is 2929 deaths.
Source: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/5889435/

The number of Israelis killed in terror attacks is 1169 deaths (2000-2008).
Source: http://www.mfa.gov.il/MFA/Terrorism-+Obstacle+to+Peace/Palestinian+terror+since+...

35,023 people died from a terrorist act (1968-2006) with a ratio of 1.6 deaths per terrorist act, and an average of 898 deaths annually.
Source: http://www.nationmaster.com/cat/ter-terrorism

bluebird wrote on Jul 31^st, 2008 at 8:00pm:


I notice you didn't mention the video maker's other point, that being - praising the Bali bombers for only killing a couple of hundred innocents.

What are your thoughts on thanking Aliya Zilic who murdered his 3 year old son, Imran and threw his body into a mine shaft? I heard a rumour he pinned the little boy to the ground by the neck and smashed his face into his brain. Later he threw his battered remains down a mine shaft. They say the boy's mother suffered such a deep shock that she may never fully recover. What are your thoughts on sending him a 'Thank You' card for only murdering one little child? Or perhaps thanking him for killing him by smashing his face into his brain with a rock instead of dismembering him alive?

You don't have to answer that. Of course you don't approve, because I'm prepared to bet you're not a monster.

That video, by the way, was a contemptible and gutless attempt at covertly approving the work of murderers - to thank them no less - which is as evil in its intent as thanking Zilic for bashing his son to death.

Acid Monkey wrote on Jul 31^st, 2008 at 11:30pm:


Haha.

We are talking about real terrorism here. You know things like invading multiple countries, 10,000s of dead people, millions of refugees.

Quote:


You are using THAT on a discussion on terrorism? Wow...

Quote:


(1968-2006) and only 35k people died from terrorism? Haha what a relief for states like Israel and the U.S.

I think you are all missing a big point here. Saying that drugs cause a lot of deaths does not mean that Schapelle Corby should be punished the same as a terrorist, any more than saying that car crashes causing lots of deaths mean that drivers should be put to death. Drugs and car crashes are a bigger problems because there are more people doing it, not because the people doing it are such bad people. Terrorism causes fewer deaths despite the evil involved, because there are so few terrorists. An individual terrorist is still at the bottom of the pile compared to a pot smuggler.

Abu, by trying to protray conventional war as terrorism you are playing into their propaganda.

So why are you reinforcing the idea that terrorism is worse than war?

Can you link me to where the US made that claim?

They are terrorist acts because they are unconventional. That's the definition of terrorism.

I prefer to define it in terms of whether there is a nation-state behind it. That's really what the difference between terrorism and war boils down to.

I asked you whether the US made that claim because I think your argument is a strawman. In my opinion, they have valid reasons for declaring terrorism to be evil and they had a valid reason for invading Afghanistan. Those reasons are nothing like the simplistic posturing you described.

freediver wrote on Aug 1^st, 2008 at 11:13am:


Conventional(?) war is the greatest form of terrorism.

Acid Monkey wrote on Aug 1^st, 2008 at 9:29am:


Yeah... so invading a country is terrorism.

freediver wrote on Aug 1^st, 2008 at 12:00pm:


The U.S army manual defines terrorism as the...

"calculated use of unlawful violence or threat of unlawful violence to inculcate fear; intended to coerce or to intimidate governments or societies in the pursuit of goals that are generally political, religious, or ideological."

The modalities or methods of the violence are not the defining factor.

freediver wrote on Aug 1^st, 2008 at 1:57pm:


Well the U.N security council and the ICJ don't agree with you.

More like asking JWH to define "fairness".

Quote:


So you trust political bodies to declare terrorism as evil, and to define who is and isn't a terrorist and what kind of action to take against terrorists, you just don't trust them to define exactly what terrorism means... interesting

abu_rashid wrote on Aug 1^st, 2008 at 5:37pm:


Nelson Mandella was once considered a terrorist by the US.

freediver wrote on Aug 1^st, 2008 at 1:57pm:

Wow.. So the truth is out eh?

State's can do whatever they want by invading another nation and occupying it including murdering and torturing innocent civilians and they will only be considered engaged in war which is such a sterilized way of naming the brutality they cause..

But if a person is fighting for their freedom and is an individual, even if they attack an occupying army using guerilla tactics they would be considered terrorists which is considered such a dirty word and considered something which is unjust..

the American founding fathers were terrorists according to you..

Malik Shakur wrote on Jul 26^th, 2008 at 6:52pm:


I don't see much a problem with this statement. It is a reasonable statement to make. If this statement is made with the intent of downgrading the actions of the Bali Bombers THEN the statement is flawed. Corby should thank her lucky stars that she won't be executed, but owes little debt to the Australian public for its instant championing of the Corby cause before any facts came in. in fact it reinded me of the Tolstoy quote "It is amazing how complete is the delusion that beauty is goodness." She is a pretty young thing, instantly deserving of the benifit of the doubt.

Of course where do we draw the line. Certainly child killers and upper tier drug oushers/barons should be executed here as well. Someone who kills innocents on the road because they were under the influence of a self administered illegal drug should not be able to claim diminished responsibility. etc etc etc.

And what of the Indonesian governments protracted extermination of the people of Western Papua. A program of genocide on our own door step, that has been not only ignored by this country, but deliberately kept off any agenda. Until of course vast resourses are discovered, that allows a questionable territorial locality, to justify a overdue and probable too late call for the liberation from Australian sanctioned Indonesian terrorism. Ala East Timor.

Murky waters?

So you trust political bodies to declare terrorism as evil

I don't need any politician to tell me that terrorism is wrong.

Well I'm just pointing out no one agrees with that idea, including the world court and intro to terrorism courses at uni.

But they do, they just don't state it as explicitly as you'd like.

Nelson Mandella was once considered a terrorist by the US.

Nelson Mandela did a very good job of preventing the situation in South Africa from descending into terrorism and cyclical violence.

State's can do whatever they want by invading another nation and occupying it including murdering and torturing innocent civilians and they will only be considered engaged in war which is such a sterilized way of naming the brutality they cause..

Again Malik, you are buying into the propaganda by accepting that war is a 'sterile' term compared to terrorism. You accept their propaganda then try these absurd little semantic arguments to turn their propaganda against them. They have you dancing round in circles.