331–340 of 561 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Take responsibility is just a euphemism, though. For some people that is someone going behind bars. What do you actually mean?
Apply the same thought process to ‘punishment’. Those who spend a lot of time in prison seem to come out worse and reoffend. How is that helpful?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Since a few days, there is an abundance of cover and articles in most major newspaper here with propaganda and repeated lies supporting him. How much of this is driven by contrarian and counter-cyclical reporting? I’m not familiar with French media, but I see the same pattern in every country where I’ve kept up with the news: Media starts being favorable to a topic when it’s up and coming, switching to being highly…
Imprisoning political prisoners is a great kick off to a bright future (historically speaking).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Basically Libya would still have been an intact nation with college tuition and free health care if Gadaffi hadn't been so extraordinarily stupid to give money to Sarkozy - who later had him murdered and his nation destroyed via NATO to cover this fact up.
Basically this article would still be expanded if Gadaffi was not deposed: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_rights_violations_during...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Your own link said it 33%, so not the majority. A union has no obligation of "independence". Being member of a union does not mean you agree with everything, just that you think it's the best to defend your interests. The "Fête de l’Huma" is not the Communist Party's annual conference but it is indeed left leaning. There is no need to write communist in all caps, it's not an insult. For your last point you'll need to…
Yeah, it's not communist, it's just "left-leaning", organized by L'Humanite, a communist newspaper (who calls itself so), known for amongst other things, for grieving the "great comrade Stalin"'s death on its front page dated 9th March 1953. :o) And sure, belonging to a communist-leaning syndicate which publicly takes political stances (one being to say "dont vote for Sarkozy") has strictly no influence on how you de…
Your claim that the judges are red is a popular right wing fantasy
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Basically this article would still be expanded if Gadaffi was not deposed: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_rights_violations_during...
Frankly, that record looks far cleaner than most US Presidents.
Btw, I've seen chinese tankies and I've seen russian tankies. First time I see a gadaffian tankie.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
But his NY felony convictions were not about those cases but about paying off Stormy Daniels. That case I do think was lawfare; it was politically motivated and on similar facts would never have been brought against, as an example, Joe Biden. It’s also a very dangerous precedent to bring criminal charges against the presumptive (and in hindsight, actual) winner of the at time forthcoming presidential election, even i…
Thanks for reminding me, he also broke campaign finance laws with the pornstar payoff. No, if Joe Biden had the same facts against him the entire right wing -- including you -- would be eagerly prosecuting them and singing of the high-minded justice in doing so. Have you forgotten "lock her up!"? "President is above the law" is a far more dangerous precedent to set, and "nominees are above the law" is out-of-this-wor…
I am not right wing, have never voted for Trump or chanted "lock her up", and no, I believe in principles and not party loyalty and would have felt the same had it been Biden.
I was also against Clinton's impeachment for the same reason. Stormy Daniels and Monica Lewinsky were both private sexual matters, and to try to use ancillary technical crimes (obstruction; campaign finance) to remove your political opponent is a bad precedent and it's bad when both parties do it.
Your reply itself also proves my point. You say that the right wing would have prosecuted Biden on the same facts, not that the same left wing New York DA would have. Justice shouldn't be left wing and right wing.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Frankly, that record looks far cleaner than most US Presidents.
That's a complete non-sequitur. Btw, I've seen chinese tankies and I've seen russian tankies. First time I see a gadaffian tankie.
But keep thumping yourself on the chest. What do all the deaths and suffering matter ? The bad guy has been beheaded after all and the War stockholders got richer! Mission Accomplished!
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Law doesn't seek to punish but to rehabilitate. Act of taking freedom away from the criminal is violent enough. Treating them badly is just a sign of unfair/poor society that cannot maintain (afford to keep) it's promise to be civil to all citizens.
> Law doesn't seek to punish but to rehabilitate. That's unfortunately not universally true. This is most obvious when considering the death penalty. Norway exemplifies a rehabilitative justice model and it is effective, evidenced by low recidivism rates.
It can be about removing the threat that a person poses from society permanently.
It can be about making the victims feel a sense of relief and justice.
Something really scary in France right now is that you can see really clearly how most mainstream media are used for propaganda. Since a few days, there is an abundance of cover and articles in most major newspaper here with propaganda and repeated lies supporting him. It's hard to imagine but non stop. You have everyday interviews of his family saying that it is an injustice, that he did nothing, that the judgement…
That's not the issue. The issue is that there are hundreds , if not thousands, of french politicians who should be in jail. I don't disagree with him going to jail: but it's one heck of a corrupt country where they all have their hands in the cookie jar. Most french politicians who served at the EU, for example, have friends and family as "employees" on their payroll (well, on the EU citizens' payroll). Same at non-E…
[flagged]
Law doesn't seek to punish but to rehabilitate. Act of taking freedom away from the criminal is violent enough. Treating them badly is just a sign of unfair/poor society that cannot maintain (afford to keep) it's promise to be civil to all citizens.
The purposes are punishment are deterrence, retribution, and rehabilitation [1]. (Incapacitation is also typically considered in sentencing.)
The potential deterrence and retributive benefits of cruel have been known for ages. It’s why jailers did it. Those potential benefits are balanced against rehabilitation. But that doesn’t make it the supreme consideration, particularly for crimes of corruption.