JSDD wrote:in my view thats all just a show, symbolic politics ...
that guy is a traitor, he`s been caught, commited treason to russia (his homeland). in the US, treason can be punished by death. i dont know how it is in russia, but there cant be a more severe punishment (except being tortured, then killed ^^ gitmo?!
:D). i think its just that a guy that has been caught commiting treason gets killed. he had a choice.
1) If you're a tyrant, then yes, kill whomever you choose. If you're a democracy with an independent legal and judicial system, then you take the individual, provide the evidence, and convict them in a court of law according to the law of the country. If that's the death sentence, then that's your law.
He was convicted, he served his time for said crime. So this would be "extra" punishment.
what i think is not thought thoroughly through, is that about 1billion people (US + EU + some island shepherds) have to sacrafice in trade/cooperation/diplomacy and so on, just because 1 *sshole gets killed ...
Upon what basis is he considered an ahole? He made a judgement call which his country convicted him for making incorrectly according to their laws. He served his time. However, additionally, currently there's no trade sanctions. But at what point do you decide "enough is enough"?
compare that to iran: women sometimes are being hanged to death (from a dredger, crane etc .. what comes in handy) if they commit adultery (or if they`ve been raped). no word about that, trading with saudi arabia is also "business as usual", trading with communists is also acceptable nowadays ...
Those countries are allegedly trying people by their judicial systems according to the laws of their sovereign nation. They're also citizens of those countries, for which we have no jurisdiction or say over either. There are reports of executions (though there are so MANY in Iran and Saudi!), but yes, they're not front page news. Why? Because they're not necessarily unusual, or exceptional, do not involve our nationals and are for a country we have no say in the running of. Supposedly we "protest" their treatment and urge them to stop using the death penalty, as do many NGO's. They don't listen, as they believe it's their law and therefore it's all fine.
but if a foreign traitor is being killed by his homeland, thats a hole other question, an example has to be stated, just to make a point ...
State's can, by their own laws, try and execute within their own territory. Russia, however, has no legal jurisdiction to execute individuals within the UK. Whether a "traitor" or not... there is no
legal jurisdiction.
Furthermore, the Russian constitution requires a trial by jury to assign the death penalty. One assumes this hasn't been done, as to do so would be a pretty large admission of suspicion!
Of course, no presumption it is Russia (yeah, right
) - but if there's smoke, and some orange glow - you'd be reasonable to assume fire until proven otherwise. So far the arguments against consist of "doesn't make sense" and what are commonly called conspiracy theories in order to prop up a Government and/or distract from current affairs. If that's the case, then this needs to happen once every 2 weeks - because that's about the duration of interest in the media over and above normal country matters. Russia is upping the ante by expelling yet more UK diplomats to "make it even in number" - safe knowing that if it can be proven it's going to take time.
Most interesting question for everyone is - if it is proven to be Russia, will you believe that or believe that's a cover? For those thinking it is Russia, if it were found not to be Russia, would you be able to "forget" this episode or is it forever going to colour your opinion of Russia/Putin etc.
Given the polar opinions I've read online surrounding this, I think people either believe or not - and it doesn't matter what is found out in the future... they'll always hold that opinion.
Do I believe it was Russia? Yes, because I believe there is good reason for his offing as I've mentioned previously. Will I change my opinion? If they find a guilty party, then yes. If it ends up like nearly all Russian related "mysteries", then no... Russia have become masters of the "deniable", insufficient evidence doesn't mean they're innocent. Just can't pin them as guilty.
In those circumstances it'll be very interesting to see what happens in the political arena. They appear incredibly convinced it is Russia, and that's many countries, not one.
JSDD wrote:pjknibbs wrote:... since they didn't seem inclined to do anything about Russia's blatant meddling in the American elections.
is there a law that says that this is probibited?
who`s enforcing that law?
is there a world police or such that i`m not aware of?
how exactly did they meddle in the election, by influencing public opinion? isnt that what all the news media in the world is doing all the time?
Yes, there are laws against electoral fraud, but I don't think that's what Russia was accused of with regards to the US - more in its own elections instead.
There are also laws against computer hacking and unauthorised access, which is what they argue was the Russian interference in the US (hacking of Hilary Clinton and other various individuals, before releasing information to the media).
It isn't necessarily whether the steps were illegal and punishable, it
is the attempt by a state to influence the other's (supposed free/open) electoral system. Whether you'd think releasing "truthful" information (that proves damaging) is on the same level as fabricating it instead ("fake news") is up to you
The media do roughly the same, but of course, providing evidence through the means used is likely to have a greater impact.
Care much? Not really, Governments interfering in others elections has been going on since the dawn of time. But the attributable audacity of doing so by one "major power" to another is very brazen.
