As a reminder, torture is against both our US Constitution and the Geneva Convention. And while our Constitution does call for a speedy trial as a right of the accused, the speed of the trial is not to be at the expense of other requirements for due process, such as the right to a trial by jury, to call in witnesses, to cross examine one…
As a reminder, torture is against both our US Constitution and the Geneva Convention. And while our Constitution does call for a speedy trial as a right of the accused, the speed of the trial is not to be at the expense of other requirements for due process, such as the right to a trial by jury, to call in witnesses, to cross examine one's accuser, etc.
Your calls for special tribunals with sped up "warp speed" trials, or no trials, remind me of Big Pharma and our government claiming there was no time to do proper clinical trials for the mRNA shots since we were supposed to believe that was justifiable given the "emergency" we were in. There's a reason why clinical trials take so much time and certain standards must be met. To skip the long established requirements and fast track those trials was a grave injustice to humanity, and one that we continue to suffer from.
Yet now you're calling to do essentially the same thing with our legal system. You're taking a problem that has always existed and claiming it's a reason to undermine centuries of American jurisprudence and our hard won rights to due process. What you're calling for isn't progress, it's going back to the Dark Ages of justice.
While I agree that rape and murder are serious crimes, many men have been falsely accused of rapes and even murders they did not commit. If, heaven forbid, you ever found yourself in a similar situation, I guarantee you would want your Constitutional due process rights.
I never said no jury, I said a speedy trial...and again, I said once declarative...same way I say if you physically target attack any police, any military, any border agent, IMO we need no trial, in that case shot on the spot
I know all there is to know about trials, I have already said Trump was fooled and did not understand that the 15 extra years in a clinical trial is to exclude harms etc. and monitor for rare events that need time...please read what I write.
If someone is actively attacking the police with lethal force, they already have the right to shoot that person in self defense or the defense of others. However, if you're referring to a situation where someone is not an imminent threat to anyone's safety or if they were a threat they have been subdued, then NO the police, military, border patrol etc. don't have a right to shoot that person. Remember, at least one January 6th prisoner is still in jail because they reportedly bumped into a police officer and that was considered "assaulting" a police officer. That was clearly a miscarriage of justice and a very slippery slope we should not go down.
I have always said if life is threatened. again, go read again what I say...I know what I am saying...I know there are folk like you reading it he he he
life must be in imminent danger but I stand by it, there is no situation where you physically attack a police other than to get their gun and shoot them, border agents etc. so the perp must be killed, no question
Agree with your comments. He's just lost me as a subscriber. I was all in support of his covid content and maybe he should just stick with that. My state of TN has already passed a bill that the death penalty will be applied against child rape but like you said we have due process for a reason.
Sheila, if you unsubscribe, its ok...we still have free choice....you are wrong, for if you go back and read my writing, you will see you are wrong...you just read crap others write and assume they are right...how about you read. unsubscribe if you wish.
I understand. I also recently cancelled my subscription but it doesn't expire till late September. So I'll continue to comment here and there if I see an opportunity to interject something positive.
I do have a great deal of respect for everything Dr. Alexander has done to help save humanity from the deadly COVID shots, economically disastrous lockdowns, etc. I have respect for his courage and his work as a scientist. However, I cannot continue to support his work if it includes advocating for torture, legally questionable fast-tracked "special courts," mass arrests and executions that appear to be incompatible with the due process requirements of the Bill of Rights etc.
I understand his frustrations with the state of our nation and the many problems facing us. I just don't agree with his methods. If he eventually finds that everyone left on his Substack agrees with him, it will only be because he has driven away all the people with more moderate viewpoints.
we must torture them, they tortured Jocelyn Nungaray for 3 hours before killing her, violently raping her...were you there Sasha to help her? no, so we must torture so the message is sent. once and for all.
I completely disagree. What you are advocating is unlawful, unethical, and a violation of the US Constitution. If you want to live in a country where torture is considered a valid form of justice, I'm sure you can find some hell hole where people are still stoned to death and maybe you'd be happier there. As for me, I prefer to stay here and live under the US Constitution.
" ... many men have been falsely accused of rapes and even murders they did not commit. ..." That's very true. President Trump was falsely accused of rape by E. Jean Carroll. Thank goodness there was no way to charge him. Mike Tyson was probably falsely accused and convicted too. Under Kamala Harris innocent black men in California were framed for murder. The US just ass cyst em could be the best in world and yet it's still crap, not greatly evolved from dunking witches in water.
As a reminder, torture is against both our US Constitution and the Geneva Convention. And while our Constitution does call for a speedy trial as a right of the accused, the speed of the trial is not to be at the expense of other requirements for due process, such as the right to a trial by jury, to call in witnesses, to cross examine one's accuser, etc.
Your calls for special tribunals with sped up "warp speed" trials, or no trials, remind me of Big Pharma and our government claiming there was no time to do proper clinical trials for the mRNA shots since we were supposed to believe that was justifiable given the "emergency" we were in. There's a reason why clinical trials take so much time and certain standards must be met. To skip the long established requirements and fast track those trials was a grave injustice to humanity, and one that we continue to suffer from.
Yet now you're calling to do essentially the same thing with our legal system. You're taking a problem that has always existed and claiming it's a reason to undermine centuries of American jurisprudence and our hard won rights to due process. What you're calling for isn't progress, it's going back to the Dark Ages of justice.
While I agree that rape and murder are serious crimes, many men have been falsely accused of rapes and even murders they did not commit. If, heaven forbid, you ever found yourself in a similar situation, I guarantee you would want your Constitutional due process rights.
in this case we torture....you go tell it to the parents of the little girls
I never said no jury, I said a speedy trial...and again, I said once declarative...same way I say if you physically target attack any police, any military, any border agent, IMO we need no trial, in that case shot on the spot
I know all there is to know about trials, I have already said Trump was fooled and did not understand that the 15 extra years in a clinical trial is to exclude harms etc. and monitor for rare events that need time...please read what I write.
again Sasha, I said once declarative and 100% bullet proof...we kill them fast...we build special fires to throw the bodies into
If someone is actively attacking the police with lethal force, they already have the right to shoot that person in self defense or the defense of others. However, if you're referring to a situation where someone is not an imminent threat to anyone's safety or if they were a threat they have been subdued, then NO the police, military, border patrol etc. don't have a right to shoot that person. Remember, at least one January 6th prisoner is still in jail because they reportedly bumped into a police officer and that was considered "assaulting" a police officer. That was clearly a miscarriage of justice and a very slippery slope we should not go down.
I have always said if life is threatened. again, go read again what I say...I know what I am saying...I know there are folk like you reading it he he he
he he he
life must be in imminent danger but I stand by it, there is no situation where you physically attack a police other than to get their gun and shoot them, border agents etc. so the perp must be killed, no question
Agree with your comments. He's just lost me as a subscriber. I was all in support of his covid content and maybe he should just stick with that. My state of TN has already passed a bill that the death penalty will be applied against child rape but like you said we have due process for a reason.
https://tennesseestands.org/criminal/hb1663-authorizes-death-penalty-for-rape-of-a-child/
Sheila, if you unsubscribe, its ok...we still have free choice....you are wrong, for if you go back and read my writing, you will see you are wrong...you just read crap others write and assume they are right...how about you read. unsubscribe if you wish.
I understand. I also recently cancelled my subscription but it doesn't expire till late September. So I'll continue to comment here and there if I see an opportunity to interject something positive.
I do have a great deal of respect for everything Dr. Alexander has done to help save humanity from the deadly COVID shots, economically disastrous lockdowns, etc. I have respect for his courage and his work as a scientist. However, I cannot continue to support his work if it includes advocating for torture, legally questionable fast-tracked "special courts," mass arrests and executions that appear to be incompatible with the due process requirements of the Bill of Rights etc.
I understand his frustrations with the state of our nation and the many problems facing us. I just don't agree with his methods. If he eventually finds that everyone left on his Substack agrees with him, it will only be because he has driven away all the people with more moderate viewpoints.
Torture is a violation of the 8th Amendment prohibition on "cruel and unusual punishment." There are no special exceptions for emotional reasons.
we must torture them, they tortured Jocelyn Nungaray for 3 hours before killing her, violently raping her...were you there Sasha to help her? no, so we must torture so the message is sent. once and for all.
I completely disagree. What you are advocating is unlawful, unethical, and a violation of the US Constitution. If you want to live in a country where torture is considered a valid form of justice, I'm sure you can find some hell hole where people are still stoned to death and maybe you'd be happier there. As for me, I prefer to stay here and live under the US Constitution.
" ... many men have been falsely accused of rapes and even murders they did not commit. ..." That's very true. President Trump was falsely accused of rape by E. Jean Carroll. Thank goodness there was no way to charge him. Mike Tyson was probably falsely accused and convicted too. Under Kamala Harris innocent black men in California were framed for murder. The US just ass cyst em could be the best in world and yet it's still crap, not greatly evolved from dunking witches in water.
ANW, be sure to read what I said, always it must be definitive and bullet proof then we kill them, we torture them...100% definitive I always say.