Hey... so I found this article about how some people want to use the death penalty on people associated with 9/11 and part of their argument is that the death penalty is legal and should be used like it was used in the Nuremberg trial.
Of course problems with this comparison is that the numbers of people murdered by the nazis was far greater than the current death toll due to 9/11 and so some people doubt whether that comparison is even valid... anyways... here's the article:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080212/ap_on_go_pr_wh/sept_11_trials_nazis
2 comments:
I think the article is pretty interesting. According the article, the comparison to Nuremberg came as a response to the question "Doesn't the application of the death penalty to these defendants violate international law?"
I'm curious to know what you guys think. Does the death penalty violate international law? What are the merits/demerits of the death penalty? Do you think the death penalty is a good way for justice to be carried out?
No matter what we think about the death penalty, it is legal in parts of the USA so if that is what people will be convicted with it is legal.
However I think the comparison between 9/11 and the trials is invalid. both were horrible crimes and i don't deny that, but the Genocide in europe was, I can't put it into words, 9/11 didn't have the same drawn out extermination of a group, nor did it have the torture, starvation. It didn't have the same crimes against humanity, it was an act of war. more of a protest than a genocide.
Post a Comment