Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.
Options

eye for an eye

stonemusestonemuse
edited April 2013 in Not Sports Related
Fair retribution?

The UK has urged Saudi Arabia not to carry out a reported sentencing of paralysis for a Saudi man as punishment for paralysing another man.

A Foreign Office spokesperson said London was "deeply concerned" by the sentence, describing it as "grotesque".

Such punishment was "prohibited under international law", the official added.

Saudi media reports earlier said the 24-year-old man could be paralysed from the waist down if he could not pay his victim £250,000 in compensation.

Comments

  • Options
    RizzoRizzo
    It would certainly discourage me from committing a crime over there!
  • Options
    Wheresmeticket?Wheresmeticket?
    Unspeakable. The only reason we have anything to do with this appaling regime, once again, is dirty old o*l.
  • Options
    MeebaumAzanitchMeebaumAzanitch
    What sentence would Mick Philpot have got out there?
  • Options
    Wheresmeticket?Wheresmeticket?
    MeebaumAzanitch said:

    What sentence would Mick Philpot have got out there?

    Depends how close to the royal family he was.
  • Options
    MattDMattD
    Well, shouldnt have a paralyzed the other man should he. Lesson learnt.
  • Options
    HornchurchHornchurch
    If it turns out that they got the wrong man, will they be able to reverse it?

    If not, will they then paralyse the guys who dished out this punishment?

    Where will it all end?
  • Options
    stonewallpenaltystonewallpenalty
    Wheely bad punishment.
  • Options
    DaveMehmetDaveMehmet
    stonewallpenalty said:

    Wheely bad punishment.

    Lame joke
  • Options
    DRAddickDRAddick
    edited April 2013
    The bloke was actually a 14 year old kid at the time and was fighting with his mate and stabbed him. Still no justification but does change things from if it was just a random attack or by a supposed grown up .

    And I can never agree with a supposed Justice which is effected by wealth. Either everyone should be paralysed as a punishment or no-one should.
  • Options
    stonewallpenaltystonewallpenalty
    DaveMehmet said:

    stonewallpenalty said:

    Wheely bad punishment.

    Lame joke
    cheer up 8-D
  • Sponsored links:


  • Options
    DaveMehmetDaveMehmet
    Whoosh!
  • Options
    eaststandmikeeaststandmike
    Why are we sticking our noses in? We have enough problems and issues here at home in the UK why get involved.
  • Options
    stonewallpenaltystonewallpenalty
    eaststandmike said:

    Why are we sticking our noses in? We have enough problems and issues here at home in the UK why get involved.

    Because we're british?
  • Options
    AddickUpNorthAddickUpNorth
    Again the Saudi's are showing how barbaric they are. Yet we cosy up to them and turn a blind eye simply because, as someone has said, they are rich in oil. If they didn't have a pot to piss in our attitude would be entirely different. Don't forget, the majority of 9/11 plotters were Saudi nationals. So what happened? Our leaders decided to invade Iraq!
  • Options
    se9addickse9addick
    Appalling
  • Options
    stonewallpenaltystonewallpenalty
    We invaded Afghanistan as thats where the Al quaeda training camps were.

    Iraq was a totally different war.
  • Options
    LincsaddickLincsaddick
    an eye for an eye will mean we are all eventually blind .. who said that ?? .. mind you I would like to see Philpott et al burnt at the stake
  • Options
    AbsurdistanAbsurdistan
    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/2966790.stm
  • Options
    AddickUpNorthAddickUpNorth
    Imo Iraq wasn't a war, it was an illegal invasion. My point being though, how come the Bush jr regime didn't invade Saudi Arabia when it became obvious that the Al Queda threat came from within it's borders and from it's citizens? We all know the answer to that.
  • Options
    LincsaddickLincsaddick
    AddickUpNorth said:

    Imo Iraq wasn't a war, it was an illegal invasion. My point being though, how come the Bush jr regime didn't invade Saudi Arabia when it became obvious that the Al Queda threat came from within it's borders and from it's citizens? We all know the answer to that.

    Oil & Mecca (not the bingo halls) .. EVERY muslim worldwide would be on a fatwah if the infidel invaded the holy city
  • Sponsored links:


  • Options
    stonewallpenaltystonewallpenalty
    Saudi government doesn't deal with terrorists. Bin laden himself was exiled.

    9/11 had nothing to do with saudi arabia the state.

    personally i believe iraq would have been invaded anyway. You're right it was totally illeagel with made up bullshit for an excuse to invade.
  • Options
    mascot88mascot88
    World Trade Centre 7
  • Options
    Ormiston_AddickOrmiston_Addick
    stonewallpenalty said:

    Saudi government doesn't deal with terrorists. Bin laden himself was exiled.

    9/11 had nothing to do with saudi arabia the state.

    personally i believe iraq would have been invaded anyway. You're right it was totally illeagel with made up bullshit for an excuse to invade.

    The Saudi government are one of the biggest funders of terrorists on the planet.
Sign In or Register to comment.

Roland Out Forever!