posted on June 7, 2001 09:57:48 PM new
Credit where it's due:
"On August 24, 1996 President Clinton announced in his radio address a plan for a national sex offender registry. The registry, operated by the FBI, will enable law enforcement to quickly determine whether an individual has been convicted of a sex offense in any state in the country. The plan was developed by the Attorney General as directed by the President....
posted on June 7, 2001 10:11:30 PM newSigh. I guess I am ambivalent about McVeigh's execution. I generally am no supporter of the death penalty. I don't believe it deters anyone from commiting a similar crime and merely serves as a way for government to exact the harshest penalty: revenge.
I also am conflicted about the way this case was handled. If there was exculpatory evidence that the government withheld from McVeigh's defense attorneys prior to trial, it's a true miscarriage of justice. I personally never believed the Oklahoma bombing was solely carried out by McVeigh, Nichols and Fortier. It was too well planned and executed. Of course, McVeigh confessed after his conviction to being the sole mastermind. He wants to die a martyr, as so many other posters have pointed out.
I believe every criminal defendant is entitled to due process and a fair trial. Then, on the other hand, I think about the families of those bombing victims. Will McVeigh's death finally offer them closure? Probably not. But everytime I recall those devastating pictures after the Murrah building was destroyed, particularly the photo of the firefighter cradling that lifeless baby in his arms, my heart aches. Maybe in yet another death, those people will find peace.
I work for Indiana's largest daily newspaper and the day McVeigh arrived at the federal penitentary in Terre Haute, our newsroom has planned and planned and planned the coverage we will provide our readers when he is put to death. Mercifully, I am not a part of the "execution team" as the group of reporter being dispatched again to southwest Indiana have been dubbed. I have no desire to be there on Monday. But I will be glad when it's finally over.
Sorry for bloviating.
**typos**
[ edited by Baduizm on Jun 7, 2001 10:14 PM ]
[ edited by Baduizm on Jun 7, 2001 10:14 PM ]
posted on June 8, 2001 12:04:10 AM new
Spaz, to characterize my post as "a weenie whacking off" is vulgar, insulting and abusive. A new low, even for you. I guess the moderators are asleep at the wheel.
I see you have emailed us about this as well - in the future please just use our email address for moderation issues.
As far as spaz's post above, while it can be taken two ways - a play on words, and also could be construed as vulgar, I would remind you that you also posted the words in a different way, which could also be construed as vulgar.
In that case, I would ask Everyone to please use the basic rules of etiquette when posting.
Edited to add: Due to the real time nature of the Message Center, it is impossible for us to see every single post made.
Thank you,
Sara
[email protected]
*UBB and edit
[ edited by SaraAW on Jun 8, 2001 12:26 AM ]
posted on June 8, 2001 12:54:40 AM new
This is not discussion of a moderation issue. After all, why would I care?
In the context, the post by twinsoft containing the phrase "whacking off some guy's weenie"is decidely vulgar, but it had been preceded by several posts in that exact vein by others (look for dopey smilies and loud LoLs).
The post by spazmodeus containing the phrase "a weenie whacking off" is purely a play on the words contained in the previous post.
posted on June 8, 2001 01:04:39 AM new
Well, isn't that special? And of course, I'm not allowed to dispute your comments publicly, though you make mine public. Thanks a bunch.
posted on June 8, 2001 01:57:24 AM new
I find complaints about vulgarity rather disingenuous when they come from the same person who posted this just days ago:
Posted by twinsoft on May 31, 2001 11:40:41 PM
------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Open her face ... cramming it in there?"
Hepburn, you can really turn a phrase. Whew, need to take a cold shower now.
--------------------------------------------
As Sara and krs suggest, my comment was a play on words.
Furthermore, there was nothing in my post in question to indicate that it was a comment about any particular poster.
I grow weary of these frequent and contrived attempts by twinsoft to coerce the Moderators into taking unwarranted action against me. Moderators, please ask twinsoft to desist, as it seems to me a form of harrassment.
posted on June 8, 2001 02:03:16 AM new
spazmodeus and twinsoft,
It appears there may be some personal conflicts between you - I strongly suggest making use of the Ignore button.
As per our CG's, and as I have mentioned above, please take moderation issues to email only.
One final time: Take this thread back to Topic, otherwise it will be locked, which would be unfortunate as the Topic of this thread is an issue I'm sure many would like to discuss.
posted on June 8, 2001 07:15:37 AM new
Spaz, you know very well I was quoting another poster. Boy, I don't get you. I think I treat you respectfully, though I don't particularly like you.
I don't rag on you because of your sexual orientation, I don't make cracks about you watching TV all day. Is that what you want? Smarmy clever repartee just to be hurtful? Because you won't get it from me. There's too much good in life to waste it playing stupid head games. I thank God my four-year olds display more maturity than some posters on this board.
(Moderator, heaven forbid you should lock this thread.)
posted on June 8, 2001 07:19:12 AM new
... So if I were to email the moderators or staff about something, y'all would announce that I had emailed you? The heck with that.
posted on June 8, 2001 07:26:28 AM new
Now I've heard everything.
Twinsoft says: "I don't rag on you because of your sexual orientation, I don't make cracks about you watching TV all day. Is that what you want?Smarmy clever repartee just to be hurtful? Because you won't get it from me"
LOL
What are you talking about concerning Spaz's sexual orientation and television habits, twinsoft? Has he told you things privately? I don't recall his mentioning either of those things here in any definable manner.
posted on June 8, 2001 07:52:48 AM new
He couldn't watch THAT?! That's for yum-yum munching harlequin novel reading desperately unhappy women to watch.
posted on June 8, 2001 08:01:23 AM new
[i] twinsoft
posted on June 8, 2001 07:15:37 AM[/i]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Spaz, you know very well I was quoting another poster. Boy, I don't get you. I think I treat you respectfully, though I don't particularly like you.
I don't rag on you because of your sexual orientation, I don't make cracks about you watching TV all day. Is that what you want? Smarmy clever repartee just to be hurtful? Because you won't get it from me. There's too much good in life to waste it playing stupid head games. I thank God my four-year olds display more maturity than some posters on this board.
(Moderator, heaven forbid you should lock this thread.)
------------------------------------
posted on June 8, 2001 08:01:28 AM new
I am in favor of the death penalty.
I do feel since McVeigh admitted his part (guilt) in this bombing, he should be executed.
And I do not believe his constitutional rights are being violated in this lastest ruling. IF he had not admitted he was, in part, responsible then it would be a whole different ball game. Had he pled innocent and this same thing happened, I'd feel differently. I really don't feel a persons constitutional rights can be violated when they openly admit their guilt.
