23
Jul
09

If a killer asks to die, should we kill them?

Mumbai attackerHis deadly attacks in Mumbai were shocking; as was his unexpected confession early this week. And in a final twist,  Mohammad Ajmal Amir Qasab has  said he’s ready to be hanged and wants no mercy from the court.

The attacks in November last year killed almost 170 people, and shattered the lives of countless other loved ones. So if Qasab is claiming some responsibility and is volunteering to die for his crimes — should the state kill him? If a killer asks to die then should authorities oblige?

Needless to say, this topic has those of you in India and Pakistan talking. Nundini comments on an Indian news site: “It is all the more important to keep Kasab alive, and let him see the destruction and end of his mentors”.

But Haresh responds: “Kasab wants to be hanged? He should be fed to the lions!! But worry not dear Kasab, for this is India…. you will be treated with care so the ‘feelings’ and ‘sentiments’ of a particular community are not hurt. You will continue to be well fed at the tax payers expense.”

Of course, the issue is wider than just this case.  The execution of the Bali bombers was welcomed by some of their family members, saying paradise awaited the killers after the firing squad. That in turn had some family members of the Bali victims worried that the execution would turn the killers into martyrs; while another said “I feel they should have been executed at the moment they were caught, and I’m sick of people who say that they don’t want them executed because they’ll become martyrs.”

There are surely other examples too, and we’re thinking we might explore these on tomorrow’s WHYS programme (Friday). In the meantime, tell us what you think and what other cases come to mind.


143 Responses to “If a killer asks to die, should we kill them?”


  1. 1 Konstantin in Germany
    July 23, 2009 at 11:11

    We should ABSOLUTELY NOT kill him. It what add to his cause and it would be demeaning for us, who want to be morally superior to a killer. He wants to be called a martyr. Don’t give him that. If he wants to die, he’s welcome to, by his own means, without hurting anyone else. Then again, there’s no paradise for suicides without a cause, is there?

    • 2 Helen
      July 23, 2009 at 18:22

      I don’t think being morally superior to a killer says very much for us or anyone. I agree with position though because I believe it is not our place to “kill him”. Maybe part of what is so wrong with us is our lack of moral boundaries and lack of moral superiority.

      • 3 Konstantin in Germany
        July 23, 2009 at 20:17

        @Helen

        “…it is not our place to kill him.” That’s what I meant with moral superiority.

  2. 4 James Ian
    July 23, 2009 at 11:54

    I get what Konstantin is saying but, heck with it, kill them before they kill someone else trying to kill themselves. Heck Just hang the dude and save all the money that is going to be spent messing with his butt and spend it on nurturing some vulnerable child and keep them from following the same path. I don’t know about there but here in the US, thousands if not a million dollars would be spent feeding, housing and trying this guy. For what?? Heck with it, hang him now and save some time and money. Chances are he knows they will not do it and he’s just saying that to sound tough or to sound crazy so he will have a insanity case. Of course he is crazy, only crazy people do stuff like what he did.

    • 5 Konstantin in Germany
      July 23, 2009 at 12:13

      great. hang him and make a martyr role model for all the other crazy people out there. there are communities throughout the middle east, whi gather and watch videos of martyrs blowing themselves up. that’s where new people are rrcruited for the crazy cause. the chain of violence has to stop somewhere. and why not with us, by showing an example even if the killer has supposedly lost his right to live? it’s (simplistically speaking) the bad examples, which created anger in the first place.

  3. 6 Rob (UK)
    July 23, 2009 at 11:54

    It’s none of his business how he is punished. If he asks to be let free, the courts should ignore him. If he asks for life imprisonment, or hanging, the courts should ignore him. It’s irrelevant.

    • 7 Atiang (Kenya)
      July 23, 2009 at 19:49

      I seem to concur with Rob. If we simply react to this killer’s whims, it would be comical (and I think WHYS’phrasing of the question, implying a yes or no response is simplistic. There is a more plausible response, do nothing, because it is irrelevant). If a process is already in place to prosecute him, let the law take its course. I guesse that is why those who arrested him neither shot him on sight nor indicated that if convicted to be shot, he wont be shot. Quilty or not, I dont think whatever he suggests really matters. However, if generally, one seeks to be killed, that person might as well do so privately- Why bothers others?

    • 8 RightPaddock
      July 25, 2009 at 04:13

      @ Rob (UK) – precisely, and thankfully that’s what the judge has said they will do.

  4. 9 Nigel
    July 23, 2009 at 12:20

    Remember Brer Rabbit! The decision to execute Qasab should be based on the laws of the land and the evidence provided. If he is found guilty of a crime with the death penality in India then he should be executed. The fact that this will martyr and probably please him has nothing to do with it, the law must be allowed to take its course. His guilty plea will affect the court’s process and the assumption of guilt but not the punishment to be decided by the court. Killing a defendant because they ask for it is not an option.

  5. July 23, 2009 at 13:31

    The answer to this question is as simple as A,B,C. He should be killed! no retreat no surrender…His plea is not going to assuage or more precisely dissuade the court to think otherwise…His head will ultimately be decapitated.We can not allow killers to subsist amidst us.When US is fighting terrorists,such killers move scot-free.To spur an auspicious start for a hopeful generation,the world through concerted efforts should be in position to deter its nationals from this harrowing testimonies its not a mandate for one country but the entire globe. Killing is the extreme crime an individual can ever commit in humanity endeavours.Killing is an anathema to me and I absolutely abhor killers… They should be killed too; no point in being too meek and religious.Respect… VKELVIN of Makerere University Kampala Uganda.

  6. 11 Steve in Boston
    July 23, 2009 at 13:31

    There’s no moral superiority in failing to execute a killer. In fact it demonstrates moral inferiority–the immoral failure to meet the responsibility of adequately punishing a horrific crime, and through such failure, encouraging further attacks on innocent victims. Any government that does not execute a terrorist is a co-conspirator in the next horrible incident.

    We who live by laws, truth and justice must be willing to enforce our principals upon the perpetrators of crime, chaos and terror.

    Arguments that the death penalty is more costly than life imprisonment or that it is not a deterrent are completely disingenuous.

    There’s no moral superiority or strength in weakness. You can’t win for losing.

    • 12 Nigel
      July 23, 2009 at 14:33

      Just heard that the US holds 25% of the worlds incarcerated people (2.3 million people) but crime there continues at the same pace. America still executes people so it really is not helping. Yet still terrorist Timothy Mc Veigh is still alive. Where is the moral high ground in all this? Does this only apply to non-American or Muslim terrorist?

      • 13 James Ian
        July 24, 2009 at 06:22

        @ Nigel
        Crime continues in the U.S. because our prison system is like summer camp for most of them. They live better in prison then they do in the real world.
        And as far as executions go, we don’t obviously don’t exicute enough. How many people are on death row and have been there for years and years and years sucking up tax payer money?

      • 14 L Smith
        July 25, 2009 at 19:22

        Nigel, McVeigh was executed June 11, 2001.

      • 15 MaryOGrady
        July 27, 2009 at 01:56

        Uh, no, Nigel. Timothy McVeigh was executed by US federal authorities in 2001.

    • 16 Konstantin in Germany
      July 23, 2009 at 14:34

      @Rob (UK) & Nigel
      Ok, true, Qasab should be tried and convicted arcording to India’s law system. If death is the penalty, so be it. (I was commenting along with my unfavorable view towards the death penalty.)

      @Steve in Boston
      The easy-out-solution of simply killing a killer has nothing to do with responsibility. Apart from it, the death penalty is not a deterrent. So there is the death penalty in the US; how many killers per inhabants do you have there? Now compare those figures with countries of similar wealth, where the harshest sentence is a lifetime locked away!
      And even though imprisonment for a lifetime is more costly than executing someone, society gains much more, moral superiority not being the least of it.

      • 17 Nigel
        July 23, 2009 at 15:44

        @ Konstantin

        Great stuff.

        I am totally against the death penalty. I think it is immoral and reduces us to the same level as the person who murders. I do feel though that if the Indian judicial system supports the death penalty and Qasab is found guilty under their laws then they should be free to carry out the execution if they wish. Equally if I was an Indian I should be free to protest agains state sponsored murder……….a big part in the cycle of violence.

  7. 18 Ramesh, India
    July 23, 2009 at 13:36

    No way. It is just a confession. The police must make use of the confession to find evidence of the crimes that took place. Without evidence, it is wrong to convict someone, even those prisoned in Guantanamo Bay for lack of evidence(though we believe they killed many people).

  8. 19 Ramesh, India
    July 23, 2009 at 13:43

    Just a couple of years ago, I read that someone near Philadelphia has gone to the police saying he has killed his girl friend. Upon investigation, the police found that the girl was actually drowned in a lake accidentally. so the investigation matters, not the confession.

  9. 20 Dennis Junior
    July 23, 2009 at 15:33

    1) I think that the court case should continued on with the “SUSPECT” in dock…

    ———————————-

    Yes, we (India) should killed this suspect, on the grounds of his pleading guilty to the offences charges….

    ~Dennis Junior~

  10. 21 Venessa
    July 23, 2009 at 15:47

    @ Nigel

    The death penalty is legal in the US but rarely used. I think Americans are quick to throw everyone in jail and that’s why we have so many incarcerated.

    • 22 Nigel
      July 23, 2009 at 17:14

      @ Venessa

      Wasn’t taking a swipe at the USA but at Steve in Boston’s assertion that those who kill legally are morally strong and those who don’t kill aren’t. US did execute 37 in 2008, the lowest since the mid nineties.

  11. 23 Venessa
    July 23, 2009 at 15:52

    Who cares if this guy gets to be a martyr if he is executed. If evidence proves his guilt I say why not? We all die anyway and the fact that he deprived someone of their full life is enough reason not to allow him to continue his. I say firing squad just because he wants to be hanged.

  12. 24 Anthony
    July 23, 2009 at 15:52

    Yes, but they should somehow be forcefully baptised before they are killed so they can’t collect the 72 virgin bounty.

    -Anthony, LA, CA

  13. 25 Tom K in Mpls
    July 23, 2009 at 16:01

    First, follow the law. Second consider the merits of changing the law through due process. To me capital punishment needs to be viewed this way. Assuming an afterlife, divine judgment is coming eventually, no matter what. A non-issue. Living a life with no hope or freedom is the ultimate punishment. Then, is it cheaper to go through the legal processes for execution or to keep them alive. In other cases the question of possible reform is a consideration too.

    Once again there is no clear choice for a good law.

  14. 26 Michelle from Jamaica
    July 23, 2009 at 16:04

    Do what the law of the land dictates, not what the criminal wants. It’s that simple!

  15. 28 Jennifer
    July 23, 2009 at 16:31

    Re: “Kasab wants to be hanged? He should be fed to the lions!! But worry not dear Kasab, for this is India…. you will be treated with care so the ‘feelings’ and ’sentiments’ of a particular community are not hurt. You will continue to be well fed at the tax payers expense.”

    I think feeding him to the lions would be a good idea! If this man wants to die; let him. What is the alternative? Where will he be kept? Please, not in the U.S. prison system! Maybe a sandy beach resort!

    • 29 Konstantin in Germany
      July 23, 2009 at 16:59

      @Jennifer

      He’s going to be tried and convicted in India. The sentences will be carried out there, too. Where, according to you, has the US a monopoly on convicted/unconvicted terrorists?
      And I don’t think the prisons in India are sandy beach resorts.

  16. July 23, 2009 at 16:49

    The story,
    narrated by him before the court is original,
    circumstances,related to the incident are doubtless,
    the judge, presiding over ,hearing the case,
    rightly come to the conclusion,
    so he deserv no sympathy.

    But it is no justice,
    to be hanged him alone,
    whos he put him on the track,
    which leads to so many killing,
    are equally responsible for the such heious crime.

    He was poor,his family was passing life below the poverty line,
    he got out from the house for better livelyhood,
    but traped in the net of those,
    who’s business to craet unrest, bloodshed,
    on the indication of their masters,
    they are principle accusdes and deserv to capital sentence..

    In case,
    we want to remove insurgency, terrorims from the world,
    we should do justice ,
    we should become servant for the people not ruler,
    and provide everything to the people that is essential for life.

  17. 31 Natasha
    July 23, 2009 at 17:03

    “Yes, but they should somehow be forcefully baptised before they are killed so they can’t collect the 72 virgin bounty.

    -Anthony, LA, CA”

    He won’t *actually* collect a ’72 virgin bounty’ it’s a belief. He will just be dead. Humiliating him will only demonstrate to other extremists that their ‘martyrs’ are ritualistically humiliated before their death – adding to their arsenal of stupidity.

    If Indian law dictates that he should be hanged, so be it. I would hesitate to make another martyr to give fanatics something else to use as a reason to kill people though. I agree with Tom K on the idea of imprisoning him for life, as that will be the real punishment. Especially when he realises that his handlers and peers have forgotten about him and moved on to other dupes. Although I disagree with the assumption of an afterlife.

  18. 32 Peter in Jamaica
    July 23, 2009 at 17:04

    No! No! No! Absolutely not he wants to be a martyr and I for one would not give him that satisfaction for his justification for what he or the other terrorists have done. If it were up to me I would put him in a patted cell for the rest of his life and keep him so drugged up that he could not be a harm to himself, so that he couldn’t commit suicide, or harm others. He should suffer for what took place just as the victim’s families are as a result of his actions.

    • 33 James Ian
      July 24, 2009 at 06:29

      Good idea but whos’s going to pay for all that? Can we send you and like thinking people the bill. I mean I like the idea and all, it’s just not cost effective.

      • 34 Peter in Jamaica
        July 24, 2009 at 13:31

        If i remember correctly, i think in China or Japan some years ago, as well as it might be going on now, when people were put to death by firing squad, the Families were charged for the executioners time and the Bullet that actually killed them.
        I say put the cost of the drugs, the food and the disposables to the families as well.

    • 35 L Smith
      July 25, 2009 at 19:32

      Please…”give him the satisfaction”? He’ll be dead, there are no virgins in heaven waiting for him. He will rot in the ground. The only people considering him a “martyr” are just as whacked as he is.

  19. 36 Jennifer
    July 23, 2009 at 17:17

    Re: Yes, but they should somehow be forcefully baptised before they are killed so they can’t collect the 72 virgin bounty.

    You know, that’s offensive….72 virgins. As if!

    • 37 Tom K in Mpls
      July 23, 2009 at 19:31

      I find it interesting that a group professing a non materialistic and non sexual belief, would use the lure of 72 virgins in the afterlife. Is this a reward in contradiction with their beliefs, or a trick to ‘constructively’ eliminate the well intentioned impure ones?

  20. 38 Matthew from Nairobi
    July 23, 2009 at 17:26

    He can’t choose the consequences of his actions.The court shud follow the law and not his wish.Anyway,he’ll die eventually whether wishfully or otherwise.Human beings die inevitably.

  21. 39 Jennifer
    July 23, 2009 at 17:33

    Re: @Jennifer

    He’s going to be tried and convicted in India. The sentences will be carried out there, too. Where, according to you, has the US a monopoly on convicted/unconvicted terrorists?
    And I don’t think the prisons in India are sandy beach resorts.

    I am calling the imprisonment of these “convicted/unconvicted terrorists” nothing but a waste of money and time. It serves no purpose. When he serves his sentence, what will happen? He’ll be unleashed to kill more innocent people?

    If you take innocent lives you don’t deserve to live in luxury whether it’s in India, the U.S., or anywhere else!

    • 40 Konstantin in Germany
      July 23, 2009 at 18:39

      Jennifer… we, the western countries, can not degrade our justice systems to self-righteous ruling apparatuses. We must all be careful not to let fundamentalism take over. Here we are talking about muslim fundamentalism, but we also have to look at our side.

      Calling for unconvicted terrorists to be executed (that’s what you implied) is dangerous fundamentalism and puts you right there along with the thoughts of the terrorists themselves.

      Since you’re in the US, let’s look at that system. It is possible to convict someone with cumulative sentences. So if a terrorist is convicted for even just aiding in the murder of people in… say 300 cases… he won’t ever see a free day again. So how will they be unleashed again?
      Qasab evidently participated in the killing of 170 people. He’s in custody, he’s up for trial. He won’t be unleashed, either way.

      And who says, they’re going to live in luxury, if convicted? What about Guantánamo or Abu Ghraib?

  22. 41 Nate, Portland OR
    July 23, 2009 at 17:44

    India should make sure its wrung as much information out of him as it can before granting his wish. Don’t let him die protecting anybody (say, LeT founder Saeed Hafeez (sp?), for instance).

    Also, if he’s useful as a bargaining/bluffing chip India should keep him around for that purpose. If the Indian govt can convince Pakistan that he knows more than he actually does maybe they can trick Pakistan into admitting to a greater role or responsibility. On the other hand, Pakistan seems to have shameless denial thoroughly ingrained into its collective personality, so never mind. Commence with the execution.

  23. 42 Denise in Chicago
    July 23, 2009 at 17:46

    Yes, let him be executed. No SANE person is going to view him as a martyr.

  24. 44 Keith
    July 23, 2009 at 18:11

    Rethinking what it means to punish someone for their crimes because of their psychology is incorrect. This is the importance of having clear guidelines in the execution of law. I think it’s absurd that he thinks he should have any say whatsoever in his punishment. If he is treated any differently than a common criminal than the terrorist groups are empowered.

  25. 45 T
    July 23, 2009 at 19:22

    Personally I’m against the death penalty. I’d say lock them up for life with no parole.

    As for those who support the death penalty, how many of them would be willing to televise it in prime time? If you REALLY believe that it’s a deterrant, then why not let the public see it for it to be effective? Or, is that just “too upsetting”?

  26. 46 Tom D Ford
    July 23, 2009 at 19:26

    Lock him up for the rest of his life so that he can suffer thinking about the consequences of what he has done. His own thoughts will punish him unbearably to the point of despair at what he has done. Death would relieve his suffering and so he ought not be given what he wants.

  27. 47 Jennifer
    July 23, 2009 at 19:37

    How is holding someone accountable for their actions self righteous?

    This man is guilty! Look at the photos! And, he confessed!

    Either this man would be unleashed to do more harm or who is to say he won’t stay in jail bitter as a lemon plotting from the inside with others?

    • 48 Konstantin in Germany
      July 24, 2009 at 12:31

      No doubt, that he’s guilty.
      But in jail, there’s also solitary confinement. Bernhard Madoff got 150 years of solitary confinement. I don’t think there would be a problem putting Qasab in solitary confinement as well.

  28. 49 T
    July 23, 2009 at 20:03

    Another point about the death penalty. What if you killed an innocent person? What if it was YOUR son/daughter/brother/sister/wife, etc.? How would you feel if the govt. said, sorrry. Here’s $______ compensation? What valu do you put on a human life?

  29. 50 Abdul Baseer - India
    July 23, 2009 at 21:22

    In no way he should be considered a Martyr if he is either hanged or if he was killed during the attack. His motivation was absolutely wrong. He did it for money just like lots of other soldiers do. Well he and his handlers are not as organized as a first world country like army. But whats the difference they get paid to kill people based on the commands given by 50%+ majority leaders.
    He should be dealt as a criminal for killing innocent people. And for those who think he is Martyr let him confess on the television why he killed innocent people. If he has a fight then take it to the border with the Indian army (well they are ready to die for the country aren’t they plus we pay taxes to feed them)

  30. 51 Protim
    July 23, 2009 at 21:31

    Well, according to me, “DEATH” is never an answer! Whether it is murder or as a punishment for committing horrible crimes or, suicide. It makes us no different from Dogs like Qasab if we are to kill him. Yes, I am aware that whatever i just said must sound completely crazy or not justifying, but I believe it is right. Yes, he should be punished under harsh circumstances for his crimes, I support that. However, it is not for us to decide whether or not to kill him, also because he is to be punished under the Law and Constitutions of India, and it is their Law which will decide his fate.

    What is important, is that we should not be judging to kill him thinking about whether people will consider him as a martyr or not. This is simply because, if we kill him he’ll be called as a martyr, and on the other hand if we don’t kill him, those crazy people will come up with something new to give him the same honour and pride. Thus, we should not be thinking of what those people would think. And why are we to listen what he says or asks for? He has done enough crime and now he should be punished under the Law.

  31. 52 deryck/trinidad
    July 23, 2009 at 22:36

    Find out the people that he is connected to.(Don’t use waterboarding). Try him according to the law and then sentence him according to what the law prescribes.

  32. 53 Jim Newman
    July 23, 2009 at 22:47

    Hello again
    Qasab wants to die. Fine let him die. If he feels that he has reached the summit of his life’s achievements then he has nothing else to live for.
    In the league of terrorists he is a very small fish.
    Jim

  33. 54 Brian from Ca.
    July 24, 2009 at 05:09

    The death penalty doesn;t work. It costs ka-zillion dollars to execute anybody, after appeals, lawyers, and more appeals, and makes them into heroes for future wackos. But understand SOME PEOPLE ARE PREDATORS, plain and simple. Do they deserve capital pinishment, yes. Would society be better off if they never existed, yes. But does it do any good, NO! And puts us in their mindset.

  34. 55 Thay T ~ Hanoi
    July 24, 2009 at 06:28

    Better a dead martyr than a live terrorist.

  35. 56 Prashant
    July 24, 2009 at 06:30

    What further evidence is required other than photos of the accused carrying guns and also video footage showing him shooting people at the railway station.He has told what he wants and now it is time for him to get the sentence.he must be treated like an animal for his inhuman deeds

  36. 57 vijay pillai
    July 24, 2009 at 08:55

    It is very likely his mental state deteriorated and ready to die. But the law must take it’s course. Perhaps he would have prefered a long sentence in jail if he were sane enough at this point in time.If his story of one of the poorest who was lured into acts he committed along with others, real mastermind culprits must be brought to justice as well, not deal only with footsoldiers who carried out orders.

  37. July 24, 2009 at 09:32

    The question to me should not be if the killer asks to die, every killer must die in the first place. Most of those misguided so called warriors and self styled Jihadees are in reality cowards who cannot live and fight against men on a real battle field so they take on innocent people who are going about their lives. They must be killed irrespective of whether they ask to die or not as long as they have the audacity to kill innocent, unarmed, law abiding people.

  38. 59 Ann
    July 24, 2009 at 10:48

    I think spending the rest of his life is prison would be appropriate. That way he has lots of time to consider the horror of what he did and why.

  39. 60 Vishaka
    July 24, 2009 at 11:10

    Dying seems to be an easy way to get out of things for criminals. He should not be allowed to die, he is not scared of dying. That is what terrorists are like-the whole point of their cause is to die for the cause so therefore not an apt punishment.
    He should be made to suffer..

    Having said that I agree with Jim, there are too many terrorists around, if one dies im sure 20 more will be born.

    vishaka

  40. July 24, 2009 at 11:18

    Most of these people like Qasab, continue to potray themselves as ‘heroes’ fighting for a cause. Its an extreme fetish for martyrdom really, dying for your so called cause. We shouldn’t give them that, instead try to grasp as much from these people about their course of work and people involved. life sentence is definitely better. For many like Qasab , asking for death penalty is a heroic act and getting it is martyrdom, which we shouldn’t allow!

  41. 62 Dinka Aliap Chawul-Kampala,Ug
    July 24, 2009 at 12:14

    170 people lives for 1 person! Mr Qasab.”Saying that he want to be killed” doesnt make sense to me because what he meant was not him to be killed but he knew that his crime was beyond death sentence even when he dont confess that way,so the good punishment for such a heinous crime must be “LIFE IMPRISONMENT WITH A SERIOUS HARD LABOUR IN JAIL” inorder to let him test the fruit of his own work and i hope Indian jury deal with such a notorious man decisively.

  42. 63 Steve in Boston
    July 24, 2009 at 12:29

    Well of course the death penalty is a deterrent. Arguments to the contrary defy common sense and are just an attempt by active pacifists to confuse the issue. The killer who is executed ain’t gonna be killing again any time soon, is he?

    The problem with the death penalty in the US is that many states do not have one, and those that do, including the federal government, take so many decades after the crime to apply it and use it so rarely, that for all intents and purposes it doesn’t exist.

  43. 65 Linda from Italy
    July 24, 2009 at 13:23

    First I’m going to nail my colours to the mast, for me, the death penalty is ALWAYS wrong, state-sanctioned murder cuts all the moral high ground from under any judicial authority. I’m actually very shocked that India, the land of Ghandi, actually practises this barbaric rite. As for the “cost to the taxpayer” argument, that is beneath contempt.
    The case of this alleged terrorist is indeed a conundrum, this whole martyr idea, enshrined in Christianity and Islam, if not other religions/ideologies, is an example of beating the system and the killer coming out the winner, he earns his justification as soon as the noose is round his neck (or the guns fire, or the current is switched on, or the syringe enters his veins etc.)
    If he is found guilty he could be regarded as a case study, while imprisoned of course to safeguard the public, and, without using torture or other forms of coercion, maybe he could be turned around and eventually perform a useful social role in dissuading others from this horrible path. Even if he doesn’t recant, at least a civilised society will have tried to prevent the disease rather than merely treat the symptoms.
    Linda

    • 66 patti in cape coral
      July 24, 2009 at 18:15

      Linda, I’m against the death penalty as well, mostly because if you made a mistake and had the wrong guy, you can’t take it back. But I don’t think what happens to a prisoner should be up to him one way or another. He just needs to be simply subject to the law. The exception to this is child molesters. There have been child molesters who told the authorities “If you let me out, I will do it again.” Some have been let out of jail after warning the authorities with disastrous consequences.

  44. 67 Michael in Ft. Myers, Florida
    July 24, 2009 at 13:36

    I am of two opinions- Firstly, allow the family of his victims to do with him as they please if they are capable of such voilence in retribution. But since the world would not allow such a simple idea to occur, then no, the state should not execute, rather should use him and others of his ilk for intense physical labor every day of their lives. Forced labor in the most dangerous and difficult of industries would be a huge benefit to any community, as commonly happens in America. Oh, but what if they escape? Well, one suggestion is mining -One way in, ONE way out, heavily guarded. Force them to be of benefit tot he state they tried to harm!

  45. 68 ecotopian
    July 24, 2009 at 15:03

    Only if that is the sentence the court hands down. The law should dictate what should be his fate, not the accused. India is a country that is governed by laws, so let the justice system do its work.

  46. July 24, 2009 at 15:05

    The law has clear cut punishment for various offenses. However, confessions will assist investigators to unravel the truth, key sponsors and possibly, other members of criminal gangs outside the loop who may constitute greater menace in future. We should not glorify common criminals and murderers for the sake of morality or superiority. Let the law take it’s course because the degree of terrorism being witnessed across the globe is abhorrent and unacceptable.

  47. July 24, 2009 at 15:13

    A merciless killer who has to face justice himself and realise the enormity of his crimes. Obviously he was brain-washed. But that does not excuse him in the least. The case should take its full course and the judge will have to pass the severest punishment to deter others contemplating similar acts. Terrorism is murder on a large scale by cold-blooded people determined to create maximum mayhem and havoc. There should be no pity for him especially as he will receive a fair trial;

  48. 71 Roy, Washington DC
    July 24, 2009 at 15:27

    If it would make a martyr out of them, then no. (If Osama Bin Laden were to be captured, I’m sure he would gleefully accept a death sentence.)

    On the other hand, if they are making this request for some other reason — they’re sorry for what they have done, they don’t want to waste prison space, etc. — then why not? We could cut the appeals process to next to nothing in this case, which would save the taxpayers a huge amount of money. It would also give quicker closure to relatives of the victim(s). Look at it on a case by case basis to make sure they’re of sound mind and they aren’t doing it for martyrdom…then grant the request.

  49. 72 John in Salem
    July 24, 2009 at 15:32

    Putting aside the larger question of the death penalty I agree with Rob (UK) – the killer’s wishes or desires are irrelevant.
    Death is too easy. If it were up to me I would want him to live, locked in a little concrete and steel box and forgotten and with nothing to think of but the lives he destroyed.

  50. July 24, 2009 at 15:49

    There are some who believe that one should live and let live. Others think that they should kill and be killed.

    A killer shouldn’t commit a crime and then set the rules by which they should be punished. It’s up to the judiciary system to decide what form of punishment should be inflicted on them.

    In the case of Mohammad Ajmal Amir Qasab , the presumed terrorist, he wants to be killed as a reward for his crime as his death will, for him, prolong his life among his sympathisers and those who sent him to carry out the deadly attacks. He essentially should get the punishment that fit his crime, not according to his wish but according to the decision of the judiciary system that should respect the victims and their loved-ones who are currently putting up with their losses.

  51. 74 albatross
    July 24, 2009 at 15:55

    Everyone past the age of majority has the right to die.

    • 75 Tom K in Mpls
      July 24, 2009 at 16:11

      Those that violate the law, in any degree, loose rights in proportion to the degree of the offense. I am all for legal assisted suicide and such. But this is different.

  52. 76 Ibrahim in UK
    July 24, 2009 at 16:16

    A reformed terrorist is more useful than a dead one. But it’s up to the courts and victims, not the criminal, to decide the punishment for the crime.

  53. 77 tipsylife
    July 24, 2009 at 16:37

    I think he sees no good life ahead. His being alive is disgrace to the cell he once belonged to because he was surposed to have killed himself (matyre). His coleagues did the impossible(suicide) leaving him a loner. The publicity has eliminated his privacy. The rest of the society will shun him because of his misdeeds and probably somebody might kill him. His home country is embarrased too. These are the mitigating factors behind his words.
    Everything these days is stretching our imagination to the limits. The law rightly has to take its course but I feel this is a weighty matter befor the concerned judges. This is yet one case full of intrigues and it is not going to be easy. It will be interesting to note that ruling and come to terms with its meaning and implications. It is a real paradox that will grace the law books once more.

  54. 78 Tom D Ford
    July 24, 2009 at 17:05

    Put him in prison for life and give him a Koran with the part about killing people being wrong, underlined or highlighted in bright red.

    Hmm, maybe give him copies of all the religious texts translated into his language, with the underlining of the parts that condemn murder.

    In other words, enable his own mind to punish him for the rest of his life.

    Don’t give him what he wants, the relief of a quick death, give him what he needs, endless suffering from his own mind.

  55. 79 patti in cape coral
    July 24, 2009 at 18:00

    I have to agree with Rob and John, the killer’s wishes should be irrelevant

  56. 80 SHANTHI
    July 24, 2009 at 18:04

    KEEP HIM, USE HIM TO EXTRACT INFORMATION, TORTURE HIM,
    BUT NOT KILL HIM! NO MARTYRDOM FOR THIS HERO!

    • 81 Dennis Junior
      July 26, 2009 at 04:50

      Torture this “guy” is pretty much not acceptable behaviour under …many…International Laws ….

      So, that is not going advance the case for executing this gentlemen, if it comes to that point…

      ~Dennis Junior~

  57. 82 skip seibel
    July 24, 2009 at 18:08

    oh by all means let’s have more killing

  58. 83 beth
    July 24, 2009 at 18:09

    he will suffer more in prison at the hands of other inmates. hanging him is lettting him off the hook.

  59. July 24, 2009 at 18:11

    This is a no-brainer. Put the man to death for societie’s sake not the man’s sake. Forget martyrdom. This is about dollars and sense. The money saved by not incarcerating this man for the rest of his life can be used to aid trully needy people. And we won’t have to worry about him escaping!!

  60. 85 Rose Mary
    July 24, 2009 at 18:19

    In my mind this raises a more fundamental question regarding the role of courts/prisons. Do they exist to protect the law abiding public from violent criminals or do they exist to force a sense of remorse and to punish people for what they have done?

    I believe that in the case of violent offenders, our legal system should be responsible to protect the public. Period. In this case, the lack of remorse justifies the death sentance. Leaving him in prison and alive will only allow his poisonous hatred to spread to others,

  61. 86 jamily5
    July 24, 2009 at 18:20

    Wait,
    he won’t collect his 72, because, actually, he killed.
    Misquoting does not help.

  62. 87 Moustapha
    July 24, 2009 at 18:25

    I think that he deserves death. Because in any case killing innocent people chiefly will never be bailed out by any kind of religion

  63. July 24, 2009 at 18:28

    Executing this man is an easy release for him. He needs to spend his time in confinement. Execution will only satisfy the public making them feel as if justice was delivered.

  64. July 24, 2009 at 18:30

    Qasab should be made to teach anti-violence classes to children and should be used to catch other terrorists. And banned from receiving any sort of publicity his entire life.

  65. 90 Allan
    July 24, 2009 at 18:31

    I’ve read that scientists and doctors believe that killers lack empathy. I’m a strong believer that this is the case. When people don’t empathize and think selfishly, no one wins.

    Allan, OH

  66. July 24, 2009 at 18:32

    Its not a question of just sentencing him to death. Firstly, the rule of law must apply, and if found guilty, a sentence must be passed. The question is “What sort of punishment can be applied, that will aid in reducing, or will entirely prevent this particular crime’s repetition?” In answering this, the courts MUST decide what is in the greater good, ignoring the cries for blood by the families of victims, and should instead concentrate on the fundamental beliefs of this group of criminals, and punish them according to what is most feared by them. Creating martyrs is exactly what they want.

  67. 92 jamily5
    July 24, 2009 at 18:33

    Nigel has a point: about Timothy McVey and one that actually points to the injustice of the death penalty.
    Actually, we are not really arguing about the death penalty. As many have said: no one should get to decide their own punishment: let the law do its work.
    It doesn’t matter his reasoning. Why should we consider his reasoning?

  68. 93 Tom D Ford
    July 24, 2009 at 18:38

    “An eye for an eye”.

    That’s the Hammurabi Code from thousands of years ago. Only barbarians still advocate that.

    If someone murders someone and you murder that murderer, then you are a murderer just like him.

  69. 94 David
    July 24, 2009 at 18:45

    Just wondering, here in the US there is something called Presumption of Innocence (Innocent until proven guilty). Is there such a thing in India’s justice system?

  70. 95 Tom D Ford
    July 24, 2009 at 18:45

    India should change their Law so that Life in Prison means the rest of the criminals actual Life in Prison.

  71. 96 Stephen
    July 24, 2009 at 18:45

    Doesn’t the promise of capital punishment lend yet more incentive to suicidal terrorists to commit their crimes?

    • 97 Konstantin in Germany
      July 24, 2009 at 19:35

      I just thought of the exact same question.

      What punishment is death for someone ready to die, carrying out his terrorist act? The only punishment would be to leave him alive and locked away.

      • 98 Steve in MD
        July 24, 2009 at 20:55

        Problem is with keeping them in jail is that they can and have continued to spread their ideology of hate while in jail, and find recruits there so logically you would have to kill them otherwise the problem never really goes away.

  72. 99 Chris Hitz-Bradley
    July 24, 2009 at 18:47

    I’ve been listening to today’s program and am astonished that there is no coherent abolitionist position represented. All of your guests seem to accept the death penalty as a legitimate form of punishment; it isn’t. It is possible to protect society from people who do violence without perpetuating the violence by killing the killer.
    There are also several organizations of the families of murder victims who actively work against the death penalty. That is another side of this discussion that you are not covering. You sought out people who support the death penalty, including a victim’s family member, but apparently have made no effort to include differing opinions so as to present a rounded discussion of this issue.
    Please check out the link below to the website for Journey of Hope, an anti-death penalty project of Murder Victims Families for Human Rights. They went through what the woman on your show did and still opposed the death penalty.
    I would also be glad to participate in any such discussion.
    Peace,
    Chris Hitz-Bradley, President

    Indiana Info. Ctr. on the Abolition of Capital Punishment
    1031 E. Washington St.
    Indianapolis, Indiana 46202-3952
    e-mail: info@iicacp.org
    website: http://www.iicacp.org
    voicemail: 317-466-7128
    personal cell: 317-797-3210
    http://www.journeyofhope.org

  73. 100 Pete
    July 24, 2009 at 18:48

    Hanging this guy would be doing him a favour. Let him spend the rest of his life in jail so he has plenty of time to realise what he’s done.

  74. July 24, 2009 at 18:50

    Acts of terror has gone beyond the confines of law and so-called criminology.
    Thus there must be a new set of law for acts of terror.

    If we really need to be fair, it has to be an eye for an eye, a life for a life.
    Perhaps, the terrorist should live to witness their close ones, families, friends executed before them, since he has made so many suffer the loss of loved ones.

  75. 102 Donna
    July 24, 2009 at 18:53

    the point of being found guilty of something is that the person found guilty no longer has choices about their fate. these decisions must be left up to the courts. it is not usual for guilty to be able to decide their fate.

  76. 103 Sue - sister of victim killed by terrorist bomb
    July 24, 2009 at 18:54

    I feel that he should be executed immediately.Then their families will suffer from their loss. We, the families and friends of those murdered by terrorists are the ones who really suffer – we are the people who have received the life sentences. Their families should be made to feel our suffering as we have it for the rest of our lives.In Bali many of the bombers are frequently released early due to anniversaries and national holidays . This should not be allowed and it is an insult to those murdered.
    If you had lost someone you would not view him as a martyr, you would simply want him dead.
    I would like to ask this ” How many of those people giving comments and saying he should NOT be executed have actually lost someone that they love to a terrorist bomb? Because if they had lost someone I am so sure that their attitudes would change.
    I cry for my Brother every day and my Family will never recover from his murder.

    • 104 patti in cape coral
      July 24, 2009 at 19:52

      Sue – I am so sorry for your loss, and it is obvious how much you are suffering. I have never had a close family member taken from me by violence, but there have been many family member of victims who did not want the murderer to be executed. I am remembering in particular a report I heard of a man whose father was killed in the “troubles” in Ireland. I think he said something like “I feel like my father is watching me, and he would not want anyone killed for his sake.” I don’t think there is a right or wrong way to feel, but I think the law is supposed to be about justice and free of the passionate hatred you feel at this awful time.

    • July 26, 2009 at 19:25

      @Sue.Killing someone immediately without judicial process had no means .I know how much it like to see someone who killed your sis,bros or loves one and so on even my elder brother was also killed by someone.But what u can do first is to make comparision between the killed & the killer.Which this(Qasb is just a criminal whose awards is to die),so i think i`d be better enough if these people are compensated and then Mr criminal is given life imprisonment with hard jail labour.

  77. July 24, 2009 at 18:55

    Killing a terrorist is exactly what he wants. Isolate this person permanently, without any human contact as much as possible. Isolate him even from books, magazines or any sound, & lets see if he is going to find any peace in what he has done.

  78. July 24, 2009 at 18:57

    The state should never be involved in killing other than in battleground situations. To do so is to cheapen all life, and brings the moral tone of the whole society down, as well as bring a horrible responsibility onto functionaries.
    God help those who grow to enjoy such a responsibility.

  79. July 24, 2009 at 19:07

    Justice in Pig Skin: Muslims believe they get paradise for killing non muslims,,, they also believe that if their body is desacrated upon death by being buried wrapped in pig skin they will not go to heaven… sounds to me like we have the answer

  80. 109 John LaGrua/New York
    July 24, 2009 at 19:58

    A civilized society should not allow itself to be intimadated by an accussed defendant .The demand to be executed by a self professed criminal is a sign of contempt the defendant is showing to discredit the criminal justice system.A scrupulous trial is the answer to such challenge and the verdict arrived at by a duelly constituted court should reflect only the evidence devoid of any emotion or pressure for retribution.Justice confounds it’s enemies!1

  81. 110 Helen
    July 24, 2009 at 21:53

    Moral superiority is an ideal we do not live up to .This world would be a different world and better world if selfishness and greed didn’t exist;because need and desperation would not motivate also where they exist.I wish we were morally superior.We would be more human if we acted in a standard dictated by morality.We lose our morality when other desires motivate us.And too often that is the case.I cannot believe we are morally superior when so much that we do says we are not.I wish we were,it would be a better world.

  82. 113 RightPaddock
    July 25, 2009 at 04:03

    On November 09 2008 3 persons convicted of carrying out the the terrorist attack in Bali in October 2002 that killed 202 and injured 220 were executed. The mode of execution was by firing squad and it was carried out in an orchard on the island of Sumatra, their families were not told of the executions until after the event.

    On the 17th of July bombs tore apart sections of the Marriot and Ritz-Carlton hotels in Jakarta killing 9 (including two of the attackers) and injuring 50.

    The three who were executed late last year also asked for the death sentence. Yet they exhausted every appeal process available, including to the Indonesian Constitutional Court and in seeking clemency from the Indonesian President .

    It is highly likely that the group that carried out the latest attack is linked those who carried out the attacks in Bali in 2002 (and others in between), so the deterrent effect is questionable. And if these people wanted to be martyrs why did they exhaust every avenue of appeal. By the time they were executed people most Indonesians had “moved on”, so their execution was almost a non-event.

    Just because these guys say they want to be martyrs does not make it so, its what they’ve been told to say, I’m not convinced its what they actually want.

    There was one Mumbai attacker using his mobile to speak with the group leader, yelling that that he couldn’t shoot women & children, the leader was urging him to do his holy duty. I’m not sure if the guy in court is the same guy.

    • 114 Helen
      July 27, 2009 at 16:45

      We just pile mistake upon mistake;killing will not accomplish any end but death.If these people seek a goal but only manifest death there is insanity in their reasoning.To kill again causes death.Death is not punishment because death is death.We punish in ways that alter behavior;killing ends behavior and it is not punishment:is it justice to be as irrational as bombing perpetrators?

  83. 115 Tom D Ford
    July 25, 2009 at 06:35

    @ Sue – sister of victim killed by terrorist bomb
    July 24, 2009 at 18:54

    “I feel that he should be executed immediately.Then their families will suffer from their loss. We, the families and friends of those murdered by terrorists are the ones who really suffer – we are the people who have received the life sentences. … ‘

    I understand and have felt that emotional heat for revenge. But eventually that emotional heat fades and all you are left with is your murder of another severely damaged human being. And you have to live with that for the rest of your life.

    This is not about him, this about your own mental health and your ability to live out the rest of your life. This is about taking back your own power over your own life and emotions and setting your self free from the horribly self destructive path of permanent unrequited hatred towards a wacko and his ideas and your desire for revenge.

    All of the time that you are entranced with revenge is time that he is in control of you and your emotions and he is winning, so you have to take back control of your life and emotions and so show him who is actually in power over your life.

    Henh, and that gives you time to think out more effective methods of punishment,

    Remember, if you kill him, you cannot punish him any more!

  84. July 25, 2009 at 10:18

    Given that he is the one that is requesting to be killed, in my book, it means he is not happy being alive. Granting his wish amounts to a pat on the wrist. The best thing is to slap him a life sentence with hard labour.

  85. 117 leoburger
    July 25, 2009 at 10:31

    I’m strongly opposing deadpenalty. (As we all should do in Europe) Figures show that a society without deadpenalty is a safer one at the end.

  86. July 25, 2009 at 11:18

    Judicial process involves a jury and a judge. It is their decision and no one else can dictate what happens. That is the theory and should at all times be what happens.

  87. 119 Abdulrahman
    July 25, 2009 at 14:18

    I think he should be judged based on what he stands on if he is still a terrorist as Islamic Shariah has it he should be killed or be put in jail if there are chances that he gets reformed.

  88. 120 Jayson Rex
    July 25, 2009 at 14:31

    No, of course not!
    And I am 100% in favor of capital punishment. After all, we, the citizenry, should not have to pay for room and board, medical assistance and better class entertainment for those that, in other times, would have been promptly executed and ‘done with’.
    But in this case, if the terrorist wants to die, that’s his business. Let him stop eating. Or whatever. In the meantime, there might still be plenty of info to extract from him, one way or another, so I say keep him alive! Maybe, just maybe, he should be neutered, like the dogs his coreligionists ‘love to hate’ so much.
    End of story!

  89. July 25, 2009 at 14:54

    the answer is simple kill him plssssssssssssssssss.atleast a terrorist will be subtracted from the others.i am very angry with the world goverments on how they handle terrorism.they are to soft on them that is why they hurt people as they pls .those guys have no human feeling so why should goverments grant them mercy when they slaugther their fellow humans like animals.kill him plssssssssss.What the bible foretold are really comming to pass.God help us n have mercy on his soul if only he has one.

  90. July 25, 2009 at 18:28

    This guy is looking for a fast way to escape. He should be made to suffer for his deeds.He should be treated like a slave ; that will even be more useful to mankind. He should be made to work himself to death. Let that fool not escape

  91. 123 luke
    July 25, 2009 at 19:18

    i say kill him…
    slowly painfully publically

  92. 124 Jussi
    July 26, 2009 at 01:42

    My opinion is that an execution is no punisment at all. Everyone dies sometime and you just deliver those sickocriminals a quick and painless way to die. And the victims of some of those freaks… For example, a lot of people have to live limblessly in horrible pain and pray for a quick death. And they are not even helped with an assisted suicide. Trust me

  93. 125 Harlan Bird (North Carolina, USA)
    July 26, 2009 at 02:07

    I’m not sure whether we should or not, but if we don’t, he’ll certainly find a way to off himself in prison.

  94. July 26, 2009 at 10:27

    Tender age,
    raw mind,
    helpless,
    powerty took him to the world of warlord,
    on the name religion.

    He was shown paradise,
    a paragon with paramount words map of elysium was shown to him,
    and told would make this earth hell for innocent people,
    would be deserve for the place had no example in this universe.

    He was traped,inclined for committing a crime,
    which claimed over hundred people,
    now requesting for death penalty,
    pls take a firm decison, who is really responsible for………

  95. 127 CJ McAuley
    July 26, 2009 at 16:44

    There are many islands on this planet that will have the waters of the oceans eventually totally swamp them. Why not erect a high fence around such islands and sentence all terrorist killers to that place for as long as they are alive? With no food or water they will slowly die. It seems to me a just fate; for they will have plenty of time to contemplate how they wound up in such a place!

  96. 128 John
    July 26, 2009 at 19:51

    Yes, provided it was the sentence they were given for their crime. This will prevent a possible escape later on which could result in further crimes being commited by the individual.
    The goal of imprisionment and a death sentance is not punishment, it is to protect society from further harm being done against it by the criminal. The wishes of the criminal play no part.
    If the death of the criminal would have had a negative effect upon society by turning the criminal into a martyr, then the prosecution should have taken that into consideration when seeing the sentence.

  97. 129 William Escoba Amin
    July 26, 2009 at 19:56

    i think he should be kept in a dungeon with rats and a couple of mosquitoes to spend the rest of his life with.then i bet he will learn how to behave and have a lot of remorse.

  98. July 26, 2009 at 20:02

    With hundreds of thousands USA allied Soldiers from the region where Mohammed Kesab come from who admitted to belong to specific Terror group when India launched Nuclear Submarine.With Massive Human Rights worldwide to install in Iran coincides With Israel Nuke Power Plant in South lighted .This comes with justified new settlements In Jerusalem is promotion came of Hillary Clinton proposing Potential war strategy .Kesab guilt coicides with Protest March arranged in 80 cities across Globe in lieu of Sanction as it was for 10 yrs in Iraq before allied landed.Is this terrorist action justified with attempt to bring reform in Iran by proxy.If Kesab admitted doing his terror for Money why away from US and Indian presence from where he came from .The question is whose money? What promotion He did? What is the benefit of killing this paid terrorist amid current thing being developed same time simultaneously ?

  99. July 26, 2009 at 21:31

    There are a lot of people that are alive only because it is against the law to shoot them. You kill if that is the only way to save your life. If someone asks to be killed then the laws say they are insane and a danger to their self and they must be protected from their self.

    There are so many people told it is alright to hate someone and to kill them. Governments and their military train people to hate others and to kill them. That to me is insane. People should be trained the other way, to save lives, to live with one another, find peace and purse happiness.

  100. 132 Jay from Thailand
    July 27, 2009 at 01:46

    I am finding it ludacris, that we even consider this thought. If the verdict of the court is guilty and death is the judgement, then the dies. If its live in prison, then it should be life in prison. The wishes of the condemned should have no bearing on the judgement. The punishment may be the same, but not by the condemned’s request.

    Kinda funny though….. here we talk about should we kill him or not and out of the other side of our mouth, good people, who have not done anything wrong and are only trying to help someone they love dearly, die by helping them get to another country where they, as they are in pain and terminally ill would be able to pull their own plug. These loving people are subject to punishment for this love.

    Who among us shall be so god-like to think it possible to make this judgement?

  101. 133 evan -from Texas
    July 27, 2009 at 03:34

    There are two issues – what the law says can be done and what the people want to be done to obtain some sense of satisfaction. I am sure the law will be followed to the letter in India especially in this case. As far as what should be done I would prefer incarceration in a glass cage open to the public so that people could see what a monster looks like. It would be far worse than death for this monster and at the same time quite “humane” .

  102. 134 TEMBO
    July 27, 2009 at 04:05

    Why we have to keep a killer, while in that attacks people are still regretting for their loves who had bee killed. so if he is guilty the court have to stop wasting time, he must be killed.

  103. July 27, 2009 at 04:29

    If it takes Kesab to Bomb Mumbai Hotel for India to Launch Nuclear Submarine
    if it took 9/11 pretext for allied army to invade Iraq with WMD gimmick after years of UN inspectors 10 yr inspecting with 10 yr Iraq Iran War leading to moving in Afghanistan Pakistanand creating autonomous region Kurdistan oil flow .What will it take to stop these killing Methodolody of Real Terrorists who finance and create?

  104. July 27, 2009 at 04:47

    With Tens of thousands USA allied Soldiers from the region where Mohammed Kesab come from after 9/11 pretest may be coincidence . Kesab admitted to belong to specific Terror group when India launched Nuclear Submarine today as if takes Kesab and gang for Mumbai Hotel killing .Why they did not attack US Soldiers and why India is to escape un notoiced for possessing Submarine as well as Nuke bombs..Israel Nuke Power Plant in South highlighted too.The question is whose money? What promotion Kesab branch of Terrorists do as if Nuke submarine launch WMD Iraq invasion and 9/11 killing? What is the benefit of killing for this paid terrorist amid current thing being developed same time simultaneously as 9/11 with billions of dollar insurance pay out .Iran Kurdistan episode also came with US allied soldiers moving in above region?

  105. 137 Amukherjee
    July 27, 2009 at 07:24

    I think the government should not waste any more time and money trying to provide utmost security to this killer… he has confessed so he should be hanged immediately and his case should set an example that India is not just going to take this crap anymore …. if somebody is gulity, just eliminate that person asap. No mercy should be the code of law now.

  106. July 27, 2009 at 12:18

    I wish the killers of my family (during 1994 genocide) could even say SORRY to me…
    who am I to kill them? the judgement belongs to God, what we need is forgiveness.

  107. 139 Rick from Prague
    July 27, 2009 at 13:02

    I don’t think it matters what that fiend wants. It’s not for him to decide. He mustn’t be in control of the process. That is up to the courts.
    If ultimately convicted, I’d say: lock him in a cell papered with photos and the life stories of those whose lives he helped to destroy. Play audio/video recordings of testimonies by the widows, orphans and grieving relatives of his victims every single day for hours at a time. Give him some simple work to do and let the proceeds got to helping to fix the survivors’ lives and making amends for his wrong-doing.

  108. July 27, 2009 at 19:06

    Two dimensions should be considered in this debate: First: how would feel the families of the victims: their children, wifes, husbands, parents … about the death penalty opposed to life long jail of the monster who commited this desastrous attack. Second: What conclusions would draw other criminals of this kind, who are probably planning other similar attacks at this second, when reading the comments on this website today ?
    If my own child or my husband or my parents had been killed by this man,I would not only want him dead, but even more than dead, (if anything worse than death had ever existed…). However, if I was a terrorist, I would just admire how my brother faced the death penalty to join other martyrs; and would certainly want join him as well by commiting the same crime.
    it is obvious that the people like Qasab are more than ready to facen death, and the best evidence is that they ask for it !!!! why ???? because that was all planed !!they know their leaders within active terrorist cells will use the death of Qasab as a heroic example in order to show how ‘evil’ the government and Wesrern countries are, and seek revenge: any best ways to recruit new terrorists ? that is the best …. so lets not give them what they are waiting for ….

  109. July 28, 2009 at 05:52

    The cost of keeping some murdering scumbag alive in jail is $80,000 – $150,000 per year. I would much rather spend that money on public libraries, schools, and childrens hospitals. THESE PEOPLE HAVE MADE THEIR CHOICE. To allow them to continue to bleed you and divert resources their way indefinately is idiocy. There is utterly no point to a prison sentence longer than 5 years; you either CAN LEARN or you CANNOT. There is no point to spending a large portion of the country’s GDP on people who do not want to participate in society in a reasonable manner. It does NOT take a college degree to figure out that rape/murder/violent crime/and the ever popular theft of HUGE amounts of money is not appropriate behaviour. The “Prison Industry” is one of the fastest growing industries in the US. Wouldn’t you rather be spending your money on more productive outcomes? Why do you want to subsidize the existance of the very folks who have proven (some repeatedly) that they would maim or murder you without a pang of conscience? Save your efforts for those who are worthwhile, or at least are not already proven human preditors.

  110. 143 P.R. Deltoid
    July 28, 2009 at 18:40

    Murders and rapist should not be killed. Murders and rapist should be strapped to a table facing a mirror and have theie arms amputated at the elbow and their legs amputated at the knee.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s


%d bloggers like this: