Topic: 110 UN countries back ending death penalty
Anonymous A started this discussion 14 years ago #23,573
http://www.news24.com/World/News/UN-countries-back-ending-death-penalty-20121120
A record 110 countries on Monday backed a resolution voted every two years at a UN General Assembly committee calling for the abolition of the death penalty.
The vote tears apart traditional alliances at the United Nations. The United States, Japan, China, Iran, India, North Korea, Syria and Zimbabwe were among 39 countries to oppose the non-binding resolution in the assembly's rights committee. Thirty-six countries abstained.
Israel voted against its strong US-ally to join European Union nations, Australia, Brazil and South Africa among major countries backing the motion.
Norway, which played a leading role campaigning for the resolution, said on its Twitter account that the increased support was a "great result".
At the last vote in 2010, 107 countries backed the resolution.
The vote tears apart traditional alliances at the United Nations. The United States, Japan, China, Iran, India, North Korea, Syria and Zimbabwe were among 39 countries to oppose the non-binding resolution in the assembly's rights committee. Thirty-six countries abstained.
Israel voted against its strong US-ally to join European Union nations, Australia, Brazil and South Africa among major countries backing the motion.
Norway, which played a leading role campaigning for the resolution, said on its Twitter account that the increased support was a "great result".
At the last vote in 2010, 107 countries backed the resolution.
Anonymous B joined in and replied with this 14 years ago, 12 minutes later[^] [v] #368,222
Finally, something on which the United States, China, Iran, and North Korea can agree.
Anonymous C joined in and replied with this 14 years ago, 29 minutes later, 41 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #368,226
I have no opinion on this.
Anonymous D joined in and replied with this 14 years ago, 20 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #368,231
I say an eye for an eye. Kill someone? Prepared to be killed, unless the court decides it was a justified killing.
I say off with their heads.
I say off with their heads.
Anonymous E joined in and replied with this 14 years ago, 8 hours later, 9 hours after the original post[^] [v] #368,314
@previous (D)
> I say an eye for an eye. Kill someone? Prepared to be killed, unless the court decides it was a justified killing.
>
> I say off with their heads.
If you're gonna be a brutal fucking savage, then be honest and embrace the fact that you are a barbaric savage.
> I say an eye for an eye. Kill someone? Prepared to be killed, unless the court decides it was a justified killing.
>
> I say off with their heads.
If you're gonna be a brutal fucking savage, then be honest and embrace the fact that you are a barbaric savage.
Anonymous D replied with this 14 years ago, 38 minutes later, 10 hours after the original post[^] [v] #368,321
@previous (E)> If you're gonna be a brutal fucking savage, then be honest and embrace the fact that you are a barbaric savage.
Please show me where I gave you the impression I was anything other then:
1: Convicted of Violent Rape ...Remove eyes balls penis both hands prostate gland and portions of both legs.
2: First degree murder ... A violent death with pain. No pussy footing around that except US Super Courts do not care for cruelty during a legal state execution. If I were King I would have them fried in hot smoking oil, slowly feet first.
eye for an eye bud. If that makes me a savage then I will raise a glass on Thanksgiving to my eye for eye philosophy.
I think use of term US Super courts should reduce my anonymity.