Sutcliffe launches legal challenge against 'die in jail' ruling.

[mariab]

Did I ever – what?
I didn't mean to offend anyone mentioning age. But it's a fact that representatives of older generations NEVER EVER admit a mistake to a representative of a younger generation. That's why I'm not surprised that Zodiac apologized eagerly, whereas Fisherman could not fathom it.

[Natalie Severn]

Did you ever---Maria---you then must be the oldest "little girl" on the planet!

[mariab]

Don't “bugger off“, Bolo! I don't think that this thread should exclude male posters! Fisherman said some “clueless“ things, but I think it has more to do with him having led a sheltered life that anything else. And it probably has more to do with age than with being male or female. My boss (who's old like the mountains) is like this too, he hates admitting that he was ever wrong – unless physically threatened. And come to think of it, my mom is the same, will never apologize when wrong, and she ain't a “clueless male“. So it must be an age thing...

[bolo]

Hello all,

I wanted to add my opinion to this thread but I guess it's too late now that it got all emotional and one-sided. Too bad, as I found it quite interesting on the first few pages.

* buggers off *

Regards,

Boris

[claire]

So bugger off,what do you know about male violence and rape!

posts crossed...lol More succinct than I managed

[claire]

******* hell. Whisky. Back slaps. The odd kiss, if I'm of a mind. Here's the reality: life sucks. Sometimes things hurt so badly that we don't even know our own minds anymore. The only thing we can do is struggle through it the best we can, and reach out hands to others from time to time.

You know, maybe somewhere between all of this, there's some truth, or at least some resolution, that can be attained. Getting there, though, requires at least considering the opposite perspective. I don't see how else we can recalibrate our moral compasses from time to time.

Then again, maybe not. Maybe it's just too complicated an issue to do anything but yell and generalise. And maybe, in the end, that's what makes us human: both our failing and our salvation.

I'm off fer a gin.

[Natalie Severn]

You should feel privileged that Ally is actually prepared to have such a debate with you about Sutcliffe, Fisherman.There are many women"s groups who wouldnt even give you the time of day to be pontificating on these attacks on women----would object to you even commenting on this series of horrific murders on thirteen women by a male serial killer.His victims were all women . So bugger off,what do you know about male violence and rape!

[Ally]

You, Ally, point me out as being sanctimonious. You very clearly infer that my stance aims to point me out as ”holier-than-thou”, and to suggest that this is what lies behind my convictions is to lie, nothing more, nothing less. But it is very clear to me that this stance, which I share with millions and millions of people, not least the people I luckily live and associate with daily, is something that nags you so badly that you cannot abide it. Therefore, you somehow think you are at liberty to first post that I am welcome to my stance, and then follow that up with slandering me for it. It is a strange way to debate.

It would seem, Ally, that you are prepared to call everybody who is not ready to join the torch- and pitchfork brigade liars; people who are arguing one thing against better knowledge - yours. I have seen and heard many people who have been ready to go to ridiculous lengths to try and press a point, but this is something new to me.

You post the words slander and lies so often, I have to wonder if you actually know what they mean. I have not called you a liar. I have not slandered you. I have given my opinion of your post and your stance, just as you have felt perfectly free to give yours of me and mine. So if I have slandered and lied about you, then you have done the exact same thing. No where did I ever call you a liar, and no where have I ever slandered you. Your hysterical use of these terms, and your bent as the persecuted prima dona prove you are no longer even attempting rational discussion, and are having a hissy. So I agree it's time to end this. It is clear, you didn't even bother to read my post or my argument, because your response had absolutely nothing to do with anything I wrote, or anything I claimed, but was one weird tangent after another. It is clear you aren't capable of gleaning the meaning anymore, so it would be a waste of my time to point out the many flaws in what you wrote above.

Ta.

[Fisherman]

"People don' t need to make inference in what I write. If I think you are a liar, I'll call you a liar. What I think you are is smug."

You, Ally, point me out as being sanctimonious. You very clearly infer that my stance aims to point me out as ”holier-than-thou”, and to suggest that this is what lies behind my convictions is to lie, nothing more, nothing less. But it is very clear to me that this stance, which I share with millions and millions of people, not least the people I luckily live and associate with daily, is something that nags you so badly that you cannot abide it. Therefore, you somehow think you are at liberty to first post that I am welcome to my stance, and then follow that up with slandering me for it. It is a strange way to debate.

It would seem, Ally, that you are prepared to call everybody who is not ready to join the torch- and pitchfork brigade liars; people who are arguing one thing against better knowledge - yours. I have seen and heard many people who have been ready to go to ridiculous lengths to try and press a point, but this is something new to me.

”I waited before I made my reply, assuming you were in the process of writing a reply to zodiac, but when I checked Who's online, found that you were in fact not doing so and made my reply, at which point, much later, you decide to respond to her.”

Shame on you, Ally, that is all I can say. You do not need to check any Who´s online facilities, there are other things that would be much more needy to check on in your case!
When I wrote my answer to Zodiac, I had not seen your post. Period. And if I had, I would have written the exact same thing.
I do not have to defend myself against a moronic accusation like this, but if you have not noticed yourself, Ally, them ”Who´s online” buttons sometimes are not lit up even as you post. Only yesterday, my latest post was lit up as I was on the boards, whereas my former posts above it, were not. I may add that inbetween your own posts yeaterday, Ally, your button was not lit. Perhaps you were not online all the time, and then that would explain it. If you were, though, then that should be food for thought. Whichever way, in the fourteen minutes – that you describe as ”much later” - that passed between our posts, I was writing my post to Zodiac.

Without a doubt, this will have to be the weirdest thread I have ever participated in on these boards. I make the point that I firmly believe that Peter Sutcliffe should stay in jail for his offenses, but I do not think that society or enterprising members of it have the right to inflict physical harm on him or kill him. This, I would have thought, would be a perfectly reasonable stance to hold, a stance that I know that I share with a very large part of the world´s population.

A number of pages further down the line, I find myself slandered, pointed out as a liar, falsely accused of having responded to posts out of cowardness instead of conviction and castigated for having hurt peoples feelings because I refuse to convert to executionism.

Is this for real? Compared to this scenario, Kafka wrote comedies!
Is this topic really so inflamed that no serious discussion can be held in connection with it? Are my wiews really fit for nothing but a witches stake? Have we come no further than this?
If so, then that is deeply deplorable.

As for my own participation on the thread, it stops here and now. I think I have made my wiew perfectly clear, and I stand by it. I have presented my arguments, and I have answered all the relevant questions that have been asked. It seems that all that now remains is an unbecoming collection of slander and lies and an ongoing invitation to wrestle in dung.

Thanks, but no thanks. I prefer to look forward to meeting you on other, less inflamed threads in the future, and thus regain my faith in dealing with rational people.

The best to all of you,
Fisherman

[cappuccina]

Ignoring all of the adolescent as well as the self-righteous crap on here, and going back to the first page of this discussion, Sutliffe should get no quarter, no favors or privileges, period. He needs to die in prison, and be "buried out back"....end of discussion.

[mariab]

I'm so sorry for your loss, Zodiac

I deeply apologize if my post ends up in restarting this thread when all of you wish to be done and over with the debate on capital punishment and “human dignity“, but I just got aware of this thread, and, if I'm getting it right, it appears that Zodiac was acquainted with someone murdered by Sutcliffe, and this lady's daughter committed suicide in 2007? Zodiac, I can't describe how sad and revolted this makes me feel, and I admire even more the way you cope with this, your intact openness to the world, and your amazing sense of humor (which has had me rolling on the floor in hysterical laughter on many occasions).
As for Sutcliffe, besides the exorbitant cost on taxpayers money that his appeal for release is costing, please don't worry about this: Obviously it will lead to nowhere, besides the obvious media attention, and some additional attention to Sutcliffe while in custody. I've heard that he's been attacked by fellow prisoners twice (Dahmer-like). Who knows if this latest development, which has irritated a hell of a lot of people, won't bring out a little bit of additional abuse in the near future? One thing is crystal clear, Sutcliffe, like many other such murderers before him, is scared sh*tless when it comes to his own safety. Let him spend the rest of his (very uneventful) life in such a fear!


Fisherman, I understand where you're coming from with your “Kantian“ approach (and by the way I've read almost all of Kant, but I prefer and most deeply admire the writings of earlier human rights “activist“ Cesare Beccaria when it comes to human dignity under imprisonment), but for crimes such as the ones committed by Sutcliffe, your pragmatic approach is a little too abstract. And it was a faux pas to mention the victim's death in the same sentence as Sutcliffe's presumed “human dignity“.
I'm not pro capital punishment like the Yankees, but in cases like this, it's tempting. It would be easier for all if Sutcliffe had gone on trial in Texas instead of Yorkshire!

[protohistorian]

I came to take this thread to Harrison, Barber,and Co., but it appears I am early. Carry on. Dave

[c.d.]

Hi Natalie,

Well go at it then with gloves off. It's a sad day when I have to be the voice of reason.

c.d.

[Natalie Severn]

You can say that c.d. but there is a serious observation here by Ally---well its beyond serious its about the tragedy of the lives he destroyed with less compunction than swatting a fly. Ally is doing her level best here to get this across. Zodiac began the thread writing out the roll call of devastation - the scope of the holocaust of Sutcliffe"s crimes against humanity and with her outrage at the affrontary of his attempt to get out of jail "early".Its worth re-reading the first few pages to understand how the discussion developed and especially in the light of any sanctimonious clap trap about him disfiguring this thread.
You are either with Zodiac on this or against her---you cannot sit on the fence---its like saying you have to treat Hitler and his henchmen with compassion because they were all human and therefore had rights.Well tell that to the 6,000,000 who perished in his concentration camps.In fact there was no
compassion---not at the Nuremberg War Trials or years later towards Eichmann.They were all executed---and good riddance.

[c.d.]

Luckily, beating a dead horse is not a capital offense because SOME PEOPLE on this thread are guilty beyond any reasonable doubt. It might be time to give it a rest guys. Just sayin'.

c.d.