Two Self-Confessed Drug Ringleaders Are Enjoying Mass Public Sympathy

In April 2005, nine Australians were arrested for trying to smuggle US $3 million of heroin from Bali, Indonesia to Australia. The two ringleaders, Andrew Chan and Myuran Sukumaran, were amongst those initially sentenced to death in early 2006. Chan and Sukumaran’s “final” judicial appeals against the death sentence were dismissed in June and July 2011, respectively. Since late 2014, both men have repeatedly sought clemency from Indonesian President Joko Widodo and then appealed his rejections of mercy via the courts.

Over the weekend, the pair were informed their executions were imminent and would take place a minimum of 72 hours after the announcement. They will probably be executed within days (or hours) of my words being published.

In the meantime, many from all corners of Australia have incessantly rallied behind the two, who admitted to multiple drug smuggling operations before being caught. Supporters, including the Australian Prime Minister Tony Abbott, emphasize Chan and Sukumaran’s “rehabilitation” in prison, notably Chan’s ordination as a Christian minister, Sukumaran’s art abilities and both men’s facilitation of education for fellow inmates. Perth’s Curtin University fell over itself to confer an Associate Degree in Fine Arts on Sukumaran.

On Monday night, several hundred people turned up for a candlelit vigil for the death row pair, the most recent of many held in cities this year. Seeking to ingratiate themselves with a public still slowly turning away from their message, Catholic bishops and archbishops have been agitating for Chan and Sukumaran for months.

Apparently these clerics forget the more desperate members of their flock who didn’t choose to smuggle heroin and live on the streets of Australia, have had their houses foreclosed or daily suffer any other injustice or misery.

But why? Of all the people facing hard times in Australia and Indonesia, hit by cancer, poverty, mental illness, intellectual or physical disability, or injury from violence, why are the Australian political elite and SJWs robbing true victims of attention and channeling it towards two inveterate drug smugglers?

The Sukumaran and Chan debacle uncovers a pernicious trend in Western political and media discourse: people pretending they fight for justice when they instead caricature it. The meaning of victimhood is beaten and bent, and those who really need our support are ignored.

Why focus on these two?

How many blameless cancer victims get the help Chan and his friend Sukumaran have received?

Even if you abhor the death penalty, the amount of collective time and energy we can devote to social causes is finite. For instance, if you properly focus on preventing one or two instances of the death penalty, you naturally ignore a thousand similar cases, especially where guilt for the crime is seemingly not beyond reasonable doubt.

The same goes for “causes” in general. By devoting five hundred recent stories to Andrew Chan and Myuran Sukumaran, the Australian media neglects a litany of other, much more deserving issues. Although homelessness in Australia is on the rise, Alzheimer’s has become a cognitive scourge devastating hundreds of thousands of families, and the nation’s disabled still live in frequent poverty, we living Down Under are meant to tolerate the domination of our print media and airwaves by two narcissistic criminals who wanted a get-rich-quick scheme involving highly addictive narcotics.

This is not a scenario of innocent people falsely condemned. The evidence against them was incontrovertible, and Sukumaran, like most of the other Bali Nine members, was found with drugs strapped to his body. Plenty of additional Australians and other Westerners languish in Second and Third World jails, incarcerated under dubious processes where the evidence against them is open to wide interpretation. Why not speak up for them, Prime Minister Abbott?

How am I meant to feel sorry for Chan and Sukumaran when I see children like this?

Where were the TV crews when your aunt wasted away before you and horrifically died of cancer? Or when the lonely senior citizen who was your neighbour died quietly and nobody realized for two years? These sorts of cases happen around the world, every day, and governments and elites do not rush to lend a helping hand.

Indonesia is hypocritical – so what?

SJWs have devoted inordinate attention to Indonesia’s bipolar behavior in advocating for its own citizens sentenced to death abroad, but generally refusing to reverse death sentences against foreigners within its own legal system. This is exactly the standard practiced by every country in the world in some form or another. Hypocrisy is rife in every country.

What’s even more hypocritical, though, is ascribing victim status to two people who orchestrated multiple, massive drug smuggling operations and then had the audacity to cry “proper justice” when Indonesia, a serial death penalty user, sentenced them to the firing squad.

A criminal’s rehabilitation is based on a myth

When I was a teenager, I remember Stanley Tookie Williams “rehabilitating” himself after going on death row, too.

Unlike the convoluted, uneducated Corby family, whose wayward daughter Schapelle became the focus of innumerable bizarre conspiracy theories about how she was ever convicted in Bali for marijuana smuggling, the families of the two condemned men come across as decent, genuine and down-to-earth. This begs the question as to how Sukumaran and Chan became involved in the drugs trade to begin with, other than through a clear, thought-out choice for which they are now paying for. So boo-hoo.

Their attempts at “rehabilitation” dovetail nicely, as well, with the firing squad which has awaited them for years. Until the prospect of a death sentence loomed from around the corner, just after their arrest, they were unrepentant peddlers of pain and merchants of death. The buck mattered more than the bite it gave to those dying from the heroin they imported to Australia.

The problem, too, with rehabilitation is that it largely depends on an inmate’s background and levels of socialization. Poorer inmates, perhaps native Balinese or other Indonesians, would have been denied the relative privilege of Sukumaran and Chan, who grew up in run-of-the-mill, secure families in prosperous Australia. This affects the opportunities for condemned inmates to skilfully stage their rehabilitation and argue for clemency under a watchful media eye.

These men, unlike their prison colleagues, have also always had the benefits of mass public support and a Foreign Ministry probably unrivalled in its drive to defend the interests of its incarcerated nationals abroad. These advantages have enabled Sukumaran and Chan to hone their skills in jail and “selflessly” teach them to others. There is nothing altruistic and everything self-preserving about these calculated actions.

Focus on the real victims

We should not shed a tear for Chan and Sukumaran until those more deserving of our sympathy and assistance have it given to them. When they die, these Australians will die of their own volition, having proactively chosen the firing squad.

The distortion of victimhood has now reached its apex with examples such as this. True victims have been hidden behind a curtain for too long, muddied by political correctness and gimmicky social media and “social justice” campaigns.

Start dealing with real issues. Chan and Sukumaran brought their fate on themselves. Let them now eat the cake they baked.

Read More: Dr. Oz Is A Pussy

251 thoughts on “Two Self-Confessed Drug Ringleaders Are Enjoying Mass Public Sympathy”

  1. “Where were the TV crews when your aunt wasted away before you and horrifically died of cancer? Or when the lonely senior citizen who was your neighbour died quietly and nobody realized for two years? These sorts of cases happen around the world, every day, and governments and elites do not rush to lend a helping hand.”
    Government spend millions on these issues every year. SJWs hate them or no, tend to be all over causes like that by supporting parties that promote massive government borrowing to ameliorate them. Although you can show your support at rallies against cancer etc and do volunteer work, theres only 1 time when you can show support to stop 2 guys being executed by the state and thats during the 72 hours they’re still alive. I’m pretty glad that many in our society view the right to life as important because when we become like you who would recommend it based on who in your view “deserves” it, we’re on a slippery slope.

  2. I always find it odd that anti-death penalty types are pro-abortion.
    Of course the pro-life types are pro-war.
    If this were a ship I would be stealing a lifeboat and sneaking off with it.

    1. In my experience most people that are pro war, are trying to save innocent lives.

    2. Hm.. I’m anti-state killing which includes wars of aggression and death penalty because I don’t believe politicians and institutions should be given the power to kill, and because I believe in the universal law of “thou shalt not kill.” And of course because mistakes are made (like the recent FBI crime lab which rubber stamped every piece of evidence that came in to them).
      I’m pro-abortion because I believe life begins at birth and birth control is a good thing, especially for those too young or poor to take care of their children. Don’t see any inconsistency there. (There are plenty of societal reasons why abortion is good for society, but that goes beyond whether it is fundamentally right or wrong. To me it is neither, and since I don’t have a snatch I don’t really care either way).
      What I personally find odd is people in the hookup PUA culture that encourage nailing chicks as often and as randomly as possible, but think sluts with triple digit notch counts should turn those bangs into families, if and when they become pregnant.

      1. “because I believe in the universal law of ‘thou shalt not kill.’
        “I’m pro-abortion because I believe life begins at birth”
        That’s a mistranslation. The Hebrew means “murder” not “kill.”
        Those to be killed include those who murder unborn babies, because life begins at conception, if you’ve ever seen a preemie baby ward, those are obviously little human beings not “fetuses.” The abortion folks are now pushing for “post-birth” abortion up to 3 years to 5 years old. And why not by baby murder logic? Obviously an unborn baby doesn’t magically become human by emerging from the womb at nine months, or 6 months, or 3 months; he/she was always fully human with more value and potential than anyone who would seek the child’s murder (including the mother).

        1. I base my morality on more than just the translated text of old books, but this does touch on one of my pet peeves–“murder” implies the desire and intent to kill, so technically even if one could “prove” that life began prior to birth (which I do not believe), at worst an abortion would be manslaughter, not murder (ie there is no motive or intent to kill, they just don’t want to have a baby). But yet you see all these “abortion is murder” bumper stickers… totally missing the point.

        2. Death Penalty, War, Abortion…anything that makes less idiots is fine with me.

        3. …”murder” implies the desire and intent to kill

          Murder is the ILLEGAL killing of another human…nothing to do with intent or desire.
          That is why an execution/abortion is NOT murder.

        4. ahh, but abortion is based on the assumption that foetuses are NOT alive, and that they do NOT have a soul, if a soul exists.
          That requires just as much conviction as believing god is real.

        5. So if we change the law on a technicality to say, kill you it’s ok to do by your logic. Hitler didn’t murder any Jews he made it legal ,pol pot, Stalin. Lenin, and so on and so forth

        6. I don’t regard it as murder, killing or execution but rather;

        7. So if we change the law on a technicality to say, kill you it’s ok to do by your logic.

          It is not MY logic… is LOGIC…and logic is a RedPill man greatest friend.
          There are international/domestic laws that make Genocide/War Crimes illegal therefore what these leaders did could be classified as murder… TODAY.
          Many people around the world consider what Americans did to the Native American population Genocide… wasn’t.
          Many people around the world consider the slavery of blacks a century ago in the West wrong… wasn’t.
          Can you tell me which court of law found Hitler/Pol Pot/Stalin/Mao etc….guilty of MURDER?
          If YOU think these people were murderers but I don’t…what happens then? Were they murderers?
          Murder is a legal term NOT a moral one.

        8. Of course it’s a motive or intent to kill. “I don’t like your face” or the way you’re talking to me, can often be a motive for murder. Translation, that person doesn’t like the inconvenience posed by the person who annoys them, preferring to resort to killing. Exactly the same as the abortion :”your existence is an inconvenience to me (even though I enjoyed the “free” tingles of unprotected sex to create you), say hello to the doctor’s vacuum”. Straight up murder. *pro-abortion, atheist hookup PUA culture promotes indiscriminate nailing. There are more righteous elements within the manosphere.

      2. Typical hamster rationalizations. Whether you like it or not life begins at conception or doesn’t begin at all, making all those pro-infanticide dudes that are praising the benefits of “late-term” abortion (killing babies of days or months old) begin to appear sound and rational…
        And their logic makes much more sense than yours since there is basically no difference in substance, in the status of the foetus and the baby. Namely those two CANNOT survive without someone taking care of them…

        1. You can call me a woman or a hamster or a wombat, but an unsupported assertation of “life begins at conception” is no more valid than “life begins at birth”. And it’s not just “my logic”, its the accepted medical opinion and the law of the land.
          Change it if you want, but why? If preventing death at all costs is a valid goal, there are a lot of simple steps society could take (lowering the speed limit by 10 MPH) but we choose not to. Society has chosen to take a fairly balanced view of life versus freedoms. My personal opinion is life begins at birth, but honestly, I don’t give a fuck what strangers do with their babies. I’ve got my own matters to deal with.

        2. Yeah we got that abortion is your blindspot and you are impervious to logic. Btw no serious doctor believes life starts magically once the baby is out of the womb *
          (Otherwise prenatal care and other lifesaving measures for the baby would be nonsense), neither do the law since you are charged with murder if you batter a pregnant woman and kill her unborn baby in your wretched country.

        3. The law of the land is that abortion is legal in the USA and in almost all nations of the world. If you want to try to reverse that, good luck, but I consider it a white knighting cause–trying to save a woman from what you believe is best for her. If an individual has a different opinion of when life begins than I, then that’s fine, and I respect it, but that doesn’t mean I will adopt these views, and certainly will not alter my actions based on another’s opinion.
          Actually, being pro-abortion is quite logical. The facts of crime, welfare, overpopulation, and child abuse are all on the side of legal abortion. Being pro-life is setting aside logic and taking ethics, religious beliefs and other feelings into the matter and determining that abortion should not be allowed even if its ends may be positive, because it is an immoral act.

        4. The law of the land is that abortion is legal in the USA and in almost all nations of the world.

          Fallacy of composition and appeal to authority in one sentence, such a great feat. By the not even most nations of the world have it legal like the West, however soon enough we will reach that point, don’t worry.
          Whether you like it or not law doesn’t make something right. No amount of rationalization will hide the fact that the whiteknight is you since you are the one defending the notion that the law must bend to satisfy women fancy, since abortion is a murder in which the female (99.9% of the time the instigator) escapes unharmed, not even judged since apostate churches and other NGO whiteknights will look out for the “poor victims” of abortion (not the babies but the mothers that killed).
          A pure whiteknight indeed.

        5. A fallacy of appealing to authority is basing a conclusion on the fact that an idea is popular, or that authorities agree with it. Indeed abortion is not right or wrong because it is legal. Instead, this fact is merely to contrast with the argument that “no serious doctor” believes life begins at birth made in an earlier post here (that in itself is an appeal to authority, as regardless of how many doctors believe when life begins does not provide an answer to the question). Indeed many doctors are on both sides of the issue, which gets us nowhere.
          Again, I have no opinion on the matter as I do not have a uterus, and would never choose for a foetus to be aborted in my personal relationships. My belief in the option of abortion has nothing to do with the women, but only for the unwanted child. So sure, I guess I am white knighting for the unwanted blastocyst, and for the rest of society that will be forced to house, feed, educate, and imprison these unwanted children, and while I’m at it I’m white knighting for the future citizens of the world who I don’t want to be robbed, murdered, or burgled by said foetus 16 years later when it becomes a hooligan. This doesn’t make abortion “right” but it does make it a social policy of utilitarianism.
          This was the argument put forth in the book “Freakonomics” which is an interesting read. Again, the authors set aside the moral question and merely looked at the social outcomes, which were positive. The morality is another issue that must be handled by religion, spiritual leaders, etc.but never politicians.
          Finally, under no legal definition could abortion ever be considered “murder” and those who continually refer to it as such are disingenuous. A positive action which leads to the end of a life without malice or motive is manslaughter, which I agree, abortion could be considered by some. Again, it all depends on the definition of when life begins, which one will find neither side is willing to debate.

    3. I am all for war when there is a just cause. I am all for abortion because I hate fucking babies and think most people make god awful parents. I walk down the street and think that about 80% of the people I see ought to have been aborted.

    4. I don’t like the death penalty because a lot of people wrongly accused have been put to death, and they were all men. Cunts who torture and murder (their own) children get a max of 15 years of basically fucking therapy and sympathy.

      1. interesting question to me: how many of those wrongly accused without death sentence have actually been found not guilty over a course of say 20 years and freed? is it a significant number?

        1. It doesn’t really matter. If one, only one was to be found not guilty, then the State killed an innocent person in MY name. I don’t agree with that at all.

        2. So in your world of going soft on crime (I’m assuming), gang bangers, dealers, etc get lighter terms than they should (they should be killed to save money) and then they go out and kill innocents after having their already violent personalities finely honed by some five year stint after something like attempted murder. So that’s in your ‘name’ too, but not nearly as tingly for you.

        3. Not soft on crime. Lock them up for life. You simply don’t understand, when the state executes people it makes all of us just like them (the criminals that is). Can you think about this for 5 minutes?
          Also, in your view the judicial system must be flawless, otherwise you wouldn’t be so up in arms about it. Is it flawless? No it’s not.. I am absolutely 100% certain among all the people we put to death, at least one was innocent. Can you live with that? I guess you can. Well, I can’t.
          You talk about money.. So I guess you are able to twist your mind in such a way to put a dollar amount on a life. Well, fuck you for that! Fucking Statist.
          And btw, how does Europe deal with it? We are still fucking uncivilized barbarians.. And don’t get me started on the execution of people committing crimes while minors or the mentally retarded.

        4. Pure self-congratulation on your part and zero practical problem solving. Nice projection too with the ‘”Can you think about this for 5 minutes” smarm. YOU are the one who can’t think about the issue. You can’t get over yourself for long enough to ‘think about this for 5 minutes’ because you’re too busy thumbing your own cornhole over how great and forgiving you are.
          Who gives a fuck if trash dies? Who cares?

        5. Executing people does not solve anything. It never did, and it never will.. Why don’t you just admit you believe in it for revenge purposes. Call your State to do the dirty work for you.
          Now, answer me this. Do you agree that we executed at least one innocent in our “justice looking” spree? Yes? You do agree with this, because if you don’t then you are a complete retard and this discussion has no sense…OK, how would it feel if you are the one that did nothing wrong and be dragged out of your cell to the gurney? Because it very well be you by some unfortunate turn of events…
          And to be clear. I am all for citizens to carry concealed. That is what would really solve the problem. If we’re talking solutions..but I have the feeling we’re not.

        6. It saves money and it is a DETERRENT. How many ethnic wannabe thugs from Australia saw the death penalty warnings in Indonesia and decided to quietly call off their gangster/baller fantasies? Countless.
          If two worthless animals dying (and saving money) achieves that, then it is a very good thing and I will toast it with my next dram.

        7. You had several questions. And how would 220 million Indonesians carrying concealed solve this drug problem?

        8. Go back to thumbing your own asshole with overly pious self congratulation. My ‘fucked up’ world has two less animals in it.

        9. You probably missed the point about concealed carry too. Anyway, it was a matter of principle but you are too wrapped up in your own delusion to be able to filter this much information.

        10. ‘wrapped up in your own delusion’
          More projection on your part. That’s exactly your problem.
          How am I delusional when I say that it’s good that two trashy, swaggy, destructive assholes are gone? Where’s the delusion? Who cares about these pieces of shit? Don’t go off into “Imma prove I’m smarter land” with your arguments and canards. Just pour a dram and toast these dead idiots. Fuck these guys.

        11. It was never a discussion these two (well, nine in total btw) were trash pieces of shit. They were. However, putting them away for life would have accomplished the same thing. You however are driven by revenge or I don’t know.. Tell me is death commensurable with the drug trafficking offence? Let’s just execute all the drug dealers we have in jail then..
          Also, I would make all drugs legal. It doesn’t matter hard/soft, whatever…. But if you harm another person while under influence, life without parole. Putting responsibility where it belongs.. on the demand side. How’s that sound for ya?
          And if we’re talking about money, how many billions are we spending on the war on drugs with no avail? Hm? Think, fucking think!

        12. “Think, fucking think!” He says. LOL at the internet argument heavy artillery. Nice work there.
          Your speculation on the future of drugs has nothing to do with this. Indonesia gave very fair warning that drug trafficking is capital. These brown and proud swagsters are too good for accountability and gambled their lives anyway. They lost. It has nothing to do with me and my ‘revenge’. You can argue for changing the laws in the future, etc. Go for it. Legalize deadly drugs and sell them to 15 year olds if you want, in your world. Nothing unfair happened to these fairly warned, cocky idiots. I bet Indonesia is cleaning up their drug issue with far less expense than ours with their capital stance, btw.

        13. I simply don’t agree with capital punishment regardless the crime. In this context you are right. They knew the risks and they took it. Fine, but there is something wrong when the “beacon” of freedom is right up there with Saudi Arabia, Iran, China, N.Korea, Indonesia while the rest of the civilized world is not doing it.
          I’ve also seen your other comment taking Indonesia off the bucket list. Why? You are not a drug dealer.. I see.. there’s still some lingering doubt about the system… Same for me when it comes to the U.S. Should I start talking about the police fucking the system right out, and killing people on the spot while they’re running away? That’s what happens when people think in single issue at a time like you do.
          As to the drugs being sold to 15 year olds. .nice try. Drugs won’t be on the streets anymore, just like alcohol and cigarettes. If you are dumb enough to put a needle in your arm, that’s your problem not mine. Natural selection at work.

        14. i don’t understand your idealistically non-compromising principle of not killing. what’s the background?
          you would not agree – hypothetically – with killing one person, but you would agree with forcing everybody to keep a million people alive for a lifetime.
          this argument makes you sound like the girl from amnesty international who told me that it doesn’t matter how many people are helped, because if only ONE person is helped, then all the millions of donations are justified.
          numbers matter.

        15. Right now, we’re neither soft on crime nor hard on crime. Cunts like Jordan Belfort (the real-life Wolf of Wall Street) defraud people of hundreds of millions and get 3 years in a soft cushy jail, while innocent dudes get killed for being in the wrong place at the wrong time.
          I 100% support being hard on crime. So let’s be hard on ALL crime.

        16. Your viewpoint is not based on a position of strength, it’s based on a position of cowardice. You don’t want to deal with these people so you want the state to come in and make the bad man go away.

        17. So ‘natural selection at work’ in the case of teenagers making mistakes with drugs where you are so hard-core all of a sudden yet you cry like a bitch when two serious pieces of shit die for their crimes….okay. More of your messed up head on display. The rest of your thinking is just a pure mess of non-sequitirs and weak appeals to emotion. I know you think you’re a conservative/libertarian type, right? But your brain stem is much more suited to liberalism.

        18. The other seven of the Bali nine were given life in prison if that helps you fall asleep at night and dream of riding unicorns through the air over leprechaun filled forests while farting marshmallow dust.

        19. So a badass like you just goes out and kills criminals daily?
          I didn’t fly down to Indonesia to kill these two pieces of garbage—this makes me a coward in your purview.

        20. Purview doesn’t mean what you think it means, you moron. Just stick with the words you know.
          In my VIEW, someone who doesn’t want to deal with human beings in a fair and just manner is either a sociopath or is just afraid of his own personal safety at the expense of justice i.e. a coward.

        21. 8 were shot one was spared, the woman that is.
          So l am looking at several options here. You are either half retarded, can’t read or just a prick insulting people while disregarding facts. Just get the fuck out of my face, idiot. You’re wasting my time.

        22. one has nothing to do with the other. Between you and me, fuck charities. You also probably think the justice system is fair. This whole discussion is about where do you draw the line for what the government can and can not do. To bring it home for you, it’s just like porn.. and I’m sure at this point you have no clue what I’m talking about…
          Most of the civilised world agrees with me.. on your side you have China, n. Korea, Saudi Arabia, Iran and alike. You are in good company there.

        23. you are right. i have no clue what you are talking about.
          glad to hear that it’s indicative of truth whether or not most of the civilized world agrees with you. i’m sure i don’t need to extrapolate this thought – although i will if you tease me to.

        24. And btw, how does Europe deal with it? We are still fucking uncivilized barbarians..
          Who gives a fuck how dying Europe does anything? In the end I could give a shit about some scum like these guys executed or for that matter someone retarded (love using that un PC word) or a minor. They are capable of hideous violence too. My sympathies go with the victims you can wring your hands like a good liberal over these two fine specimens of manhood.

        25. “you’re funny.” that’s true.
          i reckon this discussion isn’t going anywhere and i don’t mind if we fade out now.
          though, if you want to continue, start by explaining your morals to me. i’m not inconvincible.

        26. Only to a moron. No amount of numbers are to the value of a human life. Giving someone the death penalty gives every reason to continue killing after the first for one thing – but your mind is not manly enough to think like that is it?
          Further, giving someone the death penalty completely ignores the fact that the person may be innocent even though convicted which is a concept you should steep yourself in. The ramifications of imprisoning someone for life in a high standards prison system are far less severe than when you kill them then find out they are innocent. When someone is dead they can not be freed nor can they be exonerated or pardoned in any meaningful way. In this situation the state would have murdered an innocent man which is a line we must never allow to be crossed for good reason. These are basic concepts any decent human being understands.

        27. It’s precious how you still don’t know what it means even after looking it up in the dictionary. Purview means ‘scope’ as in the scope of a document or the scope of responsibilities of someone or the scope of a criminal investigation. “In your scope” is a meaningless sentence, unless you’re talking about a rifle scope.

        28. Oh, who looked it up? Ha ha. Then you found the one of several meaning of ‘purview’ that supports your incredibly strained nit-picking over nothing.

        29. Those others weren’t the Bali Nine. Those were other cases. I can’t read? I read a book on the Bali NIne. That’s why I have a bit of investment in the case here. YOU misread it. Two of the Bali Nine were executed. The woman was another case entirely as were the Nigerians. ‘Disregarding facts’ ‘Can’t read’ It’s you who has no idea of the whole story due to your skimming. Go back and figure it out. My guess is that you won’t revisit our little war after realizing how uninformed you are.

          It’s okay dude. Everyone’s lost arguments. One thing for you to learn here is that you should stick with logic and facts. You made the mistake of going for the short-end emotional payoff and self-congratulation paradigms. You lost focus on the issue at hand and opted for the pleasures of self-image enhancement. You shouldn’t do those things because it is effeminate behavior.

        31. This one time I walked down the street and accidentally stepped on an ant. I have never walked down the street again.

        32. I don’t know. How many of those wrongly accused who were later found innocent had drugs strapped to their bellies?

        33. Well firstly as a Christian yes I do believe that as a default modus operandi human life should not be taken.
          However the point that was so obvious to everyone else was that the state must never be sanctioned to end the life of a person for all the various un-retractable factors possible like the executed’s innocence. In that scenario the state has murdered an innocent man who would otherwise be alive and well for exoneration and a return to freedom. If the mans guilt continues unchallenged then he remains away from the society he (or she) poses a threat to and nothing totally irreversible has happened.
          I am also pointing out that contrary to the assumed deterrent that the death penalty allegedly provides actually in all reality (dealing with the criminally insane for example) says heres a line – when you cross it make sure you do so spectacularly because you will have nothing more to lose – accidentally kill someone and worried you’ll be killed in response? Go get revenge on all those people that pissed you off – or maybe the police who attempt to arrest you?
          You have no real experience of the world so stick to black and white regulatory thinking patterns instead of realistic rational approaches to tricky scenarios…?

        34. Well I suppose it’s difficult to understand what you don’t have isn’t it Paul?
          You know when you go and get your welfare, and the nice lady behind the desk tells you that you must complete a number of hours job searching in order to provide value for the money your receiving?
          Thats maybe the best place to start wrapping your head around the concept of value. Do some soul searching maybe?

        35. I don’t agree that the state becomes like the criminal. Execution would obviously be reserved for serious crimes, and due process would be granted (speaking idealistically). By committing heinous acts, these people are forfeiting their right to live in society. I do take into account how circumstances (nature v nurture) can compel someone towards homicide, so it’s beyond doubt that things aren’t simply black and white. If imprisonment for life was to be the alternative, then chain gangs and harsh conditions should be the order of the day. As you say, this then prevents the innocent from execution in error, and though they’ll feel wronged for working themselves to an early death, it’s not as grave an error. As an aside, the prison-industrial complex is a huge earner for judges, lawyers, cops, etc, and is hardly ideal, yet neither can we discount the merit in the law traditions inherited from ancient Europe, and refined in modernity.

        36. Actually, the death penalty is not a deterrent. The rate for solving homicides hovers in the upper 30% range, so the odds are technically in the criminals favor of NOT getting caught. And for other crimes I can only imagine the rate is worse. No criminal thinks he is going to fail; they typically plan out a crime in the hopes of not getting caught, except for the really stupid Darwin award types, which of course won’t be deterred by anything and would rob a liquor store with a cop car parked out front…

        37. well, i don’t mind if you stick to your religious ideal; though you have to understand that i can’t follow you in that regard, since i am not a christian at this time.
          i hate the idea of killing another person, but i see that although it is useful to have ideals, reality often – or rather, usually – forces one into the other direction.
          your theory about people going on a rampage is quite interesting, but it would need some data to back it up and quantize it. as i stated, i think numbers are important. it should be possible though, because death penalty does exist – you don’t happen to have some research at hand?
          well, yes, sticking to simple patterns is what you do when you have no deeper insight into issues. i don’t mind if you provide me with further understanding, but simply stating that i don’t understand without explaining will not help you with your point.

        38. What deeper insight do you require? If you as a fellow person cannot make a decision on the moral implications of state murder?
          Who is to make this decision – the state? They have the deeper insights whoever they are? It’s never been know for governments and law enforcement to juke statistics to suit political motivations now is it…? And then mislead the public…?
          You have as deeper insight as you will ever need – who comprise ‘the state’ and what motivates them?
          Who is to say that in 1 year you will not be part of that ‘state’ in which case what study do you imagine you would undergo in order to understand the deeper insights?
          When a Judge gives someone the death penalty, what deeper insights does that Judge have – that you can guarantee?
          Reality is really the expression of our collective ideals isn’t it?
          The more members of that collective hold ideals that lean a certain way the more ‘real’ those ideals become materially – look at the world around you….
          If you can justify for me why the state should be given the power to kill it’s own citizens (killing someone else’s citizen could start a war) when it is itself a representation of those citizens and behaves at the will of those citizens and by default does not have the right to kill it’s own citizens then please do.
          The burden of proof is yours – if you feel that the state by default has the right to kill citizens then the citizens by default have a right to kill the state and those that comprise it. This as you can see does not work.
          But a state that comes into being that by default can kill it’s own citizens does not come into being without ignorance collecting it together and executing it’s illegitimate demands.

        39. you have a good point about the state not having deeper insight. but i was referring to you.
          let’s abstract the situation a little: i’m a guy in a little town of 20 people. people start dying and by all standards of knowing, the evidence points to one person. i would then consider whether this person will continue killing or whether it is reasonable to assume that he will not. when in doubt, i will choose my safety. since this person will not be able to contribute to society anymore and i don’t want to work extra to keep him alive, i will kill him.
          now extrapolate to 20 million people and 1 million murder convicts. if out of these 1 million convicts 99% are actually murderers, i don’t mind the collateral damage. if 80% are actually innocent, though, i will seriously have to doubt the court system and think about alternatives.
          these numbers are bogus, of course. you can argue that it is fair to keep people alive when the incarceration rate is more realistic (less than 1 in a 100 normal prisoners), since the economic impact is more tolerable. but that is also a numbers’ decision, which your idealism doesn’t allow.
          it’s unfortunate that these abstractions are problematic. small societies are known to deal with crime in ways that big societies cannot adapt. it’s much easier to be anonymous and avoid social pressure by joining subcultures or mobs in a big society. this would be impossible in a tribe where each individual’s survival depends on their acceptance in the group and is more willing to adapt and conform.
          to answer your question straight: no, i don’t think the state has more of a right to kill than i do. but i’m neither saying that i don’t have the right. if i see my own life endangered, i will kill without hesitation – if i can emotionally and practically do it, that is.

        40. I actually think that you as an individual have more right than the state to take a life – if I’m stepping outside of my religious beliefs to play devils advocate.
          Though not playing the advocate, the only person I trust to take life is God, but this is not something He does.
          Your examples are small in scale and revolve around you personally – I don’t begrudge you as an individual taking action in the way you described – remember all this has consequences immediately in your community in that kind of example and all parties likely know each other and each others community/social group so on the rare occasion this happens both parties will have huge stakes in the attempt to kill each other.
          Were talking about the state – a group of supposedly elected individuals, acting not as individuals but as a collective for the larger group and being paid by the larger group to protect, provide for and serve. These individuals change with time and the times change all on their own. But the principles of the state must remain (like a constitution!).
          This group who make up the state, I believe must never have the right to take a life – it’s absolutely counter to their job and the reason they exist. They also have no personal stakes in the scenario which should never be the case when we make or take life.
          And in the modern world, resources are not really stretched because of the cost of keeping criminals in jail. There’s more than enough money to ‘contain’ dangerous criminals. Our prison systems are crammed full of people doin time for selling a herb that cures cancer but is illegal(WTF?) or simply for smoking it. Or people that were caught loitering three times, or people that refused to pay their taxes, or people that didn’t understand their right to remain silent or not to be harassed by the police (who are armed and armoured these days at our expense).
          The tiny minority of really dangerous criminals would not burden the tax payer certainly not morally but our governments have no interest in economy or justice simply control and obedience. They have developed incredibly deceptive ways of doing it as well…

      2. Yeah but most of those ‘wrongly accused’ guys already had long rap sheets so they should have been killed already anyway.

        1. I say yes, but I know it won’t happen that way. More to the point is that I’m not going to lose sleep over it if some rap sheet thug gets killed in error. I don’t care.

        2. Well, tell you the truth that’s fair. I’m still just not a fan of the death penalty. Or abortion.

        3. What about if you or someone you cared about was killed in error though? Would you care about it then?
          If so, then you have to consider that maybe your position on this is a selfish one.

        4. Jesus, that’s some syrupy stuff there, man. No one I know ever gets remotely close to any of this degeneracy. The ‘killed in error’ crowd is a statistically tiny group of scum with already long criminal histories. I say BZZZZZZZPPPPPPP….hissssssss. (Sound of electricity followed by smoking, dead body. Not to be confused with a smoking body)

        5. I would love to know if there are any stats or studies which back up what you say here, or whether it is just a case of you believing what you want to be true. I suspect the latter.

        6. So, innocent guys with no prior record is an epidemic then, yeah? Find one case then. You just what liberals do in every situation. You take the syrupy, pseudo-hero stance. The actual issue at hand never matters to faux heroes like you. You’ll never understand what I’m saying.

        7. Thankfully no, I hopefully won’t as you are talking meaningless drivel.
          Who said it was an “epidemic”? Why are you being so hysterical?
          Look, I don’t have much time to indulge you, as your idea that no innocent person, or person with prior clean record, has ever been executed is clearly ludicrous. But I did have a quick Google. Can’t see any evidence of prior convictions for this man

          And there is a whole page of cases here, many of which do not mention prior convictions for the wrongfully executed man

          That took me about 10 seconds of Googling but honestly I don’t know why I even wasted that much time, because people like you are so blinkered in their outlook that they never take any notice of evidence anyway, if it disproves a notion they have set in their minds. I guess I did it so anyone reading this who is unsure if you are talking nonsense will see it demonstrated quite clearly.

      3. The death penalty is also ridiculously expensive, at least compared to life in prison. I don’t want my tax dollars going to waste on lawyers and judges over some cunt.
        Either fix the system or abolish the death penalty.

      1. excellent speaker, thank you. i don’t agree on the retribution part – the argument doesn’t make sense to me. i would consider death penalty out of a purely economic perspective.

        1. I don’t agree with any killing for any reason, abortion, capital punishment or war. However if the rules are set before you commit the crime and you know the punishment, why cry foul when you get the same treatment everyone else would have got? They knew the rules, they took their chances and lost. How come no one has mentioned sympathy for the three Nigeria guys? This isn’t about death penalty. It’s about rich countries trying to ride rough shod over the laws of other countries. If they pardon those two then everyone imprisoned for drug offences in Indonesia needs a pardon. Not going to happen. Some American States still have the death penalty so this all sounds hippo critical to tell Indonesia to stop theirs.

        2. I absolutely agree with everything you said. You spoke my mind… Nobody cares or cries for the Nigerians… Some people are more equal than others… So much hypocrisy..

        3. from a political perspective, this is clearly a red herring, yes. from the perspective of the two guys, though, it’s a chance. if i were them, i would – with high probability – use it as well.

        4. I think a lot of people are pissed off because the Indonesians are so inconsistent. I’ve been here for 7 years and I can tell you factually that this has nothing at all to do with justice, it has to do with a weak president bloodletting to boost his approval ratings.
          Case in point: Two Iranians were caught with way more heroin coming INTO the country than these two were caught taking OUT, and they got twenty year-life sentences because they had the cash to pay the judges.
          Likewise, many involved in the Bali bomb plots that killed and maimed hundreds were released and some only served 3-4 years. It’s insane.

    5. Yes your first comparison hits the nail on the head . Pro life and being so called pro war are two totally different things entirely, I’m for baby’s moms not murdering them in the womb and also for holding other nations or groups accountable for acts of aggression. While I don’t agree with Iraq I agree with Afghanistan and detest abortion.

      1. I don’t do drugs or deal drugs but I can tell you this, you won’t catch me dead or alive anywhere near Indonesia. Don’t trust their corrupt justice system in case some corrupt customs official decides some bag full of drugs belongs to me. I know how they play, I stay the F— away.

        1. That’s a good point. But rest assured these guys are guilty as fuck and they acted like complete assholes at first. Like “I’m brown. You can’t fuck with me.” Because they grew up in liberal Angloville with no accountability. But you make a good point. Take Indonesia off the bucket list.

        2. I read a book about the Bali Nine. Those two guys were assholes from the start with strong senses of entitlement thanks to growing up in an Anglo culture overwhelmed with racial awareness/overcompensation. How’s that?

    6. More importantly, these men have done nothing wrong. They have not hurt a single person. They have not committed a crime. What they have done is attempt to provide a product to willing customers which the State prohibits for one of two reasons. The first is that the State does not get a cut of this particular drug unlike countless others which will kill you, only without the euphoric feelings. The second is that the State only wants certain actors to profit from the illicit drugs trade as these “actors” are allies of the State.
      These men serve a useful propaganda function for the State. They serve as the face of the illegal drugs trade and allow the State to give the false impression that it is “doing something” about drugs. But ask yourself; where is the drug lord who sold them these drugs? Why isn’t he on death row?
      These men are innocent and should be immediately set free.

  3. I’m a supporter of alternative forms of punishment like whippings and exile. If someone is demonstrably a serious enough threat to the safety of citizens (murderer, actual rapist, etc) then he or she should be removed. Spending money imprisoning someone for any significant length of time is a waste of money. Punishment / deterring other criminals can be accomplished by whipping the convict (publicly), and protection of citizens can be accomplished by branding the convict in a prominent place (hands, forearms, or face) and then exiling him or her with a declaration that returning will be punished with immediate execution.
    If bleeding heart liberals want to spend their own money to buy an island and pay for the care of dangerous criminals, so be it. If socialist Euro-fags don’t like the practice, then they can open up their borders to other nations’ human trash. Maybe the Russians will be happy to take a few “indentured servants” to work the mines in Siberia.

    1. Exile is such an underused punishment. Most “punishment” today serves no purpose, enriches the state at the expense of the taxpayer, provides no rehabilitation of the offenders, 90+% of whom will re-enter society at one point, in worse condition than they left it, and with few social or employment skills.
      I think in most cases, the question of punishment should be tied to how dangerous the person will be to the general public. Unless letting them go free puts a random stranger at risk, either fine them, exile them, or rehab them, otherwise let them go.
      I also think we should bring back tar and feathering. There are plenty of good candidates for it in DC and NYC.

    2. Once upon a time there was something called an “outlaw.”
      An outlaw was not someone who broke the law, but was, rather, someone the law had put out, removed its protection from.
      Think about it.

    3. I believe forced labor is way more productive than death penalty or exile, besides being still safe and self-sustainable.

  4. Australian Prime Minister Tony Abbott, emphasize Chan and Sukumaran’s “rehabilitation” in prison, notably Chan’s ordination as a Christian minister

    If he’s using this as a means to get out of his punishment, then he needs to re-read Romans 13.

  5. As an Australian, I am confused and appalled by the outpouring of sympathy for 2 confessed scumbag drug dealers.
    Many may have noticed that Australia, in the last 20 years, has developed a very sick, politically-correct SJW culture. A culture that portrays even the most vile individuals as victims (so long as they are in a minority group), requiring candlelight vigils and celebrity pleadings, to relieve them of the consequences of their actions.
    Seeing this from afar makes me very happy that I got the fuck out of Australia 15 years ago.

    1. What is wrong with drug dealing? Do you want alcohol and tobacco sellers to be killed as well? How dealers of prescription medications that are used by people in a recreational manner?

      1. every country has laws. just respect them
        dont bring morals cause every one follows a different set.

        1. There are no different set of morals. Either you are moral, and respect other’s property or you are not.

        2. Bro, are you trying to imply that *GASP* these dudes are immoral goons who don’t respect others’ property?

      2. These guys were dealing/smuggling heroin. Nobody could possibly argue that this drug should be in unrestricted circulation in society, considering the damage it does to the health and lives of those who become addicted.
        These guys were not executed for tobacco or alcohol, or prescription medications, so its pointless to discuss this.
        So, these guys were caught trafficking a dangerous drug for the pure motive of profit. Is this wrong ?… you bet your ass it is.
        Should they be executed ?. That is a question for the relevant countries to decide. And Indonesia has decided to impose execution. If these 2 scumbags don’t agree with this, then they shouldn’t have gone there in the first place. Risk vs reward, and they lost the toss.
        One common theme on this website, and its forums, is personal responsibility, and how women in particular seem to be immune from the consequences of it.
        These 2 should face the full consequences of their actions. And I doubt you would be so compassionate about drug dealers if one was peddling meth or heroin to your kids.

        1. 1) Making something illegal doesn’t make it unavailable. Heroin has been restricted in America since the 50s and has been available to anyone who wants it everyday since then. America has seen a dramatic rise in heroin consumption over the last few years even though it has been illegal to sell, produce, etc.. A drug’s availability is the direct result of the demand for it. It has nothing to do with making it illegal.
          2) If heroin was so bad why weren’t there any addicts before they made it illegal? There are quite a few books showing that heroin addiction, when you could go and get it at corner stores was almost unheard of among working class people and only something the wealthy did.
          3) It is never wrong to sell something to someone who wants it. Voluntary interactions between adults have no business being regulated.
          4) Drug dealers do sell amphetamines and heroin to kids. They are called pharmacies. Amphetamines are some of the most widely prescribed medications to school aged children. They are called Adderall, Desoxyn, Vyanse, etc.. Opiate drugs, which have the same action as heroin are also widely available to anyone who can go to a doctor and complain of a back ache or a migraine.
          Do I want a doctor who prescribes meth and heroin to be killed and the pharmacy to be burned down? Of course not and neither would you.

        2. “3) It is never wrong to sell something to someone who wants it.
          Voluntary interactions between adults have no business being regulated.”
          I would have to disagree with this.
          On the other issues, we can debate this all day. Whether the rule of law of a country should be respected, even if you think it is immoral or wrong.
          There is no right or wrong, only opinion.

    2. As an Australian, you should be thankful that your government is willing to go to such great lengths to protect its citizens abroad. Your opinion would change overnight if you came into any trouble wherever you live now.

      1. Its not the government actions that I have a problem with. They seemed to go through all possible options to ensure these 2 were not executed. These were rebuffed by the Indonesians.
        My problem is with the public who make out these 2 as victims, and rally behind them as though they are totally innocent of the circumstances they find themselves in.
        The idiocy of the celebrities who insulted the prime minister’s manhood, because they think he should be able to impose our set of values over the legal system of another country. They are just making fucking idiots of themselves.

        1. The trials were accused of being rife with corruption, and legal appeals were still pending while they were shot. They were victims.

    3. Death for dealing drugs, is this real life?
      a woman recently got 10 years conviction in Indonesia for KILLING HER OWN MOTHER and these men get death for smuggling drugs? That seems fair…

      1. It is real life, because it just happened.
        Maybe the woman you mentioned was beaten and forced into prostitution by her own mother, and retaliated to save her own life. Who knows what the circumstances are of that case.
        None of us are god, and have the best wisdom about the fairness, or unfairness of punishments for various crimes, in various circumstances, across every country in the world that imposes them.
        But its a matter of personal responsibility to face the consequences of your actions, knowing full well what they will be.
        But in this case, 2 drug dealers decided, of their own free will, to traffic drugs in a country with the death penalty. And those of you who rail against the unfairness of this, are basically saying that people should not be held accountable for their actions.

        1. They put those drug dealers in jail for 10 YEARS and pretty much rehabilitated them and then after giving them all that hope they just murdered them needlessly.
          The men for sure would never have done it again after suffering in jail for 10 years and being given mercy from death. Its a waste of young mens lives, and I have no idea how anyone can support this shit.

        2. The woman was American. She and her bf (also american) killed the mum and put her in a suitcase over a fight. They then put the suitcase in a taxi and fled. The reason they got ten years is because this is Indonesia, whatever judge you get is a lottery.

  6. Part of me thinks the left have sexual fantasies about being hardened criminals themselves, but simply lack the balls, so live through these public and high profile cases instead

  7. only a left wing nut job would want to take away your guns then champion criminal behavior by having outcries when a thug is thrown in jail. i guess they believe and want the world to be like gotham city?

    1. It’s something I like to call the “‘Oh no, that’s terrible!’ mentality”.
      They see guns causing taking many lives, they take guns away.
      They see two guys getting hanged, they call for reversing the death penalty.
      Notice how the news article has none of the words that are the type that trigger SJWs.
      Would they be singing the same song if these men were not drug dealers but instead rapists?
      For drug dealers: “No! Don’t kill them!”
      For rapists: “Yes. They deserve it.”

    1. Good fucking riddance. It’s always refreshing to see countries like Indonesia not giving two fucks about incessant SJW whining. If the parents of these degenerates spent more time raising their children properly as opposed to holding candlelight vigils and railing against the Indonesian justice system they probably wouldn’t have to bury them prematurely. Also, it’s interesting that the only female member of that group was granted a last minute reprieve and spared from death. Thanks feminism.

      1. Why is someone a degenerate for selling something to someone who wants it? Are tobacco dealers and alcohol dealers degenerates because they sell drugs that kill millions around the world? How about prescription medication dealers who sell opiates and amphetamine drugs.

        1. The way a society survives is by it’s citizens obeying the laws. Degenerates that sell on the black market are cheating the system and everybody who follows the rules. It’s unjust, and if caught, they need to pay the price. Not saying death is a reasonable sentence though.

        2. By that definition, North Korea should be flourishing. No one there dares break a rule.

        3. Do you support North Korea punishing people for selling bread and other basic necessities on the black market? Did you support the USSR gulags for people who dared import medication from America? Do you support the punishment for gay people in Saudia Arabia (beheading) and Iran (death by hanging)?

        4. Hard drugs aren’t basic necessities that people need in order to survive. Selling bread and medication on the black market is not the same as illegally selling destructive substances that wreck your mind and your body, while fueling criminality. And as for gays, if they are stupid enough to flaunt their shitty lifestyle in public in places where it is clearly not tolerated they deserve what they get. Not every country needs degenerate pride parades.

        5. You obviously don’t understand argumentation ethics by virtue of your counter. You initially laid out an argument saying punishments should be given for dealing in non-government sanctioned domains. Now you are saying that punishments should only exist for those who seek profits. Regardless, you didn’t think about your argument and the holes that could be shot through it before stating it. Not everyone who deals in North Korean markets is doing it for survival.

        6. Rules and laws are two separate and different things. There will always be rules as long there is behavior objectionable to a large enough group.

        7. You are the typical illogical statists. My response was to someone who says punishment is just for doing things the government doesn’t like. I responded with examples. Saying “that’s different” is the SJW’s favorite tool and I know you must use it often,
          Illegal drugs are only harmful because they are illegal. When alcohol was illegal, use when up and you had the rise of huge criminal entities called bootleggers. Only when the government legalized the activity again did the criminal activity dissipate. Why is it any of the government’s business if I choose to wreck my mind or body? Should the government prevent me from eating sugary treats and drinking alcohol? How about smoking cigarettes. Every year, nearly 600 thousand Americans die because of their Alcohol and tobacco habits. Another 40000 die from prescription medication use. Do you support those things being illegal as well?

        8. Listen here professor, why don’t you give an opinion or solution and defend it, rather than running around playing devil’s advocate.

        9. Laws are a necessary evil, and every law restricts freedom. Having lots of laws and lots of citizens following them is not a measure of a successful society. However, it is ridiculous to assume that the opposite position must be taken–that no laws should exist.

        10. I didn’t say successful, I said surviving. Yes too many laws can be as bad as no laws at all.

      2. Even better they used one of the most effective and humane ways available to execute someone.
        I see myself as an oddity. I feel that if the death penalty is to be on the books, it should be done quickly and humanely. In the USA when it takes 30 minutes to execute a condemned criminal, with that criminal agonizing in the process, I feel we are doing it wrong. I see us being a better people by saying “we’re not going to inflict revenge on a crook, but we are going to properly apply justice.”
        The firing squad solves this problem. No BS. Just do the dirty deed and be done with it.

        1. That’s not odd at all.
          If you have a rabid dog, you put it down quickly. You don’t waste your time torturing or incarcerating it.
          Execution is about getting rid of a threat, not punishment.

    2. Why did they do a pass on the woman?. She’s a witness in another trial.. Oh, I see..

  8. The world’s drug war is a disaster. After nearly 100 years of fighting the scourge of drug dealing drug use has gone up. How anyone here, on a supposed Red Pill centered forum, could conceivably support the objectively failed experiment is beyond me. Drug use in America, if you include legal opiates, legal amphetamines, etc. has skyrocketed since the inception of these failed policies. The only thing the government has managed to do is create gigantic criminal entities, fuel the explosion of America’s prison population, destroy civil liberties in America by eviscerating the 4th amendment, and making some government departments filthy rich.
    I am a victim of the drug war because I am young black male who is often stopped and searched; not because I meet a description of someone who has just committed a violent crime, but because the cops want to make an easy bust and have the opportunity to seize any cash I have on hand and my car.

    1. I agree… but if someone goes into a foreign country and knowingly, intentionally and purposefully breaks their laws, they really have nothing to complain about with regard to how that country’s criminal justice system responds.
      If these people were executed because someone duped them into unknowingly doing something that was illegal then we’d have more sympathy.

      1. Until the early 20th century, Americans used to take pride in the fact that they were the supreme contraband runners of the world.
        The yacht America was a sporting version of a smuggling ship known as the Baltimore Clipper.

        1. I will welcome the day when politicians come to their senses and end the War on Drugs in the USA.
          I can’t speak for other countries though. If they want to keep drugs illegal in their country that is their call.

    2. “The only thing the government has managed to do is create gigantic criminal entities . . .”
      And then there are the gigantic criminal entities created by the free market as well.

        1. The black.
          My comment was a joke. The criminal entities created by government would be entities such as Pfizer, Merck, Eli Lilly and the CIA.

    3. That’s a loaded question and off topic. The issue at hand is that scum bags get sympathy in today’s “compassionate” and “progressive” society whereas real victims don’t. It could be drug dealers or some other kind of criminal, what they did isn’t really the focus its how they’re treated and why society is currently configured in this perverse way.

        1. How about selling a black slave to a coal mine?
          Selling guns to a convict?
          selling 600 pounds of industrial fertilizer to a raghead in a panel van?
          Selling email addresses to a spammer?
          There are many things you can sell to someone who wants it that makes you a scumbag.

        2. 1) I was talking about selling inanimate objects. You can’t own another human being so you can’t sell a human being. In the scenario I posted, it involved two consenting adults. If you sell a slave, it involves three adults, one of which doesn’t consent (presumably).
          2) Convicted of what? Disorderly conduct? DUI? Murder? Most states allow even violent felons to apply to get their weapons privileges reinstated.
          3) ??? You are an idiot.

        3. Sure you can own another Human being… humans have been doing it since before recorded history.
          a ‘convict’ is someone who is convicted of a felony. misdemeanors are ‘violations’.
          ouch, I am deeply wounded by your irrelevant personal jab.
          There is a way to end the insanity. legalizing all drugs will simply destroy your working class. (as much as i love the idea of letting druggies kill themselves). China successfully implemented the solution to their widespread opium abuse problem.
          Liberals would never accept the chinese solution, however, because 90% of their voting demographic would be gone instantly.

        4. You ability to use violence against another person to keep them under your thumb doesn’t mean you own them. I guess if I kidnapped a woman you would say I owned her.
          You don’t know what a convict is. You think playing games with words is actual tact.
          China executes several hundred people every year for drug related crimes and drug use their has skyrocketed. The same with Iran, Malaysia, Indonesia, etc.. You try to read about these topics.

          If drug use would take out the working class, why hasn’t readily available alcohol, tobacco, prescription medications (opiates, amphetamines, etc. can all be easily had with a doctor’s visit) destroyed the working class? Just because you made something illegal doesn’t magically make it unavailable. The greatest example of which is Marijuana. America has had the most virulent war on Marijuana on earth yet has the highest proportion of adults who have used it. At one point in time, before the rise of prescription highs, 10% of Americans were users of cocaine! Making something illegal doesn’t magically make it unavailable!

        5. I am not talking about modern China, where their drug laws are easily circumvented and barely enoforceable, I am talking about China of the 1950’s, in one of the most successful drug wars in history under Mao. Yes, it was one of the few things that the commies got right… all dealers and farmers were executed, often summarily, properties were confiscated, and users were forced into rehab.
          if you consider the current war on drugs to be anything like a real war on drugs, you are nuts… the current war on drugs is nothing more than excuse to soak tax dollars while offering up a token occasional drug bust in order to prove that the money was not wasted.

        6. So your answer to people engaging in voluntary activities with one another is to commit mass murder and theft! When will you advocate for this to be done against tobacco and alcohol concerns?
          I love how you didn’t respond to my point about illegality =! unavailability

        7. The bright side is that it doesn’t matter if the govt’s answer to someone using drugs is mass murder and theft. A government that has to execute so many people over a substance they are choosing to put in their bodies already shows itself to be illegitimate. The pendulum will always swing back the other way and eventually the govt will go soft on drugs to make money or legalize it because objectively there is no way to convince people that them putting something in their body that they want to put in it is wrong.
          As long as the demand for drugs are high, and it always will be, there will always be plenty of people willing to risk using it and dealing it. If the govt wants to wipe out a large portion of its population over it, so be it. The people in power in that govt wont last forever even if they aren’t overthrown, and it’s a bandaid to a “problem” that can’t be “fixed” anyway.

        8. I would make everything legal… BUT, and this is a big BUT.. If a person under influence harms another person they should go away for life without parole. Put the responsibility where it should be.. Other than that, the war on drugs, and all the other bullshit “wars” only purpose is to keep the population under the thumb, and make money for the elite.

        9. Absolutely. There are lots of voluntary activities that people engage in that are harmful to others and civilization. That is one of the primary functions of government… to prevent people from engaging in activities that are harmful to others.
          legalities don’t enter into the equation, because in reality, every government eventually becomes corrupted, and winds up passing laws which are both unethical and immoral. ‘legal’ doesn’t mean right, and like any organism that develops too many viruses, too much illness, societies MUST die.
          ‘culture’ can and does often continue despite the death of a society, and that is my goal… to retain american values, culture, and knowledge through the death of the society itself.

        10. I won’t argue against alcohol because I support Beer, and beer was the foundation of original civilization.
          Why beer? because prior to the advent of beer, water around any concentration of humans or regular use was unfit to drink. Beer allowed humans to make something drinkable that was nonetheless mostly safe, even around humans in concentration.
          Considering the problems that enhanced carbohydrates from processed grains cause humans, Beer is apparently the only viable usage for grains.
          As far as other alcoholic beverages, much of which are the product of advanced manufacturing methods? I would happily give them the same treatment as other drugs, except that humans go to extremes… you cannot have a prohibition that outlaws manufactured alcohols without including beer and wine on the list.
          And as far as smoking, cigarettes, while addictive and destructive of health, have virtually NO NOTICEABLE EFFECT on a person’s behavior and psychology. They do not interfere with your ability to drive or operate heavy equipment, they do not kill those around you (despite all of the crap about second hand smoke, it is still entirely unproven… second hand smoke has far less of a pollutant factor than say… San Diego’s normal air).
          You cannot ‘force’ someone to become addicted to nicotine, and the addiction can be beaten by willpower… believe me, I know, I did. Thus, Smoking is an exercise that hurts only yourself, that hurt usually occurs long after the age that you are a useful worker, have no notable effect on job performance during your most profitable years, and has a slightly relaxing effect that is useful in maintaining the stability of certain mental types.
          But, unfortunately, the world is full of you ‘all or nothing’ types that cannot understand that life is about moderation. Quick and total fixes never work.
          Yes, I want to see the majority of Negroes and south americans driven out of this country… but not ALL of them. YES I want to see drugs punished harshly, but not ALL of them. YES I want government weakened… but not destroyed. Yes, I want to see grains eliminated as a staple food source, but not ALL of it. Yes, I want people to have freedom, but not COMPLETE freedom. Yes, I would like to see the death penalty instituted for ‘3 strikers’, and a return to corporal punishment instead of locking men in a cage to learn to be better criminals, but not ALL of the time, or for all offenses.
          I want juries to judge cases, not judges and precedents and manditory minimum sentencing (an abomination if ever there was one). Each person is an individual, and the goal is to stop crime, not criminals. Some you cannot fix (execution) and some crimes you cannot forgive, but is it really appropriate to lock a 19 year old kid in a cage with murderers for three years to be raped daily for taking his neighbor’s car for a joy ride?
          When did society crumble to the point where we cannot understand moderation? When did people start thinking ‘compromise’ and ‘moderation’ meant the same thing? You can and should be an uncompromising moderate, but the opposite is not true.

        11. There is no point arguing with you if you think Nicotine isn’t addictive. Nicotine is, by far, the most addictive stuff on the planet. Nicotine is so addictive that scientists named the nicotinic receptor after it. Nicotine is harder to kick than heroin.

          The vast majority of drugs don’t impair your ability to function. Uppers like Coke and Amphetamines should be widely available because they help with worker productivity. The government drastically harms worker productivity by making people have to go to doctor’s to get prescriptions for these things.
          Regardless, there is very little point talking to someone brazen enough to say Nicotine isn’t addictive. Your problem is your lack of knowledge.

        12. ” ……………….. but is it really appropriate to lock a 19 year old kid in a cage with murderers for three years to be raped daily for taking his neighbor’s car for a joy ride? ”
          Friend, let’s put it this way, if it’s appropriate to expose a hard-working man to raping murderers in prison simply because he tried to conceal his hard-earned money from marauding bandits (read: IRS) then I suppose anything goes.

        13. My point exactly. There are men getting raped in prison because they LOST THEIR JOB and couldn’t afford alimony!
          This is sicker than sick.

        14. I kicked my cigarette habit of 20 years through self-discipline. exactly what knowledge of nicotine addiction do YOU have?
          I have dealt with those with drug addictions for many, many years. Your line about ‘improving productivity’ is retarded liberal bullshit. It keeps you awake, increases your energy temporarily, and destroys your ability to focus, and your ‘downs’ generally last three times as long as your ‘ups’. even short periods of substance abuse can do massive damage to both your body and mind. I was sucking down crystalmeth like crazy in the Navy to ‘stay awake on watch’ despite working 16-18 hour days for 6 months at a time, I know EXACTLY the effect they can have on your productivity and ability to accomplish real work.
          Try your lies on someone that hasn’t been there. Are you even out of high school yet?

        15. How about if someone sold your 12yo niece into forced prostitution. ?
          I think scumbag would be the best possible description of them.

        16. An interesting point about inanimate objects. So I guess you would be fine with North Korea selling a nuke to the local Jihadis sitting in their basement in new york…

        17. No of course not but there are many reasons why that wouldn’t happen.
          The most obvious is that the local jihadis lack the funds to buy a nuke. The second would be that North Korea would not want the nuke traced to them. I love the weak arguments of these stupid forums. I don’t know how any reasonable adult could believe this stuff.

        18. You are just a dummy. Something is an inanimate object. My niece is a human being who wouldn’t agree to be a prostitute. Do you understand the difference between selling a non-consenting adult and selling an object?

        19. Nope, I am medical doctor in training. I do things you can not even conceive of.
          You think your infantile anecdotes are arguments. You showed how stupid you are by saying Nicotine isn’t addictive; an utter farce since scientists named the receptor in the neuro-muscular junction after it because it fits perfectly. It is much harder to kick Nicotine than Heroin and numerous articles show it.
          In regard amphetamines, amphetamines are some of the most widely prescribed medications in America. Adderall alone is taken by 3 or so million school children alone every single year with virtually no negative effect. I think WW1 and WW2 pretty much defeat whatever purpose your anecdote was trying to serve. 10s of millions of people used amphetamine drugs during WW1 and WW2 for the sole purpose of being more productive over long periods of time, especially pilots. They easily kicked the habit they developed when they got home. Saying that they can’t be used to focus just shows how ignorant you are.

        20. Actually, you are incorrect.
          The drug dealer has no legal right to sell the drugs, since they are illegal. Under the law, you cannot claim legal ownership of something that is illegal to own.
          Likewise, the slave trader has no legal right to sell the 12yo girl, because that is illegal as well.
          So, there is no technical difference.
          From a moral standpoint, I would shoot the human trafficker before the drug dealer. But if I had some bullets left, I would also pop the drug dealer a brand new asshole.. right in the forehead.

        21. what is your main criticism…. drug dealing being illegal, capital punishment, one country being unable to influence the laws of another ?

        22. A student. I have been wasting my time arguing with a student.
          Come back when you grow up a little.

        23. Come back when you don’t use your own personal anecdotes as fuel for arguments.

        24. “I do things you can not even conceive of.” cracks me up..
          one with a big ego I might add.. He’ll wake up when life will shaft him.. that’s for sure.

        25. anecdotes?
          You pull that card out of your ass?
          I pointed out that I have been to prison, and I see what happens there.
          I have pointed out that I have been in the military, I know what goes on in the Navy.
          Don’t act as though your complete ignorance of reality and lack of experience is some kind of bonus points. You are a schoolboy. You have absolutely NO clue how the real world works… I am surprised that you are even here, instead of over on xojane talking about evil misogynists with the rest of the idiot university crew.
          Anyway, go ahead and get in the last word, I am done with you, child.

        1. Only idiots care about childish political affiliations. What is the difference between the two parties?

        2. None, except that democrats protect their voting demographic. Republicans sacrifice THEIRS on the altar of greed. You kinda missed the point.

      1. Yep, and I bet the situation were very different if these fuckwits were facing the firing squad for trafficking young girls into forced prostitution.
        You wouldn’t hear a peep from the SJW crowd.
        Its only because most of these SJWarriors hit the bong pretty hard in their university gender studies days, and so they think “drugs are not that bad”. And thus these fuckheads are not really deserving of the death penalty.

  9. Drug smugglers don’t kill people. Individuals make the choice to use drugs. By your theory, cigarette and firearm manufacturers and distributers should be shot in the face too.

    1. In America, tobacco products kills 440 thousand American per year. Alcohol kills 90 thousand Americans per year.

      1. 440 thousand? Really? source?
        That sounds like the biggest bullshit I have heard since “6 million jews” or ‘500 million women get raped every year”

        1. “Cigarette smoking is estimated”
          Ahh, yes, the lovely CDC fact sheet. The one that famously links Every death among smokers to smoking, and every death among those that are around smokers to second-hand smoke. The one that includes house fires, forest fires, and car accidents where a cigarette butt was found at the scene to ‘smoking related deaths’.
          You would be pleased to note that it also links all crack cocaine and pot-related deaths to ‘smoking’ deaths as well.
          I am not a smoker, and even I find their methodology as ridiculous as Piers Morgan’s gun violence crusade.
          However, the CDC DOES manage to coax americans into blowing over 7 BILLION dollars a year on smoking cessation advocation… That’s more money than the entire tobacco industry made in the last 10 years. Someone hjas gotten very, very rich.

        2. It’s bull shit. If they were right, Mexico should be depopulated by now.. All this anti tobacco propaganda is only about the money. I’m so sick of the do gooders.

  10. I’m against the death penalty for the most part, except for particularly heinous crimes. Run-of-the-mill drug smuggling should definitely be punished, but not with death.
    That said, they knew what they were getting into. They knew, if caught, they’d die. They took those chances themselves, and I’m not going to try to convince Indonesia to change their laws based on my morals. These psychotic SJWs think they can violate Indonesia’s sovereignty.
    Not a tear shed on my part.

    1. I am against the death penalty regardless… I simply don’t want the State to kill in MY name.

      1. Dude, fuck your ‘name’. It’s not about you. It’s about killing off animals instead of having to feed them for life, provide them with exercise equipment, books, art supplies, TV’s, clothes, water, health care. Your ‘name’ is nowhere near this issue.

        1. Do you have a problem with me not believing in killing other people? How do two wrongs make it right? Explain that to me.

        2. Fuck off with your decades old cliches. Trash should be taken out. They just did, btw. These two swaggy, arrogant boys just got KILLED and I’m having a drink right now with a smile on my face. Better world with two .35 cent bullets. World just got better and cleaner. Can’t you feel that in the air? Or are you too busy stroking yourself off to a picture of yourself, thinking about how virtuous you are.

        3. “Or are you too busy stroking yourself off to a picture of yourself, thinking about how virtuous you are.”
          This line applies to most people who post here. Now stop trying to shame one of my favourite hobbies!

    1. my thoughts exactly. You shouldn’t call on God or Jesus to save you when you deny Him everyday leading up to that point. This is why he sits back and allows freewill. What else should He do or can do? Even when God intervened in OT, people still went back to their old ways.

  11. Well said… good article.
    While I think that drug prohibition laws are stupid and in the end futile I don’t have a lot of sympathy for those who knowingly smuggle drugs into or through a country that has severe punishment for such actions and then cry about their fate when they are caught.

  12. emphasize Chan and Sukumaran’s “rehabilitation” in prison

    Everybody “rehabilitates” in prison when their life literally depends on it.

  13. Have you ever been so alpha that you pride yourself on following your overlords’ rules?
    Wah, you didn’t do as bossman says so you should die. Hey guys, see how alpha I am? Let’s all conform, toe in line, and do exactly as we’re told, cause we’re so alpha!

  14. Women do not have morals.I am not saying they are evil.Im saying they dont give a damn about good and evil.
    Which translates to a society of serious moral hypocrisy when women run the show politically .They act on hypergamy, which is blind to nuances of morality because its mandate is superior offspring by any means necessary.This occasionally for her means sleeping with Bad People.
    As such, women centric society doesnt view people based on what theyve done, but on their utility from a female perspective.This is why a cop isnt as respected among women as a drug dealer-a dealer can get her stuff.An honest cop can only get her in trouble.
    Therefore,the reverence of criminals and the contempt for morality.

    1. And people wonder why I consider women property. Beloved property, but property nonetheless… They do not have the faculties for moral judgement or emotional growth, and are incapable of the reponsibility, judgement, and foresight necessary to be a man.

  15. Just saw the two guys who are the subject of this article were executed just about an hour ago. Death by firing squad.

    1. Outstanding. I find nothing hypocritical about a government executing foreign criminals while advocating for clemency for it’s own citizens…. It sounds like a government trying to do the right thing.

  16. 1-It is rarely bcause of man fault. We do have to take responsabilty
    for our responsabilities BUT we DO NOT HAVE to take responsabilities for
    her mistakes.
    2- I have some disagreement. 9 and 4. I do think
    that porn is better than real woman. The only reason I go with a real
    woman is to get what I don’t have with porn = emotions. That sound beta
    but I don’t think so, I am just looking for what I do not have with
    porn. 4- Well, some guys are really trash and I see no problem telling
    the truth about them. the only good thing about 4 is that it should NOT
    be done too much because it shows that I am trying to impressed her which
    doesn’t work but I tell that this guy is an idiot for driving his car
    wrongly I will do it and call him an idiot.

  17. A woman recently got 10 years of prison there for brutally killing her own mother in Indonesia while these men get the death penalty for smuggling some drugs.
    I hope to hear feminist outcry on the sexist inequality of the justice system…. still waiting….

    1. It would be interesting to know if Indonesia puts females in front of a firing squad.. Just curious.

  18. this is a stupid article.
    i’m not necessarily against death penalty – saves money. but your argument about “having chosen death” in combination with other people “deserving our sympathy” is strongly skewed.
    these two guys are basically businessmen, in their own way. yes, they knew the risk, but to say that they don’t “deserve” sympathy and others do is outright ridiculous.
    to say that one shouldn’t feel sympathy with them is like saying one should be attracted to obese girls. it misses the point.
    sympathy is “deserved” the same way attraction is. it’s an emotion. you don’t choose with whom you sympathize other than through your values.
    what values do you stand for here? for the war on drugs and their criminalization.
    these two people are actually victims of laws. things that were brought upon them through the decision of other people. that’s why it’s worth discussing.
    who the fuck cares about cancer victims? nobody gave them cancer. a discussion will not make less people get cancer. giving cancer victims sympathy will not make their cancer go away.
    also, disabled people can only take, take, take. these two are able-bodied and can contribute. it’s a waste to kill them. yeah, they broke the law. we can argue whether that law is plausible. in my opinion, it isn’t.
    they did not murder anybody or forcefully harmed someone – that may be an assumption, as i have not read further into it.
    on one hand, you argue against “narcissists”, on the other hand you gauge the amount of attention that should be given to various people. hell, even you give attention to these two. to get some yourself.

    1. your post is thought provoking. However, they were selling a dangerous drug, a highly addictive drug and they knew the law of Indonesia. Do they deserve to be killed? probably not. They should be put in a camp somewhere in that country or forced to clean up trash forever.

      1. whether they deserve it depends on the applied values. as i said, they knew the risk. that doesn’t mean they shouldn’t try to live anyway. self-preservation is not a bad thing and as long as my values do not justify their death, there is no reason for me not to sympathize in the least or to support them. which i don’t, because i don’t really care.
        my take on drugs is that they should be free.
        it’s one of my core beliefs that people should be responsible for all their life decisions to the full extent. if one decides to ruin his life, they should be free to do so. evolutionarily, the smarter ones will survive.
        also, consider all the deaths from drug cartels and the war on drugs. take away the criminalization and these mobs lose their financial power. though i would have to dig deeper into the matter to form an informed opinion regarding this point.

        1. some people will argue that they are encroaching on other people’s health, and safety by selling the drugs. I wouldn’t argue that way. I believe it is up to humans to decide what to or what not to put in their bodies. Smoking is legal and I have never touched a cig.

        2. agreed. i was drunk a few times, but never a drinker. i smoked a few times, but never regularly. i was a fatass most of my life, but i would never – not anymore – support a policy that taxes or forbids sugar / whatever. my demise is nobody’s fault but mine.

    2. Idiotic response. Drugs cause widespread health consequences, money and societal problems especially in Indonesia. They tried to attribute to this social decline whilst simultaneously benefitting from it. They deserve to die just like all drug traffickers.
      By the way the only reason they are “rehabilitated” now is because these tough guys are being killed. When they were first arrested they spat at the cameras and threatened everyone near them. Funny how some tough penalties change people.

      1. Yeah I read the book (one of them) about these guys. Total dicks. Pedestalized ethnic arrogance type guys growing up in a liberal Anglo country that kissed their brown asses. They were totally arrogant, now their “I’ve changed” stance is a pure survival tactic. Buh bye idiots.

      2. no, drugs don’t cause that. as little as macdonald’s causes obesity. everybody can choose to abstain from that stuff.
        of course the “rehabilitation” is nonsense. never doubted that.

    1. they found a pretext though. Or the Phillipines came up with something that allowed Indonesia to not appear weak (or indulgent towards women)

      1. I think they spared the lives of all the ‘runners’. These two guys here were the kingpins of the whole deal. 6 or 7 ‘runners’ got life sentences but no death penalty. Not just the woman.

    1. Does it? I thought dada was most people’s first words.
      edit: Oh, I see I looked it up

  19. now they’re soaking up the publics’ sympathy in eternity
    – theological problem for you: do you have drugs in heaven or hell. If there are no drugs in heaven, does that make it hell. Or vice versa

    1. Yes had they lived and been released they would have gotten laid like rock stars.

  20. I’m an Aussie, and it’s been ridiculous the amount of media attention these two are getting. The article scratches the surface on the situation, but I have a more comprehensive (see: longish) understanding for those of you who’re interested.
    DON’T be fooled by what the media says, by what Julie Bishop says. From the second this shit hit the media (when their first plea was rejected), THAT. WAS. IT.
    From then on, it’s just been a media ruse for sake of placating the Aussie public. The politicians have just been bullshitting since then. All these “consequences” for Indonesia? Nonsense. All it is is that we can’t look like we’ve just given up, in spite of the fact they KNEW that Indonesia was NEVER gonna backflip.
    Indonesia is one of the most populated countries in the world, yet they’re still a third world country. They’re trying to become a first world country. They NEED a sense of continuity from their anti-corruption new leader.
    If they’re going to become a FIRST world power, what’s it going to say to the world if they let an established power like Australia push them around? They’d just look like our BITCH.
    So knowing that, the best Australia has been able to is create a victimhood campaign for these two men. To be honest, I don’t think the death penalty is an appropriate punishment, and they’re probably regretful.
    However, anyone with a functioning brain knows that drug smuggling and south-east Asia DONT MIX. They did this knowing the consequences they’d face.
    Now that they’ve faced justice, in two weeks there won’t be a sniff of this or any so-called repercussions for Indonesia in the media. And why?
    Because this whole media furor was just a SJW-driven storm created to make Indonesia look as if it was denying two victims of their apparently god-given right to escape from the consequences of their actions.

  21. I’m an Aussie and don’t get the outrage to be honest. I’m not pro death penalty by any means, I think it is barbaric. But with all the publicity cases like this have gotten in Australia over the past ten years, you would have to be living under a rock not to know how strict Indonesia is on drug trafficking. Part of taking the red pill is accepting that, just as women should be accountable for their actions, so should men. And at the end of the day, these guys are scumbag drug dealers. They are paying a massive price, but they were also seeking a massive reward from illegal activity. Drugs bring nothing but misery to so many people. It is their country, they set their rules, and if you travel there, you need to abide by them. Simple

    1. ‘outcasting’, or locking people in cages, is far more barbaric than killing them cleanly.

  22. If you go into a foreign country you should respect their laws. Especially if it involves the death penalty luls. I have no sympathy for those two.

  23. I think people in general fear justice because they know they deserve to be on the receiving end. SJWs cared in this case because they probably related to these guys in some way.

  24. Social Justice Warriors are all about defending “choice”, even if said choice is socially destructive – such as drug dealing. On the other hand, caring for the weak and destitute is not high on their list of priorities.

      1. Who’s coming for me and why? Now you’ve lost me. Oh now the government is coming for me because Indonesia executed some ethnic trash. Man, that is some Hall of Fame slippery slope stuff going.
        Footnote; Spain doesn’t have the death penalty. Let’s see what your huge brain makes of that.

        1. It’s about what Napolitano is saying. Pay attention next time.
          My take was never about those two. I don’t care about Indonesia. It’s their country, their law. You are the one bringing it back to them while I was talking about the death penalty in general, and the the death penalty in the United States in particular.

        2. I read Napolitano. You can’t just trot him out in any argument when you’re starting to feel like you’re out of your depth. It doesn’t work like that. Especially when it’s with someone who reads him.

  25. I abhor the death penalty, but not for the reasons most think.
    I want a criminal (and that damn well includes “white collar” criminals) under lockdown 23hrs a day, showers every other day, exercise in the yard (alone) every other day. The only (direct) contact with other people being the prison guards and lawyer visits. The TV (embedded) plays only educational programs or religious programs on a loop. No movies, TV shows, or commercials, nothing else.
    No freedom. No fancy meals (two menus: vegan or regular) nothing. Strict compliance or immediate punishment.
    Some people think this sounds easy, but it isn’t. The only person, other than your lawyer, you have contact with are the guards who are only allowed to speak to you to give orders that must be complied with immediately. Locked in a cage, just like an animal.

    1. So you are cruel and vindictive, and think that somehow makes a decent method of controlling crime?
      Kill the unrecoverable cleanly, and beat the recoverable with a whip to teach them not to repeat their crime. Pain works, and it works very well.

      1. Most of the movie is shit, but one part of Triple X I agreed with is this: You see a wild cat in a zoo, and you can see its broken. You can see it in the dead eyes, that have a flicker.
        I’m not looking to reform people, I’m looking to make examples. I want the convicted to live long, healthy, completely structured, bland, boring, unchanging lives. I want them to be examples, reform be damned. I want people to see them in the end, broken. The ones that get out of jail, they will (and should) be shells of people.

        1. I am looking to stop crime.
          I have BEEN in prison. even the worst prison does not break men… it makes them angry. It makes them rage, it destroys all those things which make them human, but it doesn’t break their spirit.
          If anything it reinforces the feeling that they ‘did nothing to deserve this’. It lasts too long, it turns contriteness into anger at the system. and in all reality, most people in prison do NOT deserve to be locked in a cage, and even if they did, it turns them into the very animals we do not wish them to be.
          I was only in for a few months (I committed no felony, it was a fuckup that was eventually fixed) but the scar it has left with me has left me permanently distrustful of cops even though I KNOW they are necessary to a free society. I cannot look at even an honest judge without desperately desiring to strangle the fucker until his eyes pop out of his head and he turns purple as his tongue swells and then turns black. My stint was the pivotal moment when I began seeking truth, vomited up the blue pill and regretfully swallowed the red.
          Of course I didn’t get raped while I was in (Most guys over 6’3″ that work out regularly and have lots of scars don’t… I was NOT going to tell them that most of those scars were the legacy of skateboarding without pads or a helmet in my teens) but I saw it happening to the bitches dozens of times.
          Most of the ‘crimes’ could have been handled easily with ten lashes, which would virtually ensure that the crime was never repeated, as well as giving a STRONG message to any potential criminals. Pain is a marvelous teacher, as evolution has created it to be.
          Of those animals, the unrepentant beasts were easy to note. Those individuals will NEVER be cured of being anything but a criminal… it’s pointless to incarcerate them, pointless to do anything to them but end their life quickly and cleanly so that they will cease to be a threat.
          But like I said before, those who cannot bear to see pain inflicted are the most vicious and cruel creatures on earth.

        2. Ahh, a romantic. I understand the allure, really, I do understand it. I also know it’s complete bullshiat.
          You can break people, and it’s not that hard despite what Hollywood (in general) puts out. Oh, it takes time, but everyone can be broken. Yes, me and you included. The proper application of dehumanization, rigorous (but utterly dull) routine, and best of all: only minimal physical violence in response to non-compliance.
          Prison offers (today) far too much human contact and freedom for it to work. Much like Orwell’s 1984 (or even that bit of truth in the mostly tripe V for Vendetta) people can be broken, completely but it requires strict controls to handle it. When a person walks out of prison, they should be a shell, a broken man or woman. They should not only fear being returned to hell on earth, but also fearful they might do something minor to end up causing it. They should fear everything short of breathing, every step, every look, as if they have an indelible scarlet letter tattooed on them, and a stone hanging on their neck.
          The problem with prisons today, as I said, is too much freedom and interaction. How’s a gang supposed to exist if there’s no contact. When even talking to your neighbor, or passing notes like a teenage girl in class, results in swift violence for non-compliance?
          It’s not cheap, believe me, but you want a deterrent? A deterrent destroys the person but leaves them alive to work a piss ass job after they get out. People see the broken, the dead eyes, the shattered “souls” and it generates fear.
          You calm me a sadist. Yes, towards criminals I have no empathy. I’m not taking about someone who got one too many parking tickets after all. I’m talking about the crook who pulled a liquor store hold-up. The crook who stole millions of dollars (or more!) from thousands of people using slick words and a suit making many homeless or broke. The murderer who killed another human being. Why should I have empathy for them, they get to go on living after all. I did not take away their life, which many of them did directly and indirectly. No, I support breaking them, turning them into pathetic shells, as punishment. There to live out a long, boring, slightly fearful, life until they die of old age as the cowards they are truly.
          Call me names all you like. Call me a monster, you wouldn’t be wrong. Claim the human spirit is indomitable with a straight face. Then tell me, down in your coldest fears, what you fear more than death. Odds are it is what I’ve (only circumspectly) described.

        3. “Yes, towards criminals I have no empathy. I’m not taking about someone who got one too many parking tickets after all. I’m talking about the crook who pulled a liquor store hold-up. The crook who stole millions of dollars (or more!) from thousands of people using slick words and a suit making many homeless or broke. The murderer who killed another human being.”
          I’d be with you if that’s what most people were in prison for. I’ve known a few people who went to prison, every one of them for some stupid drug offense. Something like 50% of the American prison population is there directly for drug offenses. In my total guesstimation, another 30% or so are there for crimes committed in the service of a drug habit. If you remove all the drug offenders, DUI offenders (those who caused no harm to others), prostitutes and other crimes with no victim, I’m all for your system.

  26. To the OP: Get lost with the concern trolling. These men are
    literally the only men that are scheduled to be executed in Australia
    this year.
    > Even if you abhor the death penalty, the amount
    of collective time and energy we can devote to social causes is finite.
    For instance, if you properly focus on preventing one or two instances
    of the death penalty, you naturally ignore a thousand similar cases,
    There aren’t a thousand similar cases.
    I’m not arguing for or against the death penatly. I’m just saying that if
    you’re against the death penalty, it makes sense to focus a lot on this
    story. It’s not ‘injustice’ at all.

  27. I seem to recall another Indonesian case where a model got caught with “party drugs” and suddenly “rehabilitated” became a “good” muslim girl, got off with 3 months in jail and within in minutes of boarding a plane heading out of the country she ditched the Muslim gear and the “party girl” was back. So to hear anyone especially the politically elite tell us these guys were “rehabilitated” is BS these guys have had years to play to the media and the amusing thing was on of them was quoted as saying “he didn’t believe they would be executed”.

  28. When it comes to police and government corruption Bali is right up there. The former Indonesian attorney for the two executed Australians alleges that the sentencing judges wanted $130,000 AUD to give them a prison term of less than 20 years.–and-then-more-explosive-bali-nine-bribe-allegations-20150426-1mtwc1.html
    Indonesian President Joko Widodo is really just a lackey for the Indonesian ruling party. Those executed were just political pawns in Indonesian politics.
    Andrew Chan and Myuran Sukumaran were not the drug masterminds that the Indonesian courts and the media have made then out to be. The man that police believe is the real ringleader has stopped his criminal activities as he apparently won $5 million in a lottery at about the time they received their death sentences. The irony. He was probably pissing himself laughing.
    In the drugs trade the low to middle operators are the ones who are usually caught. Those at the top always ensure there is enough distance between themselves and their activities to make prosecuting them very difficult.
    The two Australians were part of a group other Australians that became known as the ‘Bali 9’. Here is an overview of them:
    At the end of the day they chose to be drug traffickers is a country that has the death penalty for the offense. They took a roll of the dice and they lost.

  29. As an Australian, this is the best article on these 2 dills I’ve read. As time goes on I’m becoming more and more concerned and dismayed about my country. We really are just going to hell in a hand basket, and in true Aussie fashion we’re going to drag our feet doing it.

  30. Let’s kill some men or throw them in prison for drug possession because the government says drugs are bad mmmmmkay. Some blue pill shit if I’ve ever seen it. The war on drugs is a joke.

    1. “Drugs are bad” is NOT the point of the article – not even close! If this needs to be explained to you, you really ought to re-read what the man has written. These people knew the risks, took their chances, got away with it a few times and then got caught. No one forced them to do this, and a tremendous amount of time and energy has been spent on them that could be better spent elsewhere.

    1. There it is. You’re doing maintenance work on your own ego with your ‘complex’ (messy), canard-filled thoughts. ZERO MONEY. Case closed. The rest is you staring at yourself in the mirror.

  31. I’m in Bali now and I will say this. If you smuggle drugs into or out of this country you will likely get caught and be executed.
    They made a bet and lost. They played Russian roulette and might as well have fired the gun themselves.
    The payoff would have been huge had they made it past security but they didn’t.
    My convictions don’t allow me to endorse the death penalty but I also defer to a nation’s laws and support the steadfast resolve of the Indonesian president for not caving to the Western nations. Human rights do not mean rights from consequences for actions that are done for greed.
    One thing that I noted though was that the chick wasn’t executed. While I’m glad she wasn’t, this is an example of female privilege. In Singapore, only men can be caned. You can even get caned for grabbing a chicks ass. If she grabs yours, no problem.

  32. Also, if you want to become a drug dealer, just move to Mexico. No death penalty for traffickers. The traffickers just kill you.

  33. You forgot to mention: Where’s the sympathy for all the Australians whose lives were destroyed by heroin addiction???

  34. They can MAKE money for the society by using forced labor on them.. Would that solve your problem? Bet you didn’t see this one coming.

  35. Doing drugs doesn’t make you a victim of your drug dealer, drug dealers dont victimize anybody.

  36. Go ahead, boycott Bali
    Australian fags trying to project their anglosphere ethics onto non-western countries. That’s precisely the kind of western cancer i’m always talking about
    In China Chan would’ve been executed with no news media fanfare, that’s how it should be

  37. The whole business is just Nationalism. Indonesia and Australia, well, there’s sometimes a little friction there.

  38. I’m entirely at peace with many Asian countries police of applying the Death Penalty for drug smugglers. Why? Two words; Opium Wars.
    If you examine the history of the Opium Wars over the past 200 years, you’ll see how the drugs that the British, Dutch, Portuguese, and even Japanese imported into China, Malaysia, Indonesia, and elsewhere devastated these Asian societies.
    You even had moral reptiles as far back in the 19th century using the some of the same excuses as you hear from Libertarians now. “Oh, no one is forcing the Chinese to smoke opium”, “The Chinese love opium!!! In fact, they’re predisposed to it!!!”, and even “Opium isn’t any worse than any other drug like alcohol!!!”
    Asia has some horrific history with drugs. They’re entirely correct to deal with it as harshly as possible. Including Caning. Including the Death Penalty.
    I wish the US would do the same.

  39. Eh, convict them and let em hang. That rope can be used over and over again. Saves time, money and space.
    Why are we spending money keeping these perps alive?

  40. Quote: Two Self-Confessed Drug Ringleaders Are Enjoying Mass Public Sympathy
    I live down under & in my speaking to the people here I have to meet yet one, who has any sympathy for those two P.O.S. Had few comments about blaming Indonesia of keeping those two P.O.S. for ten years on death row instead of executing them shortly after sentence passed by the Court !
    BTW It’s only the P.O.S. in the media & politics crying their eyes out & of course the lawyers having the gravy train stopped !
    P.O.S.= Piece of Shit !

  41. Like most things the Australian government does, their reaction was driven by the media attention the story was receiving. The media sensationalises any story no matter how trivial that they believe will generate the most interest and make the most money out of with the least possible effort. They give with thought about the social importance of the story.

Comments are closed.