Capital Punishment | Should Capital Punishment be Abolished?

Capital Punishment | Should Capital Punishment be Abolished? Death sentence being one of the harshest punishments known to man has taken a gradual humanized change over the years. Being a mode of punishment prominently followed in most parts of the world has now been abolished in many countries because of a wave of abolishment initiated a few decades back. India seems to be stuck between the global trend to end death penalty and the nations that is still follow. It has taken a very safe ground by giving a minimal provision and leaving it to the discretion of the judiciary to award the punishment in special circumstances. The aim of this paper is to analyze whether capital punishment should be banned or not? While considering the historical as well as present scenario of capital punishment and comparing with other countries where it has been abolished. Introduction Capital punishment is the practice of executing someone as punishment for a specific crime after a proper legal trial. It is usually only used as a punishment for particularly serious types of murder, but in some countries treason, types of fraud, adultery and rape are capital crimes.  [1]  In Indian the traditional way of awarding this punishment is handing by the neck till the death of the criminal. In other countries, shooting, electric chair, etc,are the various devices used for the purpose. The term capital originates from capitalis, literally regarding the head (Latin caput). Hence, a capital crime was originally one punished by the severing of the head.  [2]   Amongst democratic countries today, it is rare to find capital punishment being practiced. In fact, Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, and the U.S. are the only ones who still have the death penalty. However, it is mainly found in poor, undemocratic and authoritarian states that the death penalty is still being used, and usually as a means of political oppression. The European Union and the Council of Europe refuses its member states to practice the death penalty, or at least desire them to show that they no longer actively practice it (i.e. a moratorium). Although the United States had suspended executions in 1973, they resumed them in 1977. However, not all the states perform capital punishment, with at least 12 of them having banned it at the time of writing? Most of the countries except China, a few countries in South Africa and Belarus in Europe, have moved towards abolishing death penalty  [3]  . Though being a member of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights which is adopted by the United Nations and stands to bring countries to abolish death penalty, India has not taken this important step to abolish such a grave punishment. Capital punishment is nothing but judicial murder, it is said, especially when an innocent life is destroyed. Besides this, capital punishment, as is generally supposed, is not deterrent. Murders and other heinous crimes have continued unabated, in spite of it. The result of such views has been that in recent years there has been an increasing tendency in western countries to award life imprisonment instead of capital punishment. Muslims countries, to be more serve in this respect. Despite frequent demands from all society Indian has not so far abolished capital punishment. But even in India there has been a decline in the frequency of such punishment. It is now awarded only in cases of hardened criminals and only when it is established that the murder was not the result of a momentary impulse, the result of serious provocation, but well-planned and cold-blooded. In such cases, it is felt that nothing else than capital punishment would be executed for that crime. Those who indulge in anti-social and sternest possible measures should be taken against them, specially when they are habitual offenders. India has not so far abolished capital punishment but used it more judiciously. Sociologists are of the view that capital punishment serves no useful purpose. By sending the criminals to gallows, we in no way help or provide relief to the family of the murdered. The sociologists, therefore, suggest that the murderer should be sentenced for life to work and support the family of murdered person as well as his own. In this way, innocent women and children would be saved from much suffering, hunger and starvation.  [4]   Philosophers view on capital punishment According, to Kants view no state can exist if there is no law and if there is no law then there is no society and no state. Therefore legislation of law is necessary. Therefore by Kants view if a person has violated such laws by doing a crime then a person who has violated such law must be punished. According to Kant punishment is a legal act that definitely has a certain basis. This basis is a crime. If there is no crime there must be no punishment. Punishment of innocent people is a result of a worthless legislation; this means that the legal system is unable to establish guilt and make a differentiation between innocent people and criminals.  [5]  Kants opinion towards death penalty is justified only if there is a murder. According to him if there is a murder then he must die. Theory of punishment:- by both H.L.A Hart and (1959) in England and John Rawls (1955) in the United States. Defining the concept of punishment must be kept distinct from justifying punishment. A definition of punishment is, or ought to be, value-neutral, at least to the extent of not incorporating any norms or principles that surreptitiously tend to justify whatever falls under the definition itself. To put this another way, punishment is not supposed to be justified, or even partly justified, by packing its definition in a manner that virtually guarantees that whatever counts as punishment is automatically justified. (Conversely, its definition ought not to preclude its justification.)  [6]   Historical Background Capital punishment is regarded as one of the severest form of punishment in the history of mankind. During the medieval era, capital punishment was sentenced even for extremely trivial and inconsequential matter or in other words we can say that they were executed for minor crimes such as stealing, cheating or even trespassing. Also, the methods of administering death penalty were immensely harsh and gruesome. Most historical records and various primitive tribal practices indicate that the death penalty was a part of their justice system. This was the only method for them to provide justice for every crime done by a person. However, during medieval times the capital punishment was rather insensitive. The punishment which was given to the accused cant be compare to the act which has been done by accused. One of the oldest methods of practicing capital punishment was hanging. This method was originated from Persia and was restricted only for male criminals. The method was considered to be comparatively less harsh as it was relatively simpler with no involvement of blood. This form of punishment is prevalent to date in countries such as Singapore, Japan, India, Pakistan and three states in US.  [7]   In the earlier time death penalty laws can be found in the Code of King Hammaurabi of Babylon (18th century BCE), in which death penalty was given for different crimes. But in the Draconian Code of Athens (7th century BCE), times where every crime was punishable by death and was the most extreme capital systems in ancient times. Later on under Roman law in the 5th century BCE, a person could even be sentenced to death for simply writing an insulting song  [8]  . The Romans also used it for a wide range of offenses, though citizens were exempted for a short time during the republic. It also has been sanctioned at one time or another by most of the worlds major religions. In medieval and early modern Europe the death penalty was largely used as a generalized form of punishment, and often accompanied by torture. Similarly, in medieval and early modern Europe, before the development of modern prison systems, the death penalty was also used as a generalised form of punishment. For example, in 1700s Britain there were 222 crimes which were punishable by death, including crimes such as cutting down a tree or stealing an animal.  [9]  Thanks to the notorious Bloody Code, 18th century (and early 19th century) Britain was a hazardous place to live. For example, Michael Hammond and his sister, Ann, whose ages were given as 7 and 11, were reportedly hanged at Kings Lynn on Wednesday, September 28, 1708 for theft. The local press did not, however, consider the executions of two children newsworthy.  [10]   Present scenario But the time has changed now, the judiciary in most countries has adopted a more civilized attitude towards this punishment and death penalty is reserved for extremely heinous crimes. Three quarters of executions worldwide occur in Asia. 95% of Asians live in jurisdictions that carry out capital punishment. China alone accounts for 90% of all executions in Asia. The country executed approximately 5000 people in 2008. Thats a rate per capita dozens of times higher than in the U.S., and yet its a steep drop for the numbers of some decades earlier. India is also retentionist (meaning the opposite of abolitionist) but only executed one person in the first decade of the new millennium. Singapore used to kill a similar proportion of its citizens as China, but the rate has dropped recently. Japan, on the contrary, is executing more and more people. Saudi Arabia is known for its particularly gruesome methods  [11]   We can see from the above graph there is lot of change in figures earlier only death penalty was sentenced as compared to medieval times. Pakistan , U.S. and China are at the highest peak. Pakistan and china are the main contributors in increasing the percentage of death penalty in Asia. The most recent executions in South Korea took place in December 1997, when 23 people were executed at short notice on the same day. Similarly, nineteen executions occurred in 1995 and 15 in 1994, in each instance occurring all on the same day. No executions have occurred since 1998, but this de facto suspension has not been reinforced by law. Since 1999, lawmakers have thrice endorsed a bill favoring life imprisonment without parole in place of the death penalty, but each time the proposal has stalled and failed to move forward. The need remains to develop a culturally appropriate pro-abolition argument that could persuade the Korean public that the death penalty is unworkable and wrong. On 21 January 2007, in the Inhyeokdang case, the Korean Court acquitted 8 persons who had been executed 32 years earlier. The hope is that, in light of strong arguments based on the risk to innocent persons and the irreversibility of capital punishment, Korea will effectively transition from de fact o to formal abolition. Capital Punishment should be banned or not? Most of the people now feel that punishment for crimes like murders should not be death but some re formative or deterrent sentence. Death sentence cannot reform a criminal since once dead he cannot be reformed. The governments, which have abolished death sentence, find that there is no increase in the number of murders in the countries after the abolition. Some social reformers still feel that life imprisonment is a more severe kind of punishment. However, capital punishment puts an end to the criminals life, life imprisonment forces him to spend his whole life within the boundaries of a prison. Over 37 countries have already abolished the death sentence and the after-effects of it have not been harmful. India, which is the birthplace of great luminaries, should also abolish death sentence and replace it with some other kind of punishment, which aims to abolish crime, not merely kill criminals.  [12]   In India, capital punishment is granted for different crimes, counting murder, initiating a childs suicide, instigating war against the government, acts of terrorism, or a second evidence for drug trafficking. Death penalty is officially permitted though it should be used in the rarest of rare cases as per the judgement of Supreme Court of India. Amongst the retentionist countries around the world, India has the lowest execution rate with just 55 people executed since independence in 1947.  [13]   In the case of Bachan Singh v State of Punjab  [14]  , wherein a Constitutional Bench with a 4:1 majority upheld the constitutional validity of death penalty and the scope of the provision which enabled the imposition of death penalty. Justice Bhagwati took a dissenting opinion and held that the death sentence is unconstitutional and violative of Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India. laws which are to be used to avoid and prevent people from committing such offences and not to take the life a person using the same laws. The State has no right to take the life of a person. India according to me should abolish death sentence. Article 14 and 21 of the Indian Constitution provides for Right to equality before law and protection of life and personal liberty respectively. Article 14 states, The state shall not deny to any person equality before the law or the equal protection of the laws within the territory of India  [15]  . And Article 21 states, No person shall be deprived of his life or personal liberty except according to procedure established by law  [16]  . If a procedure of law itself takes a life of a person, who is to be blamed, and who should be punished for it? Is it fair to kill a person? If not, what is the difference between a murderer and the society who takes the life of a murderer by sentencing him to death? In a landmark case of Bachan Singh vs. State of Punjab  [17]  , a panel of four judges of the Supreme Court upheld the constitutional validity of death penalty but Justice Bhagwati differed in his opinion. The four judge panel led by Chief Justice Y.V. Chandrachud suggested a set of guidelines for determining the aggravating circumstances which would warrant the imposition of death penalty and other mitigating circumstances for awarding the lesser punishment of imprisonment for life. Further, the Supreme Court held that the aggravating circumstances which result in special reasons as per the Criminal Procedure Code must be considered to be sentenced to death. And finally held that death sentence should be imposed only in Rarest of Rare cases. The death sentence as a punishment can also have a deterrent effect against the potential murderers. But J. Bhagwati argues that death sentence will have a greater deterrent effect as opposed to the life sentence. J. Bhagwati enriches the court with various scholars over the world who would agree with his opinion and this very opinion has favored the abolition of death penalty in their countries. He says it is not a rational conviction but merely an unreasoned belief which is entertained by some people including a few penologists, judges, jurists and legislators that death penalty has a uniquely deterrent effect  [18]  . Reference was also made to the Fifty Fourth Law Commission report  [19]  which also took a view that death sentence acts as a deterrent. It says that every human being dreads death suggesting that death sentence had a greater deterrent effect than other punishments. As the punishment is more deterrent than others it becomes arbitrary and unreasonable and viol ates article 14 ad 21 of the Constitution. Therefore it should be not be completely abolished. Hence, it should be executed only in rarest of rare cases. Conclusion Death penalty is the harshest of punishments provided in the IPC, which involves the judicial killing or taking the life of the accused as a form of punishment  [20]  . It is a mode of punishment which extinguishes the life of an accused. In India, death sentence has gone through a number of changes but still remains as the harshest punishment. It is the punishment for murdering another human being. It is true that killing someone is cruel, but it is also not reasonable for a society to kill someone. The only difference between these is that the accused in a murder case is punished by the society but there is no one to punish the society. The rule of law is set up to protect and regulate both the society as well as the people in the society. In conclusion, I feel that death penalty should be completely abolished. Though I am also morally against death penalty this analysis has made my views even stronger. But it should be executed only in the rarest of rare case like there is nothing else left instead of capital punishment for giving justice to someone. The views suggested by philosophers also suggest the same meaning that it should be executed only in the case of murder or we can say that in the rarest of rare cases.

The Importance of Duncan’s Murder in Macbeth Essay -- Macbeth essays

The Importance of Duncan’s Murder in Macbeth  Ã‚        Ã‚  Ã‚   In Shakespeare’s Macbeth, the repercussions of Macbeth murdering his King are very numerous. Through themes that include, imagery, soliloquies, atmosphere, and supernatural beings, Shakespeare enforces the magnitude of Macbeth’s crime. Most of these factors are linked together. One of the main ways in which the horror of the murder is underlined is through the Great Chain of Being. At the time this play was written, it was believed that there was a hierarchy in the universe, with God being at the top, then angels, then the King, then man, and finally animals. This meant that the King was God’s representative on earth, and so if a rebel were to attack the King, he would be seen to be attacking and rebelling against God. This is seen in Act One, Scene Two, when the Thane of Cawdor rebels against King Duncan, where the Sergeant says – â€Å"Ship wracking storms and direful thunders break† (L.26). This thunderous weather symbolizes God’s anger at his representative of Scotland being attacked. The darkness during the play (all but two of the scenes are set in darkness) shows how the night is strangling the earth, representing the anger of God at the events in Scotland. The â€Å"Dark night strangles† (Act Two, Scene Four, Line Seven) the earth, showing God’s, overall grip on the world. The King at this time had an absolute monarchy (power of life and death over everyone in his kingdom). The belief was that God had passed special powers to all Kings, such as that for healing, which Malcolm identifies in Edward the Confessor (the King of England) in Act Four, Scene Three – â€Å"He cures†¦the healing benediction†¦he hath a heavenly gift of prophecy† (L.152-157). Shakespeare later uses Edwa... ...elm.   Criticism on Shakespeare s Tragedies . A Course  Ã‚  Ã‚   of Lectures on Dramatic Art and Literature. London: AMS Press, Inc., 1965.  Ã‚   Shakespeare, William.   Tragedy of Macbeth . Ed. Barbara Mowat and Paul  Ã‚   Warstine. New York: Washington Press, 1992.  Ã‚  Ã‚   Steevens, George. Shakespeare, The Critical Heritage. Vol. 6. London:  Ã‚   Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1981.  Ã‚   T.W. Shakespeare, the Critical Heritage. Vol. 5. London: Routledge & Kegan  Ã‚   Paul, 1979.  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   Wills, Gary. Witches & Jesuits. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1995.     Epstein, Norrie, The Friendly Shakepeare, New York, Viking Publishing, 1993. Harbage, Alfred, Macbeth, Middlesex England, Penguin Publishing, 1956. Magill, Masterplots- Volume 6, New Jersey, Salem Press, 1949. Staunten, Howard, The Complet Illustrated Shakespeare, New York, Park Lane Publishing, 1979.      

The roles of pride and prejudice in Pride and Prejudice Essay -- Jane

Becoming an immediate success in the contemporary novel public in early nineteenth century, Pride and Prejudice has proved to be the most popular of Jane Austen's novels and remains a classic masterpiece two centuries later. The title itself describes the underlying theme of the book. Pride and prejudice, intimately related in the novel, serve as challenges to the cherished love story of Darcy and Elizabeth. It is interesting to see how these two nice people were blinded before realizing that they are an ideal couple. Material for situations, characters and themes in Jane Austen?s novels are founded in her own surroundings ? countryside, parishes, neighborhood. Although written in her early twenties, Pride and Prejudice reflects Austen?s thorough understandings of her society on the matters of money, marriage, behaviors and love. Let us look at the general ideas of what pride is and what prejudice is. Pride is a strong sense of self-respect, rather is to think of oneself higher than anyone and everyone else and prejudice is a partiality that prevents objective consideration of an issue or situation. The novel was originally entitled First Impressions, which significantly contributes to the love story of Darcy and Elizabeth the way it goes. Pride and prejudice in the novel are all based upon the first impressions the two characters got from each other. Darcy, a quiet and rather cold noble man with large estates, is too proud of his position to pay attention to Elizabeth who is of poor social status while Elizabeth, a lively, pretty and clever girl, has prejudice against Darcy?s proud behaviors. It is in their first meeting pride and prejudice have shaped their relationship as it goes on later. Contrary to his wish, Darcy fa... ...hen Darcy puts aside his vanity to pursue his treasured love and Elizabeth is no longer too prejudiced to understand his feelings and behaviours, they are perfectly matched. I believe that they would share a happy life together, because their love comes from the appreciation of dignity, not money nor social position nor anything else of material values. Darcy and Elizabeth?s love seems to imply that Jane Austen views love as something independent from social conventions. There are nothing so powerful difficulties to their relationship as their own pride and prejudice. Once these internal obstacles fade away, they obviously become an ideal couple. They are equal in intellect, have attraction and tender love for each other, empathy and romance. With the central characters? beautiful love, Jane Austen suggests that you should only marry someone who is your soulmate.

George Melies Tripto the Moon :: essays papers

George Melies Tripto the Moon In the early 1900’s Georges Melies introduced his film â€Å"A Trip To The Moon† to audiences in France. This film, when first seen by viewers at this time, was jawdropping. Melies who happened to be a magician, and illusionist before becoming a filmmaker, made one of the first-ever narratives in motion picture history. Similarily throughout â€Å"Trip To The Moon† and many of his later films, Melies, who also worked in theatre, took full advantage of what is known as Mise-en-scene. Mise-en-scene is defined as: All the elements placed in front of the camera to be photographed: the settings and props, lighting, costumes and make-up, and figure behavior. In â€Å"Trip to the Moon† Melies created a world to which no one had ever seen on film, and utilized all the characteristics to which mise-en-scene is based upon. In probably using only one camera for his film, Melies had to basically film in a theater style setting. Almost every shot of the film is a long shot which is taken from the audiences’ point-of-view angle. There were no close-ups in â€Å"Trip To The Moon† no dolly shots, or handheld shots..etc. Throughout the film the same angle and longshot is used, however that does not take away from the film, knowing that he could only utilize this shot, Melies went on to first: Decorate his set like no one had ever seen. For instance in the beginning of the film we can see what looks like an abundance of individuals who seemed to be gathered in what resembles a castle of some sort. This is where the so-called â€Å"wizards† have gathered and have figured out to take their trip to the moon. The following scene shows us a large cannon type figure, an extremely large cannon to be exact, very abnormal looking. The concept of space travel at this time was unheard of and thi s being a silent film, allows us to realize that just by looking at this contraption that this is how they are going to get to the moon. It is by these elements that Melies utilizes mise-en-scen, and in other cases such as the rocky hills of the moon, the bullet shaped space-ship that encapsulates the wizards and sends them on their trip. The costumes of the actors that are used in the film also give us the feeling that these folks are not from our time, but we can identify with their â€Å"wizardly† presence.

Should Cars be more Efficient Essay -- Transportation, Automobile Indu

Should Cars Be More Efficient? Since the industrial revolution, huge steps have been made in terms of discovering and utilizing new technologies and different types of fuel for the purposes of transportation. Before the advent of the modern automobile, the widely used means of transport were horses, carriages, and walking by foot. These means of transport posed major challenges due to the fact that transporting supplies from one warehouse to another was difficult. However, with the introduction of the first car, it was a great reap forward towards eliminating most of the transportation hurdles. The advent of automobiles was accompanied by a corresponding need to consume more fuel in form of oil and gas. At first, the environmental impact of emissions from vehicles was not felt as it could not be detected within a scope of a few years. However, the cumulative effects of the emissions from vehicles on the environment have led to the phenomenon global warming. The resultant heated debate has been whether stakeholders in the automobile industry and governments should strive to make cars more fuel-efficient. This paper expounds on whether investments are worth being made towards making cars more efficient in a bid to reduce the degree of pollution coming from current types of cars. In addition, it argues whether the focus ought to be making cars with a motive to make profit. In effect, the general idea presented in the paper is which ought to be the best way of ensuring that vehicles produced are efficient for individuals, the environment, and the economy at large. It is no doubt that automobiles have become a way of life in the current society besides the transport sector contributing immensely to the economic growth of every cou... ...n the auto industry, the government, consumers, and environmentalists have indispensable roles to play in fulfilling this agenda. Though some opponents of this idea have cited a potential lack of a ready market, it is clear from the discussion that resources can be marshaled towards making new cars affordable. Efficient cars will promote clean and efficient transportation. Alternatives such as hybrid and electric vehicles and technologies such as aerodynamics and direct injection gas engines can be harnessed to make this venture a reality. The economy would benefit a great deal from saving a lot of money that goes into oil importation and many job opportunities would be created. The costs that have resulted from the impacts of global warming are an enormous burden to the economy. It would be a relief to the economy if more efficient cars are produced. Should Cars be more Efficient Essay -- Transportation, Automobile Indu Should Cars Be More Efficient? Since the industrial revolution, huge steps have been made in terms of discovering and utilizing new technologies and different types of fuel for the purposes of transportation. Before the advent of the modern automobile, the widely used means of transport were horses, carriages, and walking by foot. These means of transport posed major challenges due to the fact that transporting supplies from one warehouse to another was difficult. However, with the introduction of the first car, it was a great reap forward towards eliminating most of the transportation hurdles. The advent of automobiles was accompanied by a corresponding need to consume more fuel in form of oil and gas. At first, the environmental impact of emissions from vehicles was not felt as it could not be detected within a scope of a few years. However, the cumulative effects of the emissions from vehicles on the environment have led to the phenomenon global warming. The resultant heated debate has been whether stakeholders in the automobile industry and governments should strive to make cars more fuel-efficient. This paper expounds on whether investments are worth being made towards making cars more efficient in a bid to reduce the degree of pollution coming from current types of cars. In addition, it argues whether the focus ought to be making cars with a motive to make profit. In effect, the general idea presented in the paper is which ought to be the best way of ensuring that vehicles produced are efficient for individuals, the environment, and the economy at large. It is no doubt that automobiles have become a way of life in the current society besides the transport sector contributing immensely to the economic growth of every cou... ...n the auto industry, the government, consumers, and environmentalists have indispensable roles to play in fulfilling this agenda. Though some opponents of this idea have cited a potential lack of a ready market, it is clear from the discussion that resources can be marshaled towards making new cars affordable. Efficient cars will promote clean and efficient transportation. Alternatives such as hybrid and electric vehicles and technologies such as aerodynamics and direct injection gas engines can be harnessed to make this venture a reality. The economy would benefit a great deal from saving a lot of money that goes into oil importation and many job opportunities would be created. The costs that have resulted from the impacts of global warming are an enormous burden to the economy. It would be a relief to the economy if more efficient cars are produced.

Crossing the Rubicon Essay

Crossing the Rubicon By: Emalie Von Douche In Crossing the Rubicon: The Decline of the American Empire at he End of the Age of Oil, there are three main points where Mr. Ruppert tries to blame the entire tradjety of September 11, 2001, better known as 9/11, on the acting Vice President at the time, Dick Cheney. At first glance this seems to be a bold if not insane accusation against the Vice President of the United States of America, but Ruppert does make a few points that will make you think. The first point of Ruppert is Dick Cheney had the Ability to pull off this plan if he wanted to. According to Ruppert, Cheney was acting as Commander in Chief on 9/11 due to the terrible threat on the United States. This means he was in control and was calling the shots. Ruppert also has reason to believe that Cheney was leading a â€Å"completely separate chain of Command & Control via the Secret Service, assuring the paralysis of Air Force response on 9/11. The Secret Service has the technology to see the same radar screens the FAA sees in real time. (Kane) Ruppert claims that President Bush was kept out of a leadership position on purpose by the Secret Service men around him as he was reading to school children the morning of 9/11. He also claims that the Secret Service, acting through Cheney, had control over the FAA, Airforce (including the Fighter Jets), and President Bush. One question I would ask Ruppert is â€Å"Why? † Why would Cheney and the Secret Service go throu gh all of this trouble to attack his own country? The answer, according to Ruppert, is simply Oil. Cheney’s plan was to start a never-ending war to take control of the Middle Eastern oil and use it for American purposes. Ruppert claims that there was a peak in the oil reserves around the world from 2000-2007. After 2007, oil will become more rare and extremely more expensive. â€Å"By way of confirmation, people in and close to the oil industry are reporting that increased drilling is not resulting as yet in significantly increased supply. † (Ruppert) Upon hearing of this news, Cheney had to go into action. He just needed the right time to plan his so called â€Å"Attack†. According to Ruppert, the â€Å"right time† was any time that Cheney chose because as of May 8, 2001, Dick Cheney was put into control of all training exercises of all branches of military and government. This means he could set up â€Å"fake† hijackings by calling them training situations just in case anyone would ever want to hijack airplanes and fly them into buildings. Cheney did call for these training simulations, except he did it on the morning of 9/11. Also, Cheney called for another training simulation that send all the fighters from D. C. into Canada and Alaska to train just incase an attack came from Russia. This meant that the Air Force could not do anything to prevent the hijacked airplanes from crashing into anything they pleased. Also, the Secret Service had control over the FAA flight path screens and put fake hijacked airplanes in the air to confuse air traffic control. At one point the FAA thought there was 11 hijacked airplanes. All of this was put into motion by Dick Cheney and people taking orders from Cheney. He is guilty for singlehandedly putting this plan into motion and being successful. The scary part if these accusations by Ruppert are true, is that Bush and Cheney were re-elected the following term.

Politics In The Way Of Life Essay

Should religious beliefs shape how politics are conducted in the contemporary world? Does violence have a role in politics? Should animals as well as humans be represented in politics? What do bodies and sexuality have to do with politics? â€Å"Politics is the science of a good living. † It is man who has to decide on the way he wants to live. However every human being is influenced by his religious, social and sexual beliefs nomatter where or how he starts his political way of living. Do you think politics should be mixed with religion? Religion and politics are completely different and should not be mixed with each other. All men and women are to be treated equally irrespective of the caste or the religion that they belong to. Every person has the right to follow his own religion and to carry forward his beliefs in his society. But when his beliefs and religion is such that it affects or hurts the feelings rather beliefs of his own neighbours or fellow human beings it becomes politics. No man has the right to affect the feelings of another in any case. If man believes in God, he surely should believe in peace with fellow human beings. But when does this happen? How do religious beliefs turn to politics? When does a person start hurting the feelings of his own fellow human beings? Religion greatly influences a man sensually that is his heart and mind. Thus the misunderstandings and misconception of religions leads to a difference of opinion between people thus leading to indifferences in their opinions thereby leading to mutual quarrel. Coming to the influence of the society and social beliefs on politics. It is the society that has created politics. Politics is for the people, by the people and of the people. All the rules and policies right from the human right to social equality politics affects the way of life of every individual. Next the truth that every living being, including animals have their influence in politics. Killing specific animals is a crime, hurting any animal is a crime. It is for the protection of animals that societies like blue cross have been developed. When killing an animal is punishable, it is glad that politics helps even animals live peacefully until they are not harmful to the human beings. Thus politics is the way of good living. It is the science of kinship. A life without politics would be unorderly and miserable. Politics forms the basis of life. Thus good politics forms the basis of a good life.