I would appreciate a critique on a post I made in Al Jazeera.

[defacto7]

I have been keeping a eye on Al Jazeera lately and I have found the news source pretty reasonable. Bu I just replied to a post about the sentencing of the Ft. Hood shooter and it was removed by moderators. I'm a little perplexed as to the reason for it's removal. I can make up scenarios but they are all pretty meager. I have no reason to defend my post here because I don't think there is anything to defend. But if anyone has any input as to why this may not be suitable to that particular site I would like to hear it.

Article: Ft. Hood shooter sentenced to death.

The original comment:

Issam Benmbarek1 hour ago
Ft. Hood Soldier shooter sentenced to death because he is Muslim, Another US Soldier committed a horible crime when he had to shoot families down while they were a sleep, eating in their home got Life sentence because he is not Muslim.
Next time you want to commite a crime, make sure you convert to non Muslim Religion, you have a better chance to get better sentencing!

My reply to commenter: (as I remember it)

When you add information that is not based on reality you polarize people and incite religious hatred. Life in prison without parole is much worse than a death sentence. Death is easy, life without parole is not. There may be better examples of religious bigotry to choose from but this is not one of them.

............

any critique that may enlighten me? I will listen.

[bravenak]

1. This is tough.

Switch Muslim for black and I would emphatically agree with the poster. And the death penalty is not handed out evenly across all demographics. If you are a minority you are more likely to get the death penalty than if you are white in the United States of America. I have never seen any stats based on religion demographics.
I think it may have been the part where you say ' life in prison without parole is much worse than a death sentence, death is easy, life without parole is not.'
That's debateable but I don't think they wanted you to debate that.
I don't think death is easy, most people fight it with every breath of their being. Most people would choose life without parole. People will rat their friends out to spare themselves from the death penalty.
It's like you're saying that he guy who is going to live has it harder than the guy who is going to die.
That's just my interpretation. Don't be mad.

[defacto7]

3. Thanks for the input.

n/t

[azurnoir]

2. well explain why the guy who shoot 19 civilians (in Afghanistan)

gets life, while the Fort Hood shooter gets the death penalty
seems some lives have more worth than others, in any event

[defacto7]

4. That's not what I'm asking but thanks.

I was wondering why the reply was not suited for Al Jazeera. The point itself certainly can be debated but that's not why it was deleted... or was it?

Why would they delete that opinion or wording?

[azurnoir]

5. perhaps because you said the person you were replying to was being bigoted?

actually I'm not familiar with Al Jezeera's policies when it comes to comments, so that's just a guess

[defacto7]

6. They do have a policy and I read through it.

I still didn't see a problem.

Did I call him bigoted? I didn't, but you know it could be construed that way. What I meant was, and it's supported in the context, that if he was looking for bigotry in the judicial system he wouldn't find it in this report. My words do actually say that but if someone was looking for insults, I suppose it could be tilted to say that.

It goes to show that a person has to be very clear beyond normal language usage if you don't want to be put into the wrong context. That may be it.

[WatermelonRat]

11. If I recall correctly

it was part of a plea bargain. He'd plead guilty and cooperate in exchange for the death penalty option being shelved.

That Hasan is utterly unapologetic (whereas Roger Bales at least pretended to be remorseful) might have been a factor too. Oh, and Texas! Can't forget that this is Texas we're talking about.

[defacto7]

7. Just to follow up.... I was too ambiguous.

I meant to say that if he was looking for bigotry in the judicial system he wouldn't find it in this report.

I guess it was a call they made because it could have meant I was calling someone a bigot which I did not. How people see things is a real tell isn't it. I had better be careful.

And thanks, azurnoir.

[King_David]

8. Why you posting this in this forum ?

[defacto7]

9. I wanted to get a middle eastern perspective on a

comment I posted that was removed from Al Jazeera. I didn't see a problem with the post but I now see it was my ambiguity that caused it. Having it removed made me wonder if my wording was inappropriate in middle eastern terms. It was a guess as to whether I should choose this forum or GD. But General Discussion didn't seem the best choice for a realistic critique and I really wanted to figure this out.

I hope I was not out of line posting it here?

[bemildred]

10. It's not you.

Nothing there that should be deleted. I can think of various misunderstandings of what you said, but they are all that, errors.

You could try putting it like this: If the US government gets pissed off at you, not being a muslim won't save your ass, just look at Snowden and Manning.

And seriously, I agree with that sentiment, it's about money, not religion, that is the first thing to get through your head, as long as you think it's about some religion, you are confused, our religion is power and money.

[leftynyc]

12. It's very simple really

The solider sentenced to life agreed to a plea deal in order to take the death penalty off the table. Fort Hood shooter did everything in his own power (including defending himself) in order to make sure he got the death penalty. I wouldn't have given it to him as I have no desire to make him a martyr. I would have given him life in supermax and left him to rot. But the two situations are completely different.