[url=http://edition.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/meast/11/05/dujail.saddam/index.html]Breaking news
Saddam Hussein sentenced to death by hanging[/url]
Too bad so few murderous dictators meet the same fate.
Well, I can’t really say that it was an impartial trial. But if what I know about the case is true, then it should have been easy to convict him at an impartial trial.
Is Bush far behind?
So many things they could have chosen from, from the gassing of the kurds, the war on Iran… and in the end they dragged it on for months, half his lawyers get shot, they change the judge, a joke of a trial. Too bad it’s not going to change anything over there.
Don’t forget the appeals process. This will go for a while longer yet.
I didn’t think Saddam was into begging the court’s pardon. Disrupting it is more his style…
I didn’t think Saddam was into begging the court’s pardon. Disrupting it is more his style…[/quote]
The appeal is automatic, in this case, TTBOMU.
I didn’t think Saddam was into begging the court’s pardon. Disrupting it is more his style…[/quote]
The appeal is automatic, in this case, TTBOMU.[/quote]
???
‘Crimes Against Humanity’
As a fomer cold warrior, I find the specious and disingenuous manner in which this lofty ideal is pursued highly circumspect. If only it was to be the case that it could be applied to it’s logical extension, but that would be a real house of cards vs domino theory paradigm.
Yet of course in the history of our puny bipedal existence, it’s not done in that matter. To the Victor goes the Spoils. And that’s one reason they call it HisStory.
Another One Bites The Dust.
[quote=“TheGingerMan”] To the Victor goes the Spoils. And that’s one reason they call it HisStory.
[/quote]
Actually the term is derived from the greek for “net.” The “his story” thing was just a bit of nonsense the fems whipped up back in the day.
[quote=“bob”][quote=“TheGingerMan”] To the Victor goes the Spoils. And that’s one reason they call it HisStory.
[/quote]
Actually the term is derived from the greek for “net.” The “his story” thing was just a bit of nonsense the fems whipped up back in the day.[/quote]
Actually, the term is derived from the Old Norse ,= “Bollocks!”.
Semantics aside, it still comes down to (romanized) “historia” root word being “histor”. Which can mean many things. Chief amongst them “learned, wise man”, “old man on the hill”, and my personal favorite " freaky ol’ Fuck!".
And as the women, in the main, were not writing the history, the fems have a very valid point,
That said, I have no desire to try & read any alternate history. Women abuse power just like the best of us. They just use different means.
The History Of the World would be not much different if the ladies ran the show. Same shit, different day. :minnie:
The rope will probably break.
I didn’t think Saddam was into begging the court’s pardon. Disrupting it is more his style…[/quote]
The appeal is automatic, in this case, TTBOMU.[/quote]
???[/quote]
Tilt Toward Bottom Orient Moon Upward
I’m pretty sure I’ve cracked it.
I find this whole matter quite disturbing. If Saddam really is guilty of said crimes, I will never know, because he was tried by what is, in my opinion, a kangaroo court, set up by the invaders of his country.
I’m not saying he’s innocent; I’m saying I will never know now.
Couldn’t we try Western leaders for their support of the use of chemical weapons, of their unsanctioned invasions of oil-rich countries?
It’s shameful, and I’m appalled that the UK played a part in it.
[quote=“Stray Dog”]I find this whole matter quite disturbing. If Saddam really is guilty of said crimes, I will never know, because he was tried by what is, in my opinion, a kangaroo court, set up by the invaders of his country.
I’m not saying he’s innocent; I’m saying I will never know, now.
Couldn’t we try Western leaders for their support of the use of chemical weapons, of their unsanctioned invasions of oil-rich countries?
It’s shameful, and I’m appalled that the UK played a part in it.[/quote]Can you point to specific items that have caused these disturbed feelings of shame and appall? Or is this just a general malaise?
Givine the world-wide scrutiny of the court proceedings, exactly how do you feel he should have been adjudicated?
Its easy to take the standard anti-Coalition talking points, lets see you address some specific points of the trial. What are they?
Moonbats Erupting in anger over the Saddam Ruling is discussed here:
littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/ … r#comments
Maybe but you gotta supply yer own kangaroos.
This blog article by Jayne Lyn Stahl just about sums it up for me:
[quote] Full Moon Over Baghdad
Am glad to see I’m not the only one having a bad day. Saddam Hussein was just convicted, and sentenced to hanging for the execution of 148 men and boys, back in 1982, who were alleged to have been involved in an assassination attempt against him. Oh, and yes, this is just the tip of the iceberg.
While we, a culture of narcissists, sit and ponder whether the timing of the verdict was arranged to coincide with the midterm elections, press secretary for the Occupier in Chief, suggests that those who think that must be “smoking rope.” Well, Saddam’s days of smoking rope may just be over; he may soon be hanging from one. That is, of course, unless the verdict and sentence meet their end under the appeals process. Still, even if the appellate court in Iraq, such as it is, overrules this verdict and sentence, he faces a second trial in which he is charged with killing as many as 100,000 Kurds twenty years ago. One way or another, Bush is determined to make this guy pay.
We agree that the whole judicial process which tried and sentenced the former dictator of Iraq is “mockery of justice” but so is giving the death sentence to someone who gave the death sentence to others. After all, what is a “crime against humanity”? Is killing Saddam the “Christian” thing to do? Moreover, is this not why the trial had to take place in Iraq and not in the U.S., so our hands could remain clean? But clean in whose eyes?
Is giving death to a ruler for his crimes against humanity itself not a crime against humanity? What’s more, what does one do about the leaders of scores of Shiite death squads who are killing at least as many Sunis, each day, as Saddam was just sentenced for having executed, some of whose leaders are “working as the head of political blocs” in Iraqi government today? So it is then that capital crimes require capital punishment. It would be naive, of course, but one can only hope that the same rule of law applies regardless of who’s standing trial, their nation of origin, as well as their stature.
Once again, the U.S. can declare victory as purveyors of freedom, and justice, and saviors from torture, and cruel and inhuman punishment inflicted on the Iraqi people by that barbarian Saddam Hussein. Yet again, our government can claim that we’vehelped that country to establish a judicial infrastructure such that it can try and punish its own renegade leaders. Indeed, we can make such claims, but not with a straight face, not in light of our government’s efforts to keep detainees from testifying about our own interrogation techniques in federal court, not in light of Abu Ghraib, and the shooting of innocent Iraqi civilians, not insofar as we have outsourced the death penalty in the name of exporting democracy.
But, death by hanging? That’s so medieval. Surely Dick Cheney, and his buddies at Halliburton, can come up with a new and improved way for state sanctioned murder, like lethal injection, if for no other reason than to prove, beyond a reasonable doubt, that if nothing else, we’ve exported modernity to Iraq. I’m sure if there’s a buck to be made, Cheney and his boys will be on the next flight. After all, the least we can do is modernize how the Iraqis execute people. Is it not a crime against humanity to hang a man? Any man? Or, are some murders more justified than others? And whose sophistry is this? Anyone in the religious right who says that it’s okay to let the Shiites do our killing for us will answer to that “higher power” if, and when, he ever decides to call collect.
Oh, and if we, in this country, can pull ourselves away from the mirror long enough, we may just see that this sham of a trial, apart from being a “mockery of justice,” will show the world that death by Shiite is no better than death by Saddam is no better than death by Marine, and that a death squad is a death squad just as a “dunk in the water is a dunk in the water.”[/quote]
Maybe France will supply the rope.
What’s the difference between Saddam attacking an entire region in an act of revenge for an assassination attempt made on his own life, and Bush Jr killing thousands of Iraqis and US soldiers in an act of revenge for an assassination attempt made on his daddy’s life?
Will we see the Bushes tried in such a fashion one day? If the United States is invaded, can the victor hold a kangaroo court while the rest of us sit around and support it?
We are merely the victors, not the righteous, and that is highly disturbing.
So I ask again, Given the world-wide scrutiny of the court proceedings, exactly how do you feel he should have been adjudicated?
Its easy to take the standard anti-Coalition talking points, lets see you address some specific points of the trial. What are they?
There were multiple documented atrocities Saddam could have been charged with, would you fell less appalled if he was brought up for the gas bombing of the Kurd village? Just asking.