Hard Light Productions Forums
Off-Topic Discussion => General Discussion => Topic started by: Moonsword on June 30, 2004, 03:34:18 pm
-
BBC News (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/3852185.stm)
Have fun with the justice system, Saddam.
-
Eeeeenterestink.
-
Velly Eeenterestink.....
-
(http://www.geologyadventures.com/assets/images/kangaroo.jpg)(http://www.dcnr.nv.gov/graphic/court.jpg)
-
Good to see the so-called lawyer Giovanni Di Stefano popping up again...... the same man who was chucked out a Scottish court because he couldn;t produce any sort of documentation to prove his credentials, and who also pretty much drove Dundee FC into administration by promising money (to bring in expensive players like Ravanelli and Burley) and then promptly failing to deliver.
-
Hey, maybe we'll get lucky and he'll get thrown out of Iraq.
And yes, a kangaroo court is all too likely in this case, however, it may be appropriate. Still, it would be nice to see real justice meted out to this scumbag.
-
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/5270914/site/newsweek/site/newsweek/site/newsweek/
-
There's too much uncertainty for me to give that much credence, particularly from a defense lawyer.
-
Originally posted by Rictor
(http://www.geologyadventures.com/assets/images/kangaroo.jpg)(http://www.dcnr.nv.gov/graphic/court.jpg)
Who cares? Does anyone really think he's innocent?
-
does anyone think he deserves better?
-
Exactly. The only problem with Kangaroo Courts is that you can too easily convict the innocent. Is that really a problem here?
-
Though I hate the bastard, I must admit that I really enjoy Milosevic kicking ass at the Hague court, which is more or less the definition of a kangaroo court. He's putting up fight, and so far he's doing a good job of it too. They have to fight for every inch, and considering that Slobo has a background in law, not to mention that he's a cunning mofo, its quite a spectacle. The last person in charge of the case resigned, the new one is having trouble, there was talk of dropping the charges since they can't prove jack, but thats not going to happen.
I'm not worried about justice. Saddam deserves whatever he gets. I'm worried about the fact that this legitimizes the "you're guilty cause we say you're guilty" procedure, not to mention the concept of an American-run court which is basically just a tool for political ends. Oh wait, thats already the case. Nothing to worry about then, they can always just ship him off to the Hague if they start loosing. Where he'll live in luxury for the rest of his days, while his victims suffer under occupation and can't get clean water, enough food or electricity.
I can't help but laugh at the irony. The Hague is basically a 5-Star resort for statesmen. You would have to pay good money to live that well. Yeah, you're imprisoned, but you're imprisoned in a mansion, you're family visiits you every now and then, and you get to keep yourself amused by defening yourself and making life difficult for your captors.
-
The fact that Saddam gets convicted in a Kangaroo Court then has two benifits. He goes away for life (or gets the death penalty depending on the court) and yet the invasion of Iraq doesn't gain the legitimacy a UN war crimes trial would give it.
I would have thought that you of all people would be happier about that Rictor.
-
Have they reinstated hanging yet in Iraq? I think I remember reading that they were talking about bringing that back.
Found it: http://www.washtimes.com/world/20040618-121915-4515r.htm
Apparently, the death penalty was temporarily blocked by the US Interim Government. The question is, why do we do all the things we should do at home overseas instead?
-
If it is a 'subject' with multiple possible viewpoints, Ric will choose whichever one allows the opportunity to critique, complain, and cry. But this is a good thing, opens up possibilities that could be easily ignored.
HLP's own Little Liberal Limbaugh :).
Kangaroo Court? Nah. Watching his defense should be very interesting though. Hussein is nothing if not charismatic in his own rite. And I agree with Ric on the Milosevic thing, but it's awfully hard to get past the stuff he pulled while "doing the laundry", as it were. He is fighting, I would expect nothing less.
Anyone around here open to the possibility he (Hussein) might be found not guilty?
-
Not after I read that article I just linked to. Specifically due to the fact that even if he did not order any of that, he is still responsible for the actions of his subordinates under Iraqi law. So basically, he's lost, unless he can pull off a hung jury.
-
Well, I doubt he can claim he didn't slaughter thousands of people, but it might be interesting to see who he takes down with him.
But even the Iraqis are calling it a show to get Bush back into office next term, they think it's too early and that life is complex enough, however, in this situation, I think they are wrong, America didn't want to hand back Hussein, the Iraqi president demanded his return to stand trial. So if this is too early, then the Iraqis are blaiming the wrong people.
-
Forgive me for asking, but what laws did he break?
He altered laws to make all his **** legal. Iraq wasn't/isn't part of the UN so doesn't have to abide by any Human Rights laws or other international garbage.
Iraq might have signed some treaty I'm unaware of, but with the possible exception of the Al-Samood (SP?) missiles, which he dismantled, he hasn't broken any laws.
And who the **** are the UN to enforce American, British and French dictated laws on sovereign nations? Fine, enforce them on signatories and members, but they've got absolutely no goddamn right to press him for war-crimes.
Then there's the fact that unless the UN **** him up (which they can't do), Hussein, as the deposed leader of a sovereign nation, has to be released once hostilities have ceased.
And IIRC it was illegal for America to hand him over to the Iraqi's when he could face the death penalty. Though they wormed their way around that by having Iraq only reinstating the death penalty after they got their hands on him.
The entire thing is a ****ing joke.
-
Originally posted by Grey Wolf 2009
Not after I read that article I just linked to. Specifically due to the fact that even if he did not order any of that, he is still responsible for the actions of his subordinates under Iraqi law. So basically, he's lost, unless he can pull off a hung jury.
No pun intended.
I am SO sorry, I couldn't resist.:lol:
-
An0n, the whole things been a joke from it's inception, a very very sick and twisted joke, and only one persons' laughing, if he/she exists, which I doubt.
-
[l]an0n: Well, the way I take it, once you reach evil dictator status, once you get caught, all the laws go out the window anyway. Thing is, nobody will care, except for his lawyer... and who'd want to be the lawyer that got Saddam Hussein off? (pun intended as well.)[/l]
DIE SADDAM!!![/b]
-
Greywolf: cause the crimes he commited were against Iraqis, not Americans.
ionia: mhm, and you always take whichever position is 180* opposite from mine, apparently for the hell of it.
Flipside: I think that about right. Bush is making a big show of this because its about the only thing he has going for him right now. Unless they pop Osama out in October, just in time for elections, this may be Bush's only chance to gain an inch.
I think Iraqis just want him gone. From their perspective, they just want a bullet in his head and be done with it. I feel the same way about Slobo. I'de say that Saddam should go by way of firing squad, one Iraqi and one Kurdish. But that not going to happen. There is going to be an elaborate trail, where we will examine Saddam's crimes in all their terrible detail, to remind us how wonderful and benign the current dictatorship is compared to the previous one. Its only human nature to compare, and thats what this is about. Most Americans don't even know what Saddam did, they just know that it was Very Bad Things.
just take him out Mussollini style and bury him in a shallow grave.
-
I'd like to point out that Saddam most likely didn't kill anybody.
But will the people who actually fired the guns and gassed the Kurds have anything done to them? Will they ****!
-
Originally posted by an0n
Forgive me for asking, but what laws did he break?
He altered laws to make all his **** legal. Iraq wasn't/isn't part of the UN so doesn't have to abide by any Human Rights laws or other international garbage.
Iraq might have signed some treaty I'm unaware of, but with the possible exception of the Al-Samood (SP?) missiles, which he dismantled, he hasn't broken any laws.
And who the **** are the UN to enforce American, British and French dictated laws on sovereign nations? Fine, enforce them on signatories and members, but they've got absolutely no goddamn right to press him for war-crimes.
Then there's the fact that unless the UN **** him up (which they can't do), Hussein, as the deposed leader of a sovereign nation, has to be released once hostilities have ceased.
And IIRC it was illegal for America to hand him over to the Iraqi's when he could face the death penalty. Though they wormed their way around that by having Iraq only reinstating the death penalty after they got their hands on him.
The entire thing is a ****ing joke.
Iraq are members of the UN, so they are subject to the international laws laid down by that body - i.e. human rights laws.
http://www.un.org/Overview/unmember.html
-
Since when?
-
1945?
Huh. Never knew that.
Ah, well, let the UN roast him then. The Iraqi's have no legal right to touch him.
-
*quietly edits his post*
-
Rock, Paper, Saddam (http://www.bigmixup.com/rockpapersaddam/)
-
:lol:
-
Hey, I was just about to make a new thread about that.
Dude, Tiger Claw always beats paper.
-
Grr!
-
:lol:
-
:lol: