[Sarafan]

death by snoo snoo!!!

LOL!

[aldo_14]

I fail to see how killing 148 people, many of whom were probably actually involved in the assasination attempt anyways, constitutes a crime against humanity.

There's like 7 billion humans. Killing 148 of them is like Humanity getting a bit of grit in it's eye.

And, ****, I'm damn ****ing sure the 'cost effective' brigades of the various multi-nationals have put out products they knew for a fact would kill more than 148 people, figuring the cost of 148 lost law suits would be less than the profits from 250mil units sold. But you don't see them being tried for crimes against humanity.

Hell, in WW2 there were probably thousands of bomber crews who were personally responsible for the deaths of hundreds (if not thousands) of innocent civillians. But you don't see them being tried either.

http://www.preventgenocide.org/law/icc/statute/part-a.htm#2

Article 7: Crimes against humanity

1.         For the purpose of this Statute, "crime against humanity" means any of the following acts when committed as part of a widespread or systematic attack directed against any civilian population, with knowledge of the attack:

            (a)     Murder; 

            (b)     Extermination; 

            (c)     Enslavement;

            (d)     Deportation or forcible transfer of population;

            (e)     Imprisonment or other severe deprivation of physical liberty in violation of fundamental rules of international law; 

            (f)     Torture; 

            (g)     Rape, sexual slavery, enforced prostitution, forced pregnancy, enforced sterilization, or any other form of sexual violence of comparable gravity; 

            (h)     Persecution against any identifiable group or collectivity on political, racial, national, ethnic, cultural, religious, gender as defined in paragraph 3, or other grounds that are universally recognized as impermissible under international law, in connection with any act referred to in this paragraph or any crime within the jurisdiction of the Court;

            (i)     Enforced disappearance of persons; 

            (j)     The crime of apartheid; 

            (k)     Other inhumane acts of a similar character intentionally causing great suffering, or serious injury to body or to mental or physical health.   

[vyper]

I'm just in awe of the fact there's a website actually called "preventgenocide.org".

[an0n]

If widespread murder is a crime against humanity, then where's Fred West's trial? Or Shipman's? Or Dahmer's?

Same with rape.

And the various world gangs never get tried for any of the mass-forced-prostitution they run.

And the same with the rest of it. According to that ****, not letting the BNP candidates speak during the elections was a crime against humanity, because they were being persecuted for their political beliefs.

[Bobboau]

well your options were probly, hanging, firing squad, and beheading. so he probably got off light in that sense.

[Prophet]

Yada yada yada. Guess what sunshine, world isn't perfect. The reason why Saddamn is in trial, and not your rapist rabble and whatever ****ing assorted filth, is that Saddamn happened to be apolitical figure. A nation leader even, who happened to be on a black list of a more powerful leader. Saddam is on trial because he was important. It's about politics, first and foremost. Furthermore Saddamn just happened to be on the losing side. And you know what happens to losers.
That is how the world works.

"Waaa! The trial was injust! Humanity is evil!" Get over it.

[an0n]

And it's because of attitudes like that that you're all stuck on this ****ty, backwater rock....

[achtung]

If I were going to be put to death, this would be my preference:
Firing Squad > Hanging > Gas > Lethal Injection > Beat to death

I really think that hanging is more humane than lethal injection, mainly because it's much, much quicker.

[Ford Prefect]

Pinochet used to have his political prisoners thrown out of airplanes over the ocean. Now that's an execution.

[Prophet]

I just saw in the news... Saddam requested to be shot to death. Request was denied and he gets the rope.

And hanging, if done properly (which I do believe it is officially done) is indeed quite quick. But I think bullets are more dramatic.

[Janos]

If widespread murder is a crime against humanity, then where's Fred West's trial? Or Shipman's? Or Dahmer's?

Same with rape.

And the various world gangs never get tried for any of the mass-forced-prostitution they run.

And the same with the rest of it. According to that ****, not letting the BNP candidates speak during the elections was a crime against humanity, because they were being persecuted for their political beliefs.

you're cute when you troll 

[Black Wolf]

If widespread murder is a crime against humanity, then where's Fred West's trial? Or Shipman's? Or Dahmer's?

Same with rape.

And the various world gangs never get tried for any of the mass-forced-prostitution they run.

And the same with the rest of it. According to that ****, not letting the BNP candidates speak during the elections was a crime against humanity, because they were being persecuted for their political beliefs.

you're cute when you troll 

Que? That's a relatively on-topic, reasonable post - especially when you consider it's from anon...

[Kosh]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/4507568.stm

SUNDAY 5 NOVEMBER

Summary: Saddam Hussein is found guilty of crimes against humanity for the killing of 148 Shias in Tigris river city of Dujail in 1982.

He is sentenced to death by hanging.

Now that is indeed a humane way to end someone's life.

Is hanging an acceptable way to execute a human being nowadays?

Given the total backwardness of the middle east, do you really need to ask?

[Mefustae]

As for the trial itself it's worth pointing out that Saddam wasn't the only person on trial for the crime. As such even though everyone knew that Saddam was guilty and would be found as such the same thing can't be said about his co-defendants. In fact one of them was a aquitted. That alone makes the trial worth it.

I wasn't aware of that, thanks for bringing my attention to it. But regardless, for Saddam it was effectively a kangaroo trial, as any possible chance of aquitting him would have been hastily quashed by the US [forgive the cliche].

[Grug]

I think the question is, do you really think that it will happen? (Sadam being knocked off)

[NGTM-1R]

Is hanging an acceptable way to execute a human being nowadays?

Depends on how you do it. If you do it right hang's just a quick snap of the neck and lights out. Do it wrong with too short a rope and it's death by suffocation. Normally the intent is to do it right, but sometimes somebody screws it up.

[Rictor]

I don't understand the justification of the death penalty because 'Saddam was evil', because the first thing any trial should do is make sure that the character of the victim is disregarded in trying and indeed sentencing the criminal.  And I'm not sure why the inverse is applied to what is, after all, state-sanction murder.

Personally, I can't think of a more appropriate, more fitting punishment for a dictator who spent his life in luxurious palacial compounds than to live out his days in a tiny, grey concrete cell, each day more pathetic than the last.  Not only is execution in my mind morally wrong for any criminal, in this case it's doubly wrong as it will only mythologise and martyr Saddam; it will give him one last chance to present himself as a rallying call to his loyalists, and only encourage the romanticised notion of him (to some Iraqis) as a 'good' dictator who brought the sort of stability and general security that has evapourated in Iraq.

But didn't he bring order to Iraq which disapeeared lickity-split once he was gone?

And aside from a small group of Iraqi Sunnis (well, what's left of them in a decade or so, after the US leaves and al-Sadr's boys go to work) no one is going to lionize him. The Shia and Iranians obviously hate him. The other Arabs Sunnis (Saudi, Kuwait) etc hate him for trying to attack them. The West hates him because, well, he was a butcher. The Kurds hate him. The Israelis hate him. He could indeed have been something vaguely approaching a new Saladin, a pan-Arab leader, but that sort of went down the drain in '91.

[Nuke]

Is hanging an acceptable way to execute a human being nowadays?

No.

i disagree, a properly conducted drop-hanging at the gallows is probibly more humane than a botched electricution or laying strapped to a table for 20 minutes while a large quantity of liquid is pumped into your veins. the gas chamber is probibly the best of the worst, youre breathing corrosive gas for several minutes and youre done.

being shot in the back of the head at point blank range, the guilotine, the gallows all seem more humane to me, its fast, its cheap, but only the gallows is hemane on the witnesses as there is not a large amount of gore for them to endure. if i was to choose a means of my execution, i think hanging would be at the top of my list.

but for saddams case, id go for dismemberment, and vivisection.

[Mefustae]

...the guilotine...

Zuh? I was under the impression that you stayed aware for a few seconds after your head was severed. Not a very nice way to go, if true.

[Nuke]

wel the brain runs on glucose in the blood stream. think of it as cutting a fuel line in your car while driving. the brain runs out of gas and shots down quickly. you may have some nervous reactions, blinking, facial gestures, but thats no different than cutting off a lizzard's tail.

with leathal injection, the mind is given about 20 minutes to drive itself insane under the amount of drugs required to induce an overdose. id definately rather have a few seconds of my body being cut off than several minutes of drug induced dimentia.