Bye-bye Saddam...

[Qfwfq]

Almost like Gitmo. Hold the suspects offshore, and deny them due process because of laws being geographically bound. THAT is a slippery slope, my friend.

I'd say much more than a slippery slope, my friend. It simply doesn't hold up at all. Which jurisdiction is Git'mo under? And under which jurisdiction were the people arrested and sent there? The second point goes for "extraordinary rendition" as well. It's past the slippery slope, I say, it's right over the cliff.

 

I would dispute his understanding of the morality of his actions.

I wouldn't, at all. I did not mean "what" in the trivial sense, only of "which physical action". Are you sure you got my points?

 

Neither am I sure he can be considered an "abused, mentally messed up human" and other thing you attribute to him.

 

Anykind of retribution, besides confinement, safely away from the rest of society, is pointless. It does not lessen what he did, and it will not fix anything.

Why pointless? Since quite ancient times, systems of justice have been based on the principle of lex talionis. The important thing is not to make this into the barbaric adage, "eye for eye, tooth for tooth". The aim of retribution is neither to lessen what was done, nor to fix anything, but to treat fairly.

 

I don't understand the point behind remarks concerning retribution as an argument against the DP. I get the impression the meaning of words has shifted a bit.

 

What will have impact is treating him fairly, and with the pity that such a deranged individual deserves. He should not have our indignate sense of vengence, but our compassion.

 

It's not about who's bigger and badder. It's not about what was done, it's about what is being done here and now, and will be done in the future. It serves no purpose to kill him off, or torture or otherwise cause him harm, other than to validate his use of immoral action.

Agreed in principle, but troublesome for the reasons I said on Friday. Who are "We" to decide?

 

Who worried about preventing the Romanians from riddling Ceaucescu and his wife with Kalashnikovs, after a rather summary trial? Who worried about preventing the Italians from hanging Mussolini and his fiancèe by their toenails, after a rather summary trial? Both were examples of popular rage, both have been treated as done in their respective jurisdictions and hence weren't interfered with (any more than I could interfere with DP laws of other countries).

 

"Let he who is without sin, cast the first stone."

Exactly.

 

Let Sir Winston Churchill cast the first stone. Go now, Saddam, and sin no more, because we shall prevent you from it, instead of propping up your regime against another one (as we did until you ceased to serve us loyally).

:doh:

[Michaelangelica]

I think the point that Michealangelica was trying to make was that prisoners at Gitmo don't have those things, as you are well aware. :(

 

And that the Iraqis can give one of the most evil men alive a fairer trial than we can give to Osama's driver, as you are well aware.

 

TFS

More on David Hicks here

http://www.abc.net.au/rn/airplay/stories/2006/1748789.htm

[IDMclean]

Wikipedia, Saddam Hussein

Iraq Foundation.org, Saddam research Bio

Moreorless.au.com, Saddam Hussein

 

Neither am I sure he can be considered an "abused, mentally messed up human" and other thing you attribute to him.

 

I do not attribute anything to him, other than he is human and has committed more wrongs than any person should. What I make into that synopisis comes from a number of biographies and other such that I have had come across my field of perception during my lifetime.

 

I hold no rage against him. Only pity. I am sad to see that society has failed him, and that he failed society. For his part in it, I do place the blame where I think it to be just by evidential proof. However the responsibility is not simply upon him, he is but a pawn in the games being played.

 

For his part he is guilty, as charged, of knowingly being a pawn in a sinister game. For that I could accept condemnation to a time outzone, till the conclusion of the game, or beyond.

[Michaelangelica]

What does everone think of this?

http://www.abc.net.au/rn/lawreport/stories/2006/1791246.htm#

the respected human rights group, Human Rights Watch, released a stinging report on the recent trial of Saddam Hussein.

 

The trial and sentencing ended earlier this month, with the handing down of a death sentence on Saddam and two others.

 

It's been called the trial of the century, but it's also been called a farce and a comedy. Judges quit in disgust, defence lawyers were murdered, defendants turned up in their pyjamas, and witnesses (scared for their lives) hid behind curtains when giving evidence.

 

Well just hours ago Human Rights Watch released a 97-page report claiming the entire nine-month trial was fundamentally flawed.

 

One of the authors is New York based Australian lawyer Nehal Bhuta, who works with Human Rights Watch. He sat through much of the trial.

 

Nehal Bhuta: The trial was marred by a variety of events that really affected the integrity of the process. As you mentioned, three defence lawyers were killed in the course of the trial

. .

 

In terms of the independence of the court, there were really serious threats to that, in that the Iraqi government really wasn't interested in ensuring a climate for a fair trial, such that members of parliament in some cases, even the Minister of Justice, publicly attacked judges on the court for being weak and demanded that they be harsh with the defendant.

 

This kind of an outcry, which fuelled in a way public opinion in relation to the court, led to the resignation of one judge and then a second judge was subsequently forced to resign because he was accused of having been a member of the Baath party.

So the third presiding judge who remained in the trial through the process, was himself subject to accusations of lack of impartiality because he had been a political prisoner under the Baath.

So there were some serious concerns about independence of the court overall.

[InfiniteNow]

What does everone think of this?

That the trial was for show and he was convicted long before it began. Are they still considering stoning him to death, because that would further add to the robustness of our current sociopolitical overlap with the middle ages...[/rhetorical question]

[CraigD]

What does everone think of this?

The Law Report - 21*November*2006* - Human Rights Watch report

With deep sorrow, I think the trial of Sadam Husein is of very small concern compared to the daily slaughter of ordinary Iraqis permitted by, and perhaps even encouraged by members of, the current Iraq regime. Even the atrocities ascribed, IMHO rightly, to Sadam pale beside the present debacle.

 

The real question, however, is what, if anything, is to be done to stop it? Suggestions, anyone?

[Qfwfq]

Kofi Annan has recently said that the situation in Iraq for the average Iraqi has become worse than it was under Saddam's regime.