"basskisser" wrote in message
om...

Bass,
Harry thinks you are a dummy, he just doesn't say anything because you
are a
democratic, but he is cringing everything you make a post.

How do you know that? What evidence to you have to prove anything like
that?

Just google up some of your posts when you were posting as "OnLanier".
"How to remove a steering wheel" ring a bell?

"basskisser" wrote in message
om...
Harry Krause wrote in message
...
jim-- wrote:
"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
If any ever requires a completely legitimate trial before being
hanged,
it is Saddam Hussein. Yet Saddam wasn't represented by his lawyers at
the arraignment this morning. He was alone, facing the judge.

We can't seem to do anything right in Iraq, and yes, I know, the
Iraqis
are now running things over there, even though they are not.

Saddam should have had his lawyers present. Period. If we are going
to
try to convince the Moslem world and the rest of the world that we
really believe in what we preach, and these trials are legitimate and
"fair," then we have to abide by what we preach. It doesn't matter
what
Saddam "deserves," in terms of the outcome. Process matters.

I loved the part where the judge wanted Saddam to sign papers and
told
him he didn't need his lawyer present to do it. Saddam refused, as he
should have. You can't trust "the system" anywhere, even if you are a
monster like Saddam Hussein.


Iraqi Court. Iraqi Judge. Iraqi legal system. Understand now?

I figured you would find it in yourself to defend the guy.




I'm not defending Saddam, you ignorant ass. I'm defending the concept of
a trial through a legal process that will do us some good around the
world.

Do you work extra hard at being stupid?

As for the Iraqi court, judge, legal system...that's convenient, eh? But
not particularly convincing. Especially when the US military did not
allow independent news microphones in the room. Is the entire trial to
be censored by the US, directly or indirectly?

,.You haven't a clue as to how Iraq has been restructured, at least
temporarily, by the United States.

Harry, those narrow minded right wingers can't think like that. You
are either with everything and anything that comes out of BushCo, or
you're a traitor.

Asskisser you and Harry are the biggest TRAITORS in this Group. You can't
see but the **** you want to see. Keep on Bashing Bush and Playing right in
the hands of Harry's Buddies. You know the ass wipes that are killing our
boys in Iraq. You (Asskisser) and Harry are the worst Asshole I have ever
come across. Why don't move to Iraq and start shooting at our troops over
there. At least they will have a chance to see where the **** is coming
from. If you are Americans why don't you try to help instead of Bashing
President all the time.

"Bill" wrote in message
Asskisser you and Harry are the biggest TRAITORS in this Group. You can't
see but the **** you want to see.

I'm a traitor for wanting what is both good, and right for our
country? You fool, just because someone disagrees with the current
president, doesn't mean he's a traitor. Were you a traitor when
Clinton was president?

Keep on Bashing Bush and Playing right in
the hands of Harry's Buddies. You know the ass wipes that are killing our
boys in Iraq. You (Asskisser) and Harry are the worst Asshole I have ever
come across. Why don't move to Iraq and start shooting at our troops over
there.

That's nothing short of an idiotic statement. I, for one, never even
wanted our troops over there. So, it would be YOU that is the "ass
wipe", for wanting our troops in harm's way.

At least they will have a chance to see where the **** is coming
from. If you are Americans why don't you try to help instead of Bashing
President all the time.

Again, did you agree with everything that every president before Bush
did?

"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
jim-- wrote:
"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
If any ever requires a completely legitimate trial before being hanged,
it is Saddam Hussein. Yet Saddam wasn't represented by his lawyers at
the arraignment this morning. He was alone, facing the judge.

We can't seem to do anything right in Iraq, and yes, I know, the Iraqis
are now running things over there, even though they are not.

Saddam should have had his lawyers present. Period. If we are going to
try to convince the Moslem world and the rest of the world that we
really believe in what we preach, and these trials are legitimate and
"fair," then we have to abide by what we preach. It doesn't matter
what
Saddam "deserves," in terms of the outcome. Process matters.

I loved the part where the judge wanted Saddam to sign papers and told
him he didn't need his lawyer present to do it. Saddam refused, as he
should have. You can't trust "the system" anywhere, even if you are a
monster like Saddam Hussein.


Iraqi Court. Iraqi Judge. Iraqi legal system. Understand now?

I figured you would find it in yourself to defend the guy.




I'm not defending Saddam, you ignorant ass. I'm defending the concept of
a trial through a legal process that will do us some good around the
world.

Yes you are defending Saddam. He is one of your totalitarin gods and you are
mad as hell that he is out of power.

Do you work extra hard at being stupid?

You are quite at ease being stupid.


As for the Iraqi court, judge, legal system...that's convenient, eh? But
not particularly convincing. Especially when the US military did not
allow independent news microphones in the room. Is the entire trial to
be censored by the US, directly or indirectly?

Anyone with half a brain knows that regardless of the constitution of the
legal system that Saddam is tried under he is going to be found guilty and
be hanged in the end.

,.You haven't a clue as to how Iraq has been restructured, at least
temporarily, by the United States.

With respect to the trial of Saddam it doesn't matter the Iraqi people are
going to execute him.

"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
jim-- wrote:
"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
If any ever requires a completely legitimate trial before being hanged,
it is Saddam Hussein. Yet Saddam wasn't represented by his lawyers at
the arraignment this morning. He was alone, facing the judge.

We can't seem to do anything right in Iraq, and yes, I know, the Iraqis
are now running things over there, even though they are not.

Saddam should have had his lawyers present. Period. If we are going to
try to convince the Moslem world and the rest of the world that we
really believe in what we preach, and these trials are legitimate and
"fair," then we have to abide by what we preach. It doesn't matter
what
Saddam "deserves," in terms of the outcome. Process matters.

I loved the part where the judge wanted Saddam to sign papers and told
him he didn't need his lawyer present to do it. Saddam refused, as he
should have. You can't trust "the system" anywhere, even if you are a
monster like Saddam Hussein.


Iraqi Court. Iraqi Judge. Iraqi legal system. Understand now?

I figured you would find it in yourself to defend the guy.




I'm not defending Saddam, you ignorant ass. I'm defending the concept of
a trial through a legal process that will do us some good around the
world.

Do you work extra hard at being stupid?

As for the Iraqi court, judge, legal system...that's convenient, eh? But
not particularly convincing. Especially when the US military did not
allow independent news microphones in the room. Is the entire trial to
be censored by the US, directly or indirectly?

,.You haven't a clue as to how Iraq has been restructured, at least
temporarily, by the United States.

And you do Ass Wipe. You must have some inside Information the rest of the
world hasn't. Are you talking to some of your buddies over in Iraq. Are you
and your buddies planning on another attack over here. Why don't you do the
world a favor leave this country you hate so much and try and live with the
rest of your ASS Wipes in IRAQ.

"jim--" wrote in message ...
"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
If any ever requires a completely legitimate trial before being hanged,
it is Saddam Hussein. Yet Saddam wasn't represented by his lawyers at
the arraignment this morning. He was alone, facing the judge.

We can't seem to do anything right in Iraq, and yes, I know, the Iraqis
are now running things over there, even though they are not.

Saddam should have had his lawyers present. Period. If we are going to
try to convince the Moslem world and the rest of the world that we
really believe in what we preach, and these trials are legitimate and
"fair," then we have to abide by what we preach. It doesn't matter what
Saddam "deserves," in terms of the outcome. Process matters.

I loved the part where the judge wanted Saddam to sign papers and told
him he didn't need his lawyer present to do it. Saddam refused, as he
should have. You can't trust "the system" anywhere, even if you are a
monster like Saddam Hussein.


Iraqi Court. Iraqi Judge. Iraqi legal system. Understand now?

I figured you would find it in yourself to defend the guy.

That's idiotic. You know damned well that the U.S. is running that dog
and pony show over there. Or at least you would, if you had any sense
at all

"basskisser" wrote in message
om...
"jim--" wrote in message
...
"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
If any ever requires a completely legitimate trial before being
hanged,
it is Saddam Hussein. Yet Saddam wasn't represented by his lawyers at
the arraignment this morning. He was alone, facing the judge.

We can't seem to do anything right in Iraq, and yes, I know, the
Iraqis
are now running things over there, even though they are not.

Saddam should have had his lawyers present. Period. If we are going to
try to convince the Moslem world and the rest of the world that we
really believe in what we preach, and these trials are legitimate and
"fair," then we have to abide by what we preach. It doesn't matter
what
Saddam "deserves," in terms of the outcome. Process matters.

I loved the part where the judge wanted Saddam to sign papers and told
him he didn't need his lawyer present to do it. Saddam refused, as he
should have. You can't trust "the system" anywhere, even if you are a
monster like Saddam Hussein.


Iraqi Court. Iraqi Judge. Iraqi legal system. Understand now?

I figured you would find it in yourself to defend the guy.

That's idiotic. You know damned well that the U.S. is running that dog
and pony show over there. Or at least you would, if you had any sense
at all

Can you provide proof of these (how do you say it...oh yes) "wild
allegations"?

That's idiotic. You know damned well that the U.S. is running that dog
and pony show over there. Or at least you would, if you had any sense
at all

Can you provide proof of these (how do you say it...oh yes) "wild
allegations"?

How about the AP wire story for a start, where the judge -who it appears is
no match for Saddam- told the accused he "represented the Iraqi people and
acted under coalition authority"
Gary