Cripes...a "show trial" for Saddam?
 

"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.

Cripes...a "show trial" for Saddam?
 

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.

Cripes...a "show trial" for Saddam?
 

"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.

Wow, talk about not having a clue. Yes it is quite *convenient* having him
tried by his people...you know the ones he tortured, raped and murdered.

Get a clue Krause.

Cripes...a "show trial" for Saddam?
 

jim-- wrote:

"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.

Wow, talk about not having a clue. Yes it is quite *convenient* having him
tried by his people...you know the ones he tortured, raped and murdered.

Get a clue Krause.




Obviously, what I'm discussing are concepts that are beyond your meager
comprehensive abilities. You've proved many times you are dumb as a
post. You've just done it again.

This is a show trial, that is all. Saddam should be tried under the
international justice system that was established to handle his kind.

Cripes...a "show trial" for Saddam?
 

"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
jim-- wrote:

"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.

Wow, talk about not having a clue. Yes it is quite *convenient* having
him
tried by his people...you know the ones he tortured, raped and murdered.

Get a clue Krause.




Obviously, what I'm discussing are concepts that are beyond your meager
comprehensive abilities. You've proved many times you are dumb as a
post. You've just done it again.

This is a show trial, that is all. Saddam should be tried under the
international justice system that was established to handle his kind.

And if he was, you would bitch about that not being fair.

Call me whatever names you want. It only shows your lack of maturity and
inability to discuss things as adults. But that is your MO.

Too bad.

Cripes...a "show trial" for Saddam?
 

Harry,

Again, we find common ground. The process and rule of law should be
followed, regardless of the nature of the crime(s).


"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.

Cripes...a "show trial" for Saddam?
 

Harry... chill out on the playground zingers, man.

You are right, the Iraqi "court system" is too immature to effectively
handle this, although it is there prerogative to have first crack at him.
The procedures of juris-prudence should, however, never be neglected.

His crimes are mostly against Iraq, not the world. Perhaps the
international arena would quite be the best venue, either.

J


"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
jim-- wrote:

"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.

Wow, talk about not having a clue. Yes it is quite *convenient* having
him
tried by his people...you know the ones he tortured, raped and murdered.

Get a clue Krause.




Obviously, what I'm discussing are concepts that are beyond your meager
comprehensive abilities. You've proved many times you are dumb as a
post. You've just done it again.

This is a show trial, that is all. Saddam should be tried under the
international justice system that was established to handle his kind.

Cripes...a "show trial" for Saddam?
 

Megalodon wrote:

Harry... chill out on the playground zingers, man.

You are right, the Iraqi "court system" is too immature to effectively
handle this, although it is there prerogative to have first crack at him.
The procedures of juris-prudence should, however, never be neglected.

His crimes are mostly against Iraq, not the world. Perhaps the
international arena would quite be the best venue, either.

J


Saddam's alleged crimes were against Iraqis, Iranians, Israelis,
Kuwaits, Saudis, and, I am sure, others. He is accused of war crimes. He
should be facing an international war crimes trial. No matter the
outcome, there is nothing about Arab or Islamic justice I trust, and I
certainly don't trust our military or the Bush Administration as
overseers of the Iraqis in terms of providing a fair trial.

Saddam deserves a severe penalty, assuming he is found guilty by a
reputable and ocmpetent court. In his case, that means a world court.

Cripes...a "show trial" for Saddam?
 

I'm sure Russia, China, and France would remain impartial in a World trial
of Saddam. snicker



"JohnH" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 01 Jul 2004 10:14:24 -0400, Harry Krause
wrote:

jim-- wrote:

"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.

Wow, talk about not having a clue. Yes it is quite *convenient* having
him
tried by his people...you know the ones he tortured, raped and
murdered.

Get a clue Krause.




Obviously, what I'm discussing are concepts that are beyond your meager
comprehensive abilities. You've proved many times you are dumb as a
post. You've just done it again.

This is a show trial, that is all. Saddam should be tried under the
international justice system that was established to handle his kind.

Should the Beltway Snipers have been tried under an international justice
system? Most of us around here thought they were pretty damn guilty.

John H

On the 'Poco Loco' out of Deale, MD,
on the beautiful Chesapeake Bay!

Cripes...a "show trial" for Saddam?
 

"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

Cripes...a "show trial" for Saddam?
 

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.

Cripes...a "show trial" for Saddam?
 

"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"?

Cripes...a "show trial" for Saddam?
 

"JohnH" wrote in message
...
On 1 Jul 2004 11:46:27 -0700, (basskisser) wrote:

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.

kissy, kissy, smooch, smooch.
John H

On the 'Poco Loco' out of Deale, MD,
on the beautiful Chesapeake Bay!

More like suck, suck...slurp, slurp.

Cripes...a "show trial" for Saddam?
 

DSK wrote:


NOYB wrote:

I'm sure Russia, China, and France would remain impartial in a World trial
of Saddam. snicker

Sure... maybe Rumsfeld and Cheney will testify in his behalf. They did business
with him for years.

DSK


Perfect character witnesses for Saddam, eh?

Cripes...a "show trial" for Saddam?
 

NOYB wrote:

I'm sure Russia, China, and France would remain impartial in a World trial
of Saddam. snicker

Sure... maybe Rumsfeld and Cheney will testify in his behalf. They did business
with him for years.

DSK

Cripes...a "show trial" for Saddam?
 

"Harry Krause" wrote in message

.....He was alone, facing the judge.

We can't seem to do anything right in Iraq,

Saddam should have had his lawyers present. Period. .....we have to abide
by what we preach. .... Process matters.



I believe today's session was the rough equivalent of our arraignment
process. Under Iraqi law, it is not required that the defendant's counsel
be present for the proceeding. Saddam does have counsel, and will be
represented at trial.

Cripes...a "show trial" for Saddam?
 

"Harry Krause" wrote in message

...... He
should be facing an international war crimes trial... there is nothing
about Arab or Islamic justice I trust,


Harry wants the proceedings moved to a venue where the judges and attorneys
are all unionized.

Cripes...a "show trial" for Saddam?
 

"basskisser" wrote in message

Harry, those narrow minded right wingers can't think like that. You
are either with everything..... etc etc etc


Hey bass, check for polyps while you're up there!

Cripes...a "show trial" for Saddam?
 

I take exception to that, BK... I have disagreed with a lot that has come
out of that white house, particularly on the domestic side.



"basskisser" wrote in message
om...
Harry Krause wrote in message
...


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.

Cripes...a "show trial" for Saddam?
 

"basskisser" wrote in message
om...
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.

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. Follow JohnH's
suggestion and have Harry proof your posts before you make them.

Cripes...a "show trial" for Saddam?
 

Harry Krause wrote in message ...
jim-- wrote:

"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.

Wow, talk about not having a clue. Yes it is quite *convenient* having him
tried by his people...you know the ones he tortured, raped and murdered.

Get a clue Krause.




Obviously, what I'm discussing are concepts that are beyond your meager
comprehensive abilities. You've proved many times you are dumb as a
post. You've just done it again.

This is a show trial, that is all. Saddam should be tried under the
international justice system that was established to handle his kind.

Most of the crimes he is being charged were committed inside Iraq,
therefore should be within the jurisdiction of an Iraqi court.

Even the crimes he may have committed across a border (I don't know
when he actually last stepped foot outside of Iraq) are probably
within Iraqi juridiction.

Cripes...a "show trial" for Saddam?
 

"Megalodon" wrote in message
ink.net...
I take exception to that, BK... I have disagreed with a lot that has
come
out of that white house, particularly on the domestic side.



You are witnessing the liebral debate manual 101.....accuse your opponent
of what you are guilty of......comes right after "Blame America First"


"basskisser" wrote in message
om...
Harry Krause wrote in message
...


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.

Cripes...a "show trial" for Saddam?
 

On Thu, 01 Jul 2004 19:24:26 -0400, John Gaquin wrote:


I believe today's session was the rough equivalent of our arraignment
process. Under Iraqi law, it is not required that the defendant's counsel
be present for the proceeding. Saddam does have counsel, and will be
represented at trial.

I shed no tears for Saddam, but:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/mid...st/3855931.stm

Cripes...a "show trial" for Saddam?
 

"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.

Cripes...a "show trial" for Saddam?
 

"John Gaquin" wrote in message
...

"basskisser" wrote in message

Harry, those narrow minded right wingers can't think like that. You
are either with everything..... etc etc etc


Hey bass, check for polyps while you're up there!


Nice, I'll have to remember that one.

Cripes...a "show trial" for Saddam?
 

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

Cripes...a "show trial" for Saddam?
 

"thunder" wrote in message

I shed no tears for Saddam, but:


But what? Of course his counsel will claim that the current government has
no legitimacy. You expected otherwise? His team claims they have been
denied access. They claim no proper authority in place. Normal. The
facts are that there is a constituted legal system in place run by Iraqis,
and they are proceeding. All else is allegation and speculation.

Cripes...a "show trial" for Saddam?
 

"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.

Cripes...a "show trial" for Saddam?
 

"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.

Cripes...a "show trial" for Saddam?
 

John Gaquin wrote:

"thunder" wrote in message

I shed no tears for Saddam, but:


But what? Of course his counsel will claim that the current government has
no legitimacy. You expected otherwise? His team claims they have been
denied access. They claim no proper authority in place. Normal. The
facts are that there is a constituted legal system in place run by Iraqis,
and they are proceeding. All else is allegation and speculation.



The Iraqi judge claimed he was operating under coalition authority.
Further, the investigation of the charges is to be provided by the U.S.
But that's far less of an issue than the denial of regular access to
counsel.

Cripes...a "show trial" for Saddam?
 

"Harry Krause" wrote in message

The Iraqi judge claimed he was operating under coalition authority.

That cannot be possible. The CPA ceased to exist on June 28. Probably a
[conveniently deliberate] translation error in the press report.


Further, the investigation of the charges is to be provided by the U.S.

Many authorities, even in the USA, contract with outside providers for
investigative services. Moreover, the CPA was the governing authority
during most of the time Saddam was in custody.


But that's far less of an issue than the denial of regular access to
counsel.

Their system does not require counsel at an arraignment. Additionally, most
accounts seem to indicate that a great deal of the so-called "attorney
access" problem Saddam has encountered has been brought about by internecine
squabbling, with two or more sets of attorneys bickering with family
factions over who is to be the representative.

Cripes...a "show trial" for Saddam?
 

"P. Fritz" wrote in message
...

You are witnessing the liebral debate manual 101.....accuse your
opponent
of what you are guilty of......comes right after "Blame America First"

And your extreme is acceptable? Pretend that our foreign policies have
always been perfect, and that anyone who reacts negatively to them is nuts?

Cripes...a "show trial" for Saddam?
 

JohnH wrote:

On Thu, 1 Jul 2004 19:30:58 -0400, "John Gaquin"
wrote:


"basskisser" wrote in message

Harry, those narrow minded right wingers can't think like that. You
are either with everything..... etc etc etc


Hey bass, check for polyps while you're up there!


That was both good and appropriate.

John H


I dunno, Herring. Is there room for him with all you righties up there?

Cripes...a "show trial" for Saddam?
 

"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?

Cripes...a "show trial" for Saddam?
 

"Megalodon" wrote in message link.net...
I take exception to that, BK... I have disagreed with a lot that has come
out of that white house, particularly on the domestic side.

Then, according to MOST right wingers, you are a traitor for disagreeing.

Cripes...a "show trial" for Saddam?
 

"John Gaquin" wrote in message ...
"basskisser" wrote in message

Harry, those narrow minded right wingers can't think like that. You
are either with everything..... etc etc etc


Hey bass, check for polyps while you're up there!

Ignorant statement, from an ignorant little boy.

Cripes...a "show trial" for Saddam?
 

"John Smith" wrote in message news:9q1Fc.11288$IQ4.7564@attbi_s02...
"basskisser" wrote in message
om...
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.

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?

Cripes...a "show trial" for Saddam?
 

"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?

Cripes...a "show trial" for Saddam?
 

"Joe" wrote in message . ..
"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?

Huh? Hey, by the way, you never replied about my meeting up with you in Tampa.

Cripes...a "show trial" for Saddam?
 

That's an extreme interpretation.

"basskisser" wrote in message
om...
"Megalodon" wrote in message
link.net...
I take exception to that, BK... I have disagreed with a lot that has
come
out of that white house, particularly on the domestic side.

Then, according to MOST right wingers, you are a traitor for disagreeing.