TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Political Discussion / Debate
-- Saddam Trial
Saddam Trial
Well, we've proven that money can buy your way out of child porn and even murder these days. So should Saddam hire the Michael Jackson and OJ teams to defend his ass?
[[[smoke]]]
hmmm.. Isnt Saddam on trial for shit like genocide?? The only person that could get a blatantly guilty person a not guilty verdict would be Johnnie Cochran. but isnt he dead?? ah well, some hard cell/chair time coming up for Saddam
i wonder if they'll televise the execution. PPV?
I wounder what his defence will say?
| quote: |
| Originally posted by St_Andrew I wounder what his defence will say? |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by Dupz The only person that could get a blatantly guilty person a not guilty verdict would be Johnnie Cochran. but isnt he dead?? |
i wonder who would want to defend Saddam....
Someone who wants to make a name for themselfs and cash in on it later by becoming a "high profile" lawyer.
| quote: |
| Originally posted by Yoepus i wonder who would want to defend Saddam.... |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by Q5echo a Frenchman |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by smokeape If they beheaded Saddam, it would be the most downloaded video on Internet history. If they did it privately and you had the video, you'd be an instant multi-millionaire. Someone in the Iraqi government must be figuring out the same scenario at the moment. [[[smoke]]] |
CIA asset on trial, imagine that. He's already a classic case of blowback. To his handlers he's better off dying of cancer before anyone lets him have his day in court.
They wont give him a trial.
| quote: |
Saddam Interrogation Screened - In Silence by Robert Fisk June 17, 2005 There he was, just as his victims looked on his own television screens, his words censored, his arguments unknown, his case as undemocratic as the "judicial" courts in which Saddam destroyed his own enemies. The Iraqis - or, let us speak frankly, the Americans who tried to censor the old reprobate's previous court appearance - decided yesterday that his words would also be censored. That is Saddamism. This is how Saddam ran Iraq. The words were obliterated. And now the Americans and their obedient, Shia-led government, are acting out the same Saddamite line. The pictures, the BBC admitted, were "mute". What in God's name did this mean? Who emasculated the BBC to such a degree that it should say such a ridiculous thing? Why were they mute? The BBC didn't tell us. If Saddam was really being charged with war crimes over the killings of Shias - which I hope he was - then why, in heaven's name, didn't we hear what he had to say? Why use the methods of Saddam himself? The silent film, the assumption of guilt? Or was Saddam telling the court that the United States was behind his regime, that Washington had given him the means to destroy the Halabja Kurds with gas? How can we know? And when so many of our journalistic brethren failed to challenge the reason why this tape should be "mute", what does this say of us? We are told, by Saddam's jailers of course, that he is being questioned about the murder of Shia villagers south of Baghdad in 1982. I hope so. But how do we know? The reality is that Saddam is from Iraq's past, something from the era before "our" insecurity and destruction and the rape and insurgency and death which has now overwhelmed Iraq. Yes, there are those who would like to see Saddam brought to justice. But they want safety and law and order and freedom - freedom from us, too - before they care about this crazed old man's trial. But we insist the Iraqis have bread and circuses before they have freedom. And they must experience our democracy by understanding that the defendant in a court must be shut up and denied his own words in order to appear on the BBC. |
Stay tuned there will be more to come after a word from our sponsors.
Tired of high mobile phone charges.....
And now a look at the weather.
This is how it Saddam will be treated on the news. Nothing but a sound bite and some nonsense not pertaining to him.
He does have a Law degree. Let's see if he was actually going to Law School at the time he got it.
Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright © 2000-2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.