SADDAM Sentenced to Death by Hanging!

Originally posted by Gear

Tell me this, would you kill a wild animal that is kept in a zoo because it might break loose and kill a human? Surely you would only tighten the security.

Well if the Zoo was in the current state that Iraq is you would have two options.
Move the animals in question or put them down. You couldnt take the risk that the likes of a lion could slip thou a hole in the fence.
Do you really want to find out if your wrong ?

Yeah, we had better kill him. God forbid he gets assassinated!

The problem is if Saddam was assassinated it would help to undermine the Iraqi governments credibility in the eyes of the local population. I doubt that anyone would feel sorry for Saddam if he was assassinated.



[edit on 5-11-2006 by xpert11]

A Fatwa has been issued about Saddams verdict now.

Basically it says; Forget Saddam. Leave his fate to Allah. We've got us some Americans to kill. lalalalalalala.

At least thats the way I read it.

Making the Beast Kosher: A Jihadi Fatwa on Saddam Hussein’s Death Sentence

Originally posted by makeitso
A Fatwa has been issued about Saddams verdict now.

Basically it says; Forget Saddam. Leave his fate to Allah. We've got us some Americans to kill. lalalalalalala.

At least thats the way I read it.

Making the Beast Kosher: A Jihadi Fatwa on Saddam Hussein’s Death Sentence

Surprising...an Israeli Canadian Pseudonym site (Like MEMRI,CAMERA,DEBKA). How its always convenient of them to constantly report Muslim wrongdoings that are a supposed threat to Americans. Its a shame they can't figure out where their soldiers are but they always seem to know what Muslims are up to.I still can't understand how people can't see right through these attempts at constantly playing us off towards the muslims. I would trust a site like this like I would any other hate site...with a Deer sized lick of salt.

I feel happy about the verdict and pity to Saddam at the same time.

and now, justice is in the hands of Saddam's victims. But i don't think killing him would satisfy this peace-hungry world. it would be better to make him suffer inside a cell for a very long time.

and also i've read from a local newspaper here that Saddam urged his supporters not to take revenge on Iraq's invaders. now, i see a martyr in the making.

sad that we will make this man a maryter...
he should be locked up in a cage for all the world to see for the rest of his days

no instead we will kill him and make him a maryter

when will people learn, killing people does not stop their message and after they're dead you can not use them to call off their attack dogs

same thing happened with a jewish guy about 2 thousand years ago
millions have died in his name since...


not trying to equate sadam with jesus, but when the jews killed him, his followers only grew in numbers.
what do you think will happen when we kill sadam?

Originally posted by Britguy
Hoorah! And just before the US Mid Terms too, what a stroke of luck for Bunnypants and the boys, to have a great "victory" to wave about

I still wonder what exactly they are trying him for? The invasion and subsequent violence has killed many more Iraqis than Saddam did. As for the killing of those who attempted to oust him, what would our own governments have done faced with armed insurrection and a direct threat to their power? Would they have just sent in the police to fire rubber bullets and CS gas or would they send in the army to quell a rebellion?
When you look at it logically, he's no more guilty than our own leaders, who have blood on their hands too, lots of it.

He tortured and killed Iraqi people, well so have our guys, government sanctioned no less. He killed those who opposed his rule, well so are our folks, every day since the invasion. I see no real difference here. He'd actually spent a lot of money in the 70's and 80's making Iraq one of the most westernised of the ME countries, yet we bombed it all to pieces and then, here's the good bit for the corporate chaps, charge them (and the US and UK taxpayers) to rebuild it all again. The big corporations with their no-bid contracts are laughing all the way to the bank, despite the death and misery involved. But hey, they're just a bunch of Arabs right?

Before anyone starts flinging the "terrorist lover" or "Saddam apologist" names about, I'd like to make it clear I have no love for this deranged dictator. However, he was OUR dictator when it suited OUR leaders, so they are to blame as much as Saddam for the deaths of Iraqis during his rule and so should be tried as well.

The outcome of this Kangaroo court was inevitable, the timing of the sentence was impeccable (well, it was actually timed to come before the mid terms, no surprise there)

"You have voted Britguy way abovetopsecret", yep you got my vote as I agree with everything you just said.

I have always thought that it was wrong for our country to go in and de-thrown Saddam when we're the one's that had helped him get to where he was in the first place when our Gov't had "use" for this man

When you look at it logically, he's no more guilty than our own leaders, who have blood on their hands too, lots of it.

He tortured and killed Iraqi people, well so have our guys, government sanctioned no less. He killed those who opposed his rule, well so are our folks, every day since the invasion. I see no real difference here.

Exactly what I was thinking . Saddam = Dictator, Bush/Cheney = Dictators .......... no difference between them in my eyes. They both use their armed-forces to get what they want no matter what the cost/life-lost would be in the end.

If people think that by killing Saddam will lessen the fighting and killing of our troops over there, I think they are just fooling theirselves and if our citizens of the US are going to be crazy enough to let this announcement lull them into thinking things are going to get better, that the Bush and the Republicans are doing a great job running our country,.......... well all I can say is "for shame" for letting this tactic sway your judgement come Nov.7,06.

I beleive the best way for Saddam to be handled is to keep him alive and imprisoned, this way the people of the Holy Land will see what happens to someone that commits terrible crimes against humanity, even if that person is their president.

I guess what I'm trying to say is "Two wrongs don't make it right", and we sure are not in the "right" by a long shot,... far from it.

Interesting how no one is going after the individuals who empowered Saddam in the first place.

Saddam should have been tried in the Hague, as Milosevic was. But just think of the can of worms that would have opened up with his defence team being able to present items in open session, with no direction or control from the US.
I am sure he could have brought up a lot of issues that would be very damaging to the US and UK in open court.
His farce of a trial and sentencing were nothing more than a showpiece to try and add a bit of credibility to the invasion, but has failed miserably.

All those people on these boards applauding his death sentence need to consider just who put him in power and kept him there, while he was useful, and who showed no concern regarding his brutality. Those people in our own governments, past and present, have a lot to answer for and should be held accountable.

Originally posted by FallenFromTheTree

Interesting how no one is going after the individuals who empowered Saddam in the first place.

Good Call.

Let's see who was behind Saddam once upon a time in a land far, far away;

WARNING - THIS FLASHBACK MIGHT BE CONSIDERED LIBERAL!

US helped as Saddam plotted chemical attacks, report says

The US conducted a covert military campaign to help Iraq during its war with Iran, despite knowing that Baghdad intended to use chemical weapons in a number of battles, according to a report in the New York Times.

Rumsfeld 'offered help to Saddam'

Declassified papers leave the White House hawk exposed over his role during the Iran-Iraq war.

The Reagan administration and its special Middle East envoy, Donald Rumsfeld, did little to stop Iraq developing weapons of mass destruction in the 1980s, even though they knew Saddam Hussein was using chemical weapons "almost daily" against Iran, it was reported yesterday.

Saddam Could Call CIA in His Defence

Evidence offered by a top CIA man could confirm the testimony given by Saddam Hussein at the opening of his trial in Baghdad Thursday that he knew of the Halabja massacre only from the newspapers.

A report prepared by the top CIA official handling the matter says Saddam Hussein was not responsible for the massacre, and indicates that it was the work of Iranians. Further, the Scott inquiry on the role of the British government has gathered evidence that following the massacre the United States in fact armed Saddam Hussein to counter the Iranians chemicals for chemicals.

Saddam Silenced For Fingering US In Iraq Bombings

After the murder of Slobo Milosevic prevented the true Butchers of Serbia, Wes Clark and Bill Clinton, from being brought to justice, on the very first day of Saddam Hussein's testimony the judge turned off his microphone and ordered all media to leave following Saddam's comments that the civil war in Iraq is being deliberately fueled by the US.

Over the past few weeks we have highlighted Israeli and US foreign policy documents that actually encourage not deter the break out of civil war in Iraq. Decades old blueprints document how inter-Arab conflict would be beneficial to the Neo-Cons, initiating ethnic cleansing in Iraq and drawing in Iran and Syria to provide a pretext to expand the war.

How the CIA found and groomed Saddam

US forces may now be searching high and low for Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein but in the past he was seen by US intelligence as a bulwark of anti-communism, reports UPI.

American intelligence operatives used him as their instrument for more than 40 years, according to former US intelligence officials and diplomats.

UPI interviewed almost a dozen former US diplomats, British scholars and former US intelligence officials to piece together the following account. The CIA declined to comment.

So - will we ever see those Masters of Puppets on Trial?

Will we ever see them in the Court?

Why was Saddam judged in Baghdad and NOT in International Criminal Court in Hague - like Slobodan Milosevic was?

Is it a FAIR Trial?

Well if it is a Fair Trial - how come THREE of his Lawyers were Assassianted - and nobody has a problem with that?

And during the Trial his original judge was REPLACED?

Fair Trial ey?

If you belive in Santa!

Originally posted by Souljah Let's see who was behind Saddam once upon a time in a land far, far away;

WARNING - THIS FLASHBACK MIGHT BE CONSIDERED LIBERAL!

IOU 1 WATS

As always.. Excellent research.. with FACTS.

So nice to see SOME people don,t suffer from S.M.S(Selective Memory Syndrome)

I,ll tell you what.. why don,t I just sign over all my WAT,s and you can just collect as an when required?

Originally posted by AGENT_T

IOU 1 WATS

As always.. Excellent research.. with FACTS.

So nice to see SOME people don,t suffer from S.M.S(Selective Memory Syndrome)

I,ll tell you what.. why don,t I just sign over all my WAT,s and you can just collect as an when required?

Thank You my Friend!

Your Words are Greatly Apprechiated!

Now let's move on;

Saddam Verdict Date "Rigged" for Bush

Saddam Hussein's defence team has urged a delay of his possible death sentence and said the ousted Iraqi leader believed today's expected verdict was timed to boost President George Bush before US mid-term elections.

Saddam's lawyer Khalil al-Dulaimi repeated warnings that a death sentence against his client - which would come before Tuesday's US Congressional elections at a time when Bush faces mounting criticism over the Iraq war - would plunge the region into wider bloodshed.

"This court is a creature of the US military occupation, and the Iraqi court is just a tool and rubber stamp of the invaders," insisted Dulaimi.

"The trial of the president should not proceed this way in a climate of mounting political pressure for a quick conviction that demolishes the trial's impartiality," he said.

The credibility of the trial had been tarnished by delays, the murder of defence counsel, courtroom chaos and political interference and court bias against the defence, he added.

"During all these months, the court has deliberately sought to limit our access and ability to defend the president ... this means that justice has not been done," he said..

Midterm Elections - HERE COMES DA BUSH!

ALL HAIL THE GREAT LIBERATOR!

And the DECIDER! (ofcourse!)

And let's quickly forget what kind of a Comedy this Court really was...

Good for Saddam, that he did not own any WMD's!

Whoa - that would mean a Fate Worse Then Death!

[edit on 6/11/06 by Souljah]

You have voted Souljah for the Way Above Top Secret award. You have two more votes this month.


Thanks Souljah for putting this in proper prespective. The reality is we're hypocrites and the world sees that. For some reason, some believe that we are the deciders and make up our rules as we tear the world apart, and we have THE RIGHT to do this.

This is all going to come home to haunt us- that's guaranteed.

Originally posted by MasterJedi
Is ther a way to educate someone who believes that GOD says to die in defense of their version of him? I mean its obvious a little Algebra isn't gonna change these peoples way of thinking. But if you think you can talk rationally to someone who is willing to walk into a cafe with a bomb strapped to them, then by all means I think you should go over there and try... in fact take all your brethren who feel the same way.

Just beacuase I don't know how to communicate effectively with a wannabe terrorist doesn't mean that it can't be done. I think the education these people need would involve very little algebra.

Originally posted by MasterJedi
As far as being called a Nazi... Thats a little uncalled for wouldn't you think? Just because I think they they should be eradicated. I also feel that the Jew should get out of Isreal...Does that me me antisemite/unamerican? No I just feel they have no claim to the land when someone else lived there in the 2000 years in between. Should I be able to go back and take my childhood home back just because I once lived there?

You claimed you can't negotiate without extreme prejudice. I think you can only negotiate if you're sympathetic to the needs of the people your negotiating with, or else you aren't negotiating, you'd just be commanding. Do you understand the term extreme prejudice? If you felt extreme prejudice towards another group of people I think any reasonable person would understand why I would use the term Nazi, it wasn't personal, it was directed to the comments you posted. So if you don't like it be more careful how you phrase your comments.



[edit on 6/11/06 by byhiniur]

Originally posted by Souljah


And during the Trial his original judge was REPLACED?

Fair Trial ey?

If you belive in Santa!

That is easy, it's all about timing in the U.S. "elections" , Prime Minister Nouri Al Maliki last minute decision to replace the Iraqi judge is influenced by U.S. aid and Bush .

www.iht.com...

WASHINGTON President George W. Bush sought to repair tensions with Iraq's prime minister and the White House asserted that Nouri al-Maliki is not "America's man in Iraq" but a sovereign leader whom the U.S. is aiding.

For 50 minutes on Saturday, Bush and al-Maliki talked by video conference to find common ground. This was Published: October 28, 2006

I wonder what they talked about

that should be enough proof .......................

www.iht.com...



[edit on 6-11-2006 by XPhiles]

For those complaining about the verdict.......

The man is getting what he deserves. Hopefully it's a public hanging.

Secondly for those complaining about the 'deaths' in Iraq which have gone from ~40,000 to 650,00.... here are some figures from WW2:

en.wikipedia.org...

[edit] Casualties by country
The casualties of World War II were suffered disproportionately by the various participants. This is especially true regarding civilian casualties. The following chart gives data on the casualties suffered by each country, along with population information to show the relative impact of losses.

Country Population 1939 Military deaths Civilian deaths Jewish Holocaust deaths Total deaths Deaths/ % of population
Albania[1] 1,100,000 28,000 200 28,200 2.56%
Australia[2] 7,000,000 40,400 100 40,500 0.58%
Austria[3] 7,000,000 45,000 65,000 110,000 1.57%
Belgium[4] 8,400,000 12,100 52,000 24,000 88,100 1.05%
Brazil[5] 41,500,000 1,000 1,000 2,000 0.00%
Bulgaria[6] 6,300,000 22,000 22,000 0.35%
Burma[7] 17,500,000 60,000 60,000 0.34%
Canada[8] 11,300,000 45,300 45,300 0.4%
China[9] 530,000,000 3,000,000 7,000,000 10,000,000 1.89%
Czechoslovakia[10] 15,300,000 25,000 63,000 277,000 365,000 2.39%
Denmark[11] 3,800,000 1,300 1,800 100 3,200 0.08%
Estonia[12] 1,100,000 40,000 1,000 41,000 3.73%
Ethiopia[13] 14,100,000 5,000 200,000 205,000 1.45%
Finland[14] 3,700,000 95,000 2,000 97,000 2.62%
France[15] 41,700,000 212,000 267,000 83,000 562,000 1.35%
French Indo-China[16] 24,600,000 1,000,000 1,000,000 4.07%
Germany[17][18][19] 69,300,000 5,500,000 1,840,000 160,000 7,500,000 10.82%
Greece[20] 7,200,000 20,000 209,000 71,000 300,000 4.17%
Hungary[21] 9,200,000 300,000 80,000 200,000 580,000 6.3%
Iceland[22] 120,000 200 200 0.17%
India[23] 386,000,000 87,000 1,500,000 1,587,000 0.41%
Indonesia[24] 70,500,000 4,000,000 4,000,000 5.67%
Iran[25] 14,000,000 200 200 0.00%
Iraq[26] 3,700,000 1,000 1,000 0.03%
Ireland[27] 4,250,000 100 100 0.00%
Italy[28] 43,800,000 306,400 145,100 8,000 459,500 1.05%
Japan[29] 72,000,000 2,000,000 600,000 2,600,000 3.61%
Korea[30] 23,400,000 60,000 60,000 0.26%
Latvia[31] 2,000,000 147,000 80,000 227,000 11.35%
Lithuania[32] 2,500,000 212,000 141,000 353,000 14.12%
Luxembourg[33] 300,000 1,000 1,000 2,000 0.67%
Malaya[34] 5,500,000 100,000 100,000 1.82%
Malta[35] 300,000 1,500 1,500 0.5%
Mexico[36] 19,800,000
Mongolia[37] 700,000 300 300 0.04%
Netherlands[38] 8,700,000 7,900 92,000 106,000 205,900 2.37%
Newfoundland[39] 300,000 1,000 100 1,100 0.37%
New Zealand[40] 1,600,000 11,900 11,900 0.74%
Norway[41] 2,900,000 3,000 5,800 700 9,500 0.33%
Philippines[42] 16,400,000 57,000 90,000 147,000 0.9%
Pacific Islands[43] 1,900,000 57,000 57,000 3.0%
Poland[44] 34,800,000 400,000 2,200,000 3,000,000 5,600,000 16.09%
Portuguese Timor[45] 500,000 55,000 55,000 11.0%
Romania[46] 19,900,000 316,000 56,000 469,000 841,000 4.23%
Singapore[47] 700,000 50,000 50,000 7.14%
South Africa[48] 10,300,000 11,900 11,900 0.12%
Soviet Union[49] 168,500,000 10,700,000 11,500,000 1,000,000 23,200,000 13.77%
Spain[50] 25,500,000 4,500 4,500 0.02%
Thailand[51] 15,300,000 5,600 5,600 0.04%
United Kingdom[52] 47,800,000 382,600 67,800 450,400 0.94%
United States[53] 132,000,000 407,300 11,200 418,500 0.32%
Yugoslavia[54] 15,400,000 446,000 514,000 67,000 1,027,000 6.67%
Totals 1,971,470,000 24,456,700 32,326,700

So all the leaders from then should be hung too?
It's war....in every war there are civilain casualities.....at the US and alliies attempt to limit them

unlike the 'religion of peace'.

Also if a vast majority of Iraqis' are celebrating this verdict...isn't that a good thing?

[edit on 6-11-2006 by ferretman2]

Originally posted by ferretman2
For those complaining about the verdict.......

The man is getting what he deserves. Hopefully it's a public hanging.

IF Justice was EQUAL, there would be ALOT of Men Hanging along with Him.

But Since Justice is something you can BUY - this won't happen.

Secondly for those complaining about the 'deaths' in Iraq which have gone from ~40,000 to 650,00

.... here are some figures from WW2:

Your Point Is?

So all the leaders from then should be hung too?
It's war....in every war there are civilain casualities.....at the US and alliies attempt to limit them

Hmmmmmmmmm...

Did you ever hear about Nurmberg Trials?

unlike the 'religion of peace'.

You Mean Judaism, Right?

Also if a vast majority of Iraqis' are celebrating this verdict...isn't that a good thing?

The only thing this "Hanging" is good for, is Midterm Elections in the USA.

If you did not notice, Iraq is a Chaotic State, without any law so far.

But hey! - they get to see their former leader Hanging!

AWESOME!

Well I still can't sympathize with anyone who would strap a bomb to themselves, no matter what cause they feel justifies it. If thinking they should be thrown out of the genetic pool makes me a Nazi, then I suppose I am. Cause honestly I don't care if they can be reformed or educated, that sort of instability will resurface elsewhere at a later date.

Originally posted by MasterJedi
Well I still can't sympathize with anyone who would strap a bomb to themselves, no matter what cause they feel justifies it. If thinking they should be thrown out of the genetic pool makes me a Nazi, then I suppose I am. Cause honestly I don't care if they can be reformed or educated, that sort of instability will resurface elsewhere at a later date.

So its wrong for them to blow themselves up for whatever reasons they express, but it's ok for you to destroy them even if they could be reformed! If your type of killing spree was carried out you'd have ten times more terrorists.

What makes me wrong if I want you taken out of the gene pool because your instability could cause you to attack someone? If you can answer that then you've proved your above statement to be a load of tosh.

Do other people agree with MasterJedi?

Originally posted by byhiniur
If your type of killing spree was carried out you'd have ten times more terrorists.

What makes me wrong if I want you taken out of the gene pool because your instability could cause you to attack someone? If you can answer that then you've proved your above statement to be a load of tosh.

You make it sound like no one in the world has ever tried to come up with a way to negotiate with terrorists. That you are the first or only person that has even thought of doing that instead of fighting back against them.

If true, it's hard to imagine a more totally incorrect assumption your part.

No, it's more like the fearful, appeasement types of the world think that negotiators should be sent in to talk with these murderous thugs, however, they somehow never bring themselves to volunteer to do the work.

Originally posted by centurion1211
You make it sound like no one in the world has ever tried to come up with a way to negotiate with terrorists. That you are the first or only person that has even thought of doing that instead of fighting back against them.

You mean I'm not?

Originally posted by centurion1211
If true, it's hard to imagine a more totally incorrect assumption your part.

I obviously don't think I'm the first person to think of this... however don't you think 'terrorists' should negotiate peacefuly rather than demanding their desires with the threat of violence. We can't have things both ways. We can't say people shouldn't use violence as a means to an end but then use it when it suits our needs.

Originally posted by centurion1211
No, it's more like the fearful, appeasement types of the world think that negotiators should be sent in to talk with these murderous thugs, however, they somehow never bring themselves to volunteer to do the work.

One half of me agrees with you in the sense that the world isn't black and white and there are people, namely muderers, peadophiles and rapists, who don't care about punishment and just want to fulfill there desires, leaving us with no alternative than to fight fire with fire.

The other half remembers that we need to set examples, and that your argument is a slippery slope to oppressing all people who speak out. Maybe these 'murderous thugs' wouldn't be so murderous if they had clear avenues for questioning the way the world is, and also if there were tighter restrictions on arms sales.

This is such a big issue I can't hope to go into the intricacies involved in the detail it deserves and this is a thread for a completely different topic so I'll stop talking about it in here.

But tell me, do you agree with MasterJedi that people who don't conform to our way of life should be "removed from the gene pool"?

Violence is ignorance exemplified in action.