system_error Posted November 7, 2006 Share Posted November 7, 2006 What Ford meant was that you DIDN'T need the trial to know Saddam was guilty. That was all.(I think, at least) Alright lets assume that this case was pretty obvious - what is the next step? When to we need a trial and when is it "logical" that someone is guilty? Even if 1000 people, the judge and a TV channel see you commiting a crime you have to get a proper trial. This reminds me of the movie Judge Dredd - not a very sophisticated movie but it shows a dark vision of the future if we abandon current laws. Even after WW2 the german leaders who were absolutly guilty in my eyes had a fair trial - and they killed a lot more people and nearly destroyed entire Europe. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yoshiking Posted November 7, 2006 Share Posted November 7, 2006 I agree that a trial is needed, but I don't think you're listening to what I'm saying. The trial was not NECESSARY to know the OUTCOME. Though it was still right to have it, you didn't need it to know whether or not he was guilty. Jeez, you guys just don't listen to what people say do you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Ford Prefect Posted November 7, 2006 Share Posted November 7, 2006 Even though Ford here is presenting his point(s) in a rather.. Well, somewhat offensive matter, he's still damned right and you should all just shut up. yeah its something to do with the fact that this place has fallen off the edge of a world of shit and landed in who knows what....... there was a time once when the members had a sense of humour and a comment such as my first one would have raised a laugh or something or spurned a chat about those stupid human rights moaning bastards. but now no, just a bunch of ass holes and frankly i've had enough of it. all the decent members seem to have left most if not all of the friends i've made from this place pissed off ages ago so now i'm doing the same. may you all rot in the crap you've created......... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr_Odwin Posted November 7, 2006 Share Posted November 7, 2006 I will miss your threads about Norwegian weather. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yoshiking Posted November 7, 2006 Share Posted November 7, 2006 Ah, the weather is always the same anyway.. Crappy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack Posted November 7, 2006 Share Posted November 7, 2006 I just can't take anyone who thinks human rights are a bad thing seriously. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlueStar Posted November 7, 2006 Share Posted November 7, 2006 I just can't take anyone who thinks human rights are a bad thing seriously. They tend to be cowards, living in a state of fear. That's why they want to surrender freedoms for imagined "security". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tony_Montana Posted November 7, 2006 Share Posted November 7, 2006 COuldn't have said it better myself. He ruined so many lives, and refused to take responsibility....he deserves it. so does bush and tony blair for telling us BS facts to start a war that has killed god knows how many innocent Iraqi people ... but will they get hanged? nope, they are considered heroes thanks to biased western media. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yoshiking Posted November 7, 2006 Share Posted November 7, 2006 He doesn't think human rights is a bad thing. Being against human rights and human rights activists is a very different matter. 'Cause let's face it, some human rights activists (like any other activists) are crazier than the people breaking the human rights. Activists are bizarre. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Haden Posted November 7, 2006 Share Posted November 7, 2006 so does bush and tony blair for telling us BS facts to start a war that has killed god knows how many innocent Iraqi people ... but will they get hanged? nope, they are considered heroes thanks to biased western media. The difference is they didnt go out to kill people who rose up against them or built mass graves. They caused a war and war = death and in iraq it means a lot of muslim on muslim voilence. But this doesnt mean they should be hung. Also considered heroes? For Bush apart from the Fox network just no. In Britian every media source is against Bush for cheap laughs. And Blair isnt much more popular. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack Posted November 7, 2006 Share Posted November 7, 2006 He doesn't think human rights is a bad thing. Being against human rights and human rights activists is a very different matter. 'Cause let's face it, some human rights activists (like any other activists) are crazier than the people breaking the human rights. Activists are bizarre. Yeah, cause the people who make wacky banners are crazier than people who torture others. Obviously. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yoshiking Posted November 7, 2006 Share Posted November 7, 2006 .. You have a knack for taking everything I say a different way than it was meant. I'm not even gonna bother. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack Posted November 7, 2006 Share Posted November 7, 2006 Explain what you meant then. What have human rights activists done that's crazier than torture, censorship, or any other restrictions of freedom? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Haver Posted November 7, 2006 Share Posted November 7, 2006 That's not what he's saying, Jack. He was making a definition between Human Rights and Human Rights activists. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Haden Posted November 7, 2006 Share Posted November 7, 2006 Explain what you meant then. What have human rights activists done that's crazier than torture, censorship, or any other restrictions of freedom? Human rights guys often have an agenda. Lets like say for example they will openly weep about dead palestine people and demenstrate against guentamno bay but couldnt care less about israel or the practivces of al quaeda. No-ones perfect and most people usually have a slight agenda. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yoshiking Posted November 7, 2006 Share Posted November 7, 2006 Their actions aren't crazier. Their behavior is. (not human rights activists in particular, really, just any activists as a whole) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack Posted November 7, 2006 Share Posted November 7, 2006 What's crazy about them? I'm genuinely curious. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ramar Posted November 7, 2006 Share Posted November 7, 2006 What's crazy about them? I'm genuinely curious. Chaining themselves to buildings about to get knocked down. Now thats fucking crazy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yoshiking Posted November 7, 2006 Share Posted November 7, 2006 Yeah, stuff like that. And their, y'know, just.. general insane attitude. The case they're fighting for may be good, but they act like loons. It just makes me lose faith in their case altogether. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack Posted November 7, 2006 Share Posted November 7, 2006 Chaining themselves to buildings about to get knocked down. Now thats fucking crazy. I'd do that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ramar Posted November 7, 2006 Share Posted November 7, 2006 I'd do that. Doesn't change the fact that activists in general are crazy. Just means you're equally crazy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack Posted November 7, 2006 Share Posted November 7, 2006 Oh, I already know that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan_Dare Posted November 8, 2006 Share Posted November 8, 2006 Chaining themselves to buildings about to get knocked down. Now thats fucking crazy. no it's not. It means the buildings won't be demolished. It's not like they're actually going to bulldoze through people, is it? (Unless you're in Palestine where they do, or just shoot you in the head.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tony_Montana Posted November 8, 2006 Share Posted November 8, 2006 Human rights guys often have an agenda. Lets like say for example they will openly weep about dead palestine people and demenstrate against guentamno bay but couldnt care less about israel or the practivces of al quaeda. No-ones perfect and most people usually have a slight agenda. maybe they would give a damn if israel stopped occupying palestine's land or dropping bombs on palestines but that's another story. ]The difference is they didnt go out to kill people who rose up against them or built mass graves. They caused a war and war = death and in iraq it means a lot of muslim on muslim voilence. But this doesnt mean they should be hung.[/b] the end result? thousands and thousands dead thanks to those 2, just like saddam. many say Iraq is in a worse situation now that it was in Saddam's time. Last time I checked, when Saddam was in charge, there wasn't all this chaos in baghdad, no suicide bombs ... two dozen people didn't die every week. not saying saddam was a good guy, he wasn't, but neither are blair or bush. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Emasher Posted November 8, 2006 Share Posted November 8, 2006 No real surprises here. It's going to take some time before he'll be hanged because there's still many procedures to follow. It's kind of sad how America shows of their 'far better' system of freedom and democracy as they like to call it with something brutal and uncivilized as the death penalty. i forgot america still had the death penalty (although theres is a needle) we dont have it in canada anymore Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts