Subject:
|
Re: Justice for all.....
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Thu, 18 Dec 2003 18:34:21 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
669 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Scott Arthur wrote:
> In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Don Heyse wrote:
> > In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Scott Arthur wrote:
> > > In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Don Heyse wrote:
> > > > In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Dave Schuler wrote:
> > > > > > Is there an addendum that clarifies when a video is humiliating
> > > > > > and when it's not? Saddam appeared in lots of video before, and
> > > > > > will probably appear in more during the trial. What are the rules
> > > > > > on this? I haven't found them yet.
> > > > >
> > > > > A good question. I know there was an uproar when US POW's in Iraq were
> > > > > featured even briefly on Al-Jazeera, for example. Hussein was able,
> > > > > according to reports, to identify himself as "the President of Iraq"
> > > > > to his American captors, so this (if true) demonstrates that he had no
> > > > > medical condition preventing him from stating his identity.
> > > > >
> > > > > Beyond that, Hussein's DNA has been sampled since his capture, and that
> > > > > would seem to trump the need for any photo as verification of his
> > > > > identity (as long as a pre-existing known sample of his DNA was
> > > > > available!) The "humiliating' part, in my view, comes up when we see
> > > > > endless rebroadcasting of the open-wide-and-say-aah exam, juxtaposed
> > > > > with Dubya chanting that Hussein was a rat in a hole.
> > > >
> > > > Yeah that's annoying, but just the sort of thing the media loves
> > > > to broadcast. How do you stop them? Anyhow, my question remains:
> > > >
> > > > Has the "Red Cross or any other impartial humanitarian organization"
> > > > ever actually identified any of the video on Al-Jazeera or the western
> > > > media as "humiliating"?
> > >
> > > <http://edition.cnn.com/2003/WORLD/meast/12/18/sprj.irq.saddam.photo/ yes>
> > >
> > > Scott A
> >
> > Thank you. That's half of the answer I was looking for. Does anyone
> > have a link where the same impartial humanitarian organization
> > declares the Al-Jazeera footage humiliating? I found some hints with
> > a quick google search, but nothing quite as definate as the Saddam
> > link. I hate the way the passage of time erodes news archives on
> > the internet.
>
> You really are grasping a staws; from their
> <http://web.amnesty.org/pages/irq-faq_2-eng site>:
Heh, beat you to it. http://news.lugnet.com/off-topic/debate/?n=22983
> Your point is facile. Even if nobody did condemn the way US troops were
> treated (they did), that does not give your ‘president’ the right to break
> the law by parading his trophies [both dead and alive] on TV.
I'm not sure I made a point, other than that google is not the best
way to search for old news. I did find it before you did though, or
did you *purposely* leave out the other side of the story? I'm new
here, so I don't know all the rules of .debate.
> > What do you think the punishment for reciprocal video humiliation
> > should be?
>
> Put Bush in front of the ICC? ;)
Wouldn't someone first have to prove Bush himself gave the order to
broadcast videos? I'm sure the guilty party will turn out to be someone
from the liberal media. ;^)
By the way, what's the ICC?
|
|
Message has 2 Replies:
 | | Re: Justice for all.....
|
| (...) Scott never does that. :-) Neither do any of the rest of us here. ;-) (...) Rule #1 if you see a big nesting, deeper than 3 or 4, and it's you and Scott(1), and you're not getting anywhere with your point, give up. (...) International Criminal (...) (21 years ago, 18-Dec-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
| | | Re: Justice for all.....
|
| (...) Try: (URL) :) (...) The international criminal court; Bush refuses to sign up to it as your countrymen *could* end up in jail *if* they commit war crimes. Frankly, I feel war criminals belong in jail! Scott A (21 years ago, 19-Dec-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Justice for all.....
|
| (...) You really are grasping a staws; from their (URL) site>: "The treatment of prisoners of war, again the rules of war are fairly clear, all parties, all sides are expected to treat the prisoners humanely and in accordance with international (...) (21 years ago, 18-Dec-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
52 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
