kallend 1,625 #26 November 6, 2006 Blair opposes death penalty: www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/sns-ap-britain-blair,1,2981765.story?coll=chi-news-hed... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SkyDekker 1,123 #27 November 6, 2006 The sentence is no surprise nor is the timing of the verdict. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ian84 0 #28 November 6, 2006 According to the Times, the sentence must be carried out within 30 days of the final appeal. The appeal itself could take months. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rehmwa 2 #29 November 6, 2006 QuoteDumb move. Now they are going to turn him into a so-call "martyr" in the eyes of his crackpot supporters. A better move would be to sentence him to life living naked in a cage in the main square of Baghdad. Revising criminal penalties imposed upon individuals based on external potentials is one of the most foolish things a justice system could do. He did terrible things, he has the potential and disposition to do them again. Killing him removes the threat he poses. If crackpot supporters use this to further their activities, then that's a problem with them and they need to be judged separately. Execute Saddam based on his crimes alone, not other 'political' implications. If we could do that more often, we'd be more effective in execution of justice. Mitigating his penalty because crackpot responses 'worry' us give them power over the legal sytem. That's a terrible position you are taking my friend. ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DaVinci 0 #30 November 6, 2006 QuoteSo will the execution take 20 years, like here in America? Or is this a one stop trial, with no appeals? One it is reviewed they have 30 days to hang him. The review can take as long as needed. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
GQ_jumper 4 #31 November 6, 2006 Imagine that. 2 days before the USA elections Quote this is truly pathetic that anytime something good happens someone somehow tries to tie it to the Bush administration engineering the outcome to happen to tie it in with a certain milestone. reporter: "And in the news today the President found a dollar in his pants while doing laundry, later that day he donated the dollar to charity." Half of SC: "Imagine that, Bush found a dollar in his pants, and only six months before his re-election cmpaign was kicking off. He forced the Secretary of the Treasury to plant that their so he would look good and get re-elected." And I guarantee someone is going to turn what I wrote into an argument about Bush not spending enough money to give to charityHistory does not long entrust the care of freedom to the weak or the timid. --Dwight D. Eisenhower Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites rehmwa 2 #32 November 6, 2006 He shouldn't have to give to charity. the government should just take it. why won't he support policies to take the money from rich heirs? ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites kallend 1,625 #33 November 6, 2006 QuoteHe shouldn't have to give to charity. the government should just take it. why won't he support policies to take the money from rich heirs? Of all the ways of becoming rich, inheriting wealth is just behind bank robbery as undeserving. On second thoughts, bank robbers had to make some effort and took some risks. If the govt. can't be persuaded to cut spending (that's a joke), then taking inherited wealth comes high on my list for raising revenue.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites sundevil777 93 #34 November 6, 2006 I know plenty of kids that work very hard on their family farms (and family businesses), yes there are still a lot of family farms in Ohio. I don't think they would agree with your "undeserving" label. Inheritance taxes on such families is an effective way to reduce the number of family farms. I think you're showing a mindset of 'taking it because they have it' that is just plain wrong. We as a country are so wealthy in large part because we can become wealthy without such government policies to prevent the accumulation of wealth.People are sick and tired of being told that ordinary and decent people are fed up in this country with being sick and tired. I’m certainly not, and I’m sick and tired of being told that I am Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites kallend 1,625 #35 November 6, 2006 QuoteI know plenty of kids that work very hard on their family farms (and family businesses), yes there are still a lot of family farms in Ohio. I don't think they would agree with your "undeserving" label. Inheritance taxes on such families is an effective way to reduce the number of family farms. So if you actually wanted to raise revenue to match government expenditures (because we all know expenditures will NOT be cut) where would you do it? Be realistic, a LOT of $$ needs to be raised.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites billvon 2,400 #36 November 6, 2006 >this is truly pathetic that anytime something good happens >someone somehow tries to tie it to the Bush administration . . . Well, hey, people were blaming the democrats for "timing" the release of the Foley messages! Is that truly pathetic as well? There's not much question that the verdict was delayed to coincide with the US election. The idea that no one involved in the trial of Saddam Hussein knew/cared about the US election isn't that supportable. Doesn't mean that Bush told them what day and time to release the verdict - but it's pretty naive to believe that it's a complete coincidence. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites sundevil777 93 #37 November 6, 2006 QuoteQuoteI know plenty of kids that work very hard on their family farms (and family businesses), yes there are still a lot of family farms in Ohio. I don't think they would agree with your "undeserving" label. Inheritance taxes on such families is an effective way to reduce the number of family farms. So if you actually wanted to raise revenue to match government expenditures (because we all know expenditures will NOT be cut) where would you do it? Be realistic, a LOT of $$ needs to be raised. Expenditures can be cut. At least the rate of increase can be slowed, especially if it doesn't get labeled as a cut by the Dems in congress. Tax revenues have been going way up lately, due to a thriving economy. However, I do favor sweeping reform of the tax code. Of course many favor a flat income tax with an exemption for the first XX amount of dollars earned (some have proposed around 30K). Another way would be a sales tax only system that excludes food, and housing up to a certain amount per month. Both ideas face a lot of opposition due to entrenched interests. I don't think inheritance taxes can provide very much revenue.People are sick and tired of being told that ordinary and decent people are fed up in this country with being sick and tired. I’m certainly not, and I’m sick and tired of being told that I am Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites kallend 1,625 #38 November 7, 2006 QuoteQuote Expenditures can be cut. Very droll. Which party will do that, since neither of the major parties has ever shown an inclinaton in that direction? Over the last 40 years spending has gone up faster under Republican administrations. The only difference is that Republicans run up huge debts while Dems raise taxes.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites rehmwa 2 #39 November 7, 2006 QuoteIf the govt. can't be persuaded to cut spending (that's a joke), then taking inherited wealth comes high on my list for raising revenue. Lovely, good for you, nicely done. Spoken like a true parent. How do you handle the scenario where Junior is made a business partner with Dad and then Dad kicks off? Do you say that's not inheritance and Junior takes over? Do you shut down the factory and send all the employees into the street? Do you give the factory to the government? Or all the employees (I already know this is your dream). what about the family farm? Who deserves it more than the son or daughter that worked it throughout their childhood? I do agree with one thing - our two parties CAN'T be persuaded to cut spending. ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites idrankwhat 0 #40 November 7, 2006 QuoteImagine that. 2 days before the USA elections Quote this is truly pathetic that anytime something good happens someone somehow tries to tie it to the Bush administration engineering the outcome to happen to tie it in with a certain milestone. Why is it "pathetic"? They've done it numerous times before. By now it should be considered "business as usual". http://mediamatters.org/items/200610260010 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Amazon 7 #41 November 7, 2006 QuoteWhy is it "pathetic"? They've done it numerous times before. By now it should be considered "business as usual". Hey when you set up a puppet govenment.. you get to pull the strings.. From your link... incase they will not click on it because its not on the approved reading list.... Saddam Hussein verdict postponed until two days before U.S. election: Will the media turn a skeptical eye? Summary: While it cannot definitively be said that the reason the senior Iraqi court in charge of Saddam Hussein's trial postponed its verdict in the case until two days before the November elections so that it would influence the midterms, the postponement suggests several obvious questions, including, most importantly: Given the Bush administration's history of timing national security-related actions to the political calendar, has the date for the verdict's release been set to provide maximum political benefit for the administration and congressional Republicans? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites shropshire 0 #42 November 7, 2006 <> WTF? Taking someones life, any life is just plain wrong and can never be considered in anyway good in a civilized world. . (.)Y(.) Chivalry is not dead; it only sleeps for want of work to do. - Jerome K Jerome Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites jenfly00 0 #43 November 7, 2006 QuoteQuoteWhy is it "pathetic"? They've done it numerous times before. By now it should be considered "business as usual". Hey when you set up a puppet govenment.. you get to pull the strings.. From your link... incase they will not click on it because its not on the approved reading list.... Saddam Hussein verdict postponed until two days before U.S. election: Will the media turn a skeptical eye? Summary: While it cannot definitively be said that the reason the senior Iraqi court in charge of Saddam Hussein's trial postponed its verdict in the case until two days before the November elections so that it would influence the midterms, the postponement suggests several obvious questions, including, most importantly: Given the Bush administration's history of timing national security-related actions to the political calendar, has the date for the verdict's release been set to provide maximum political benefit for the administration and congressional Republicans? They're saving the 'Orange Alerts' for the presidential elections.----------------------- "O brave new world that has such people in it". Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Amazon 7 #44 November 7, 2006 QuoteThey're saving the 'Orange Alerts' for the presidential elections. Hell I think they are sitting on something even better.. a RED alert or two.. to show the american people just how dangerous our enemies really are. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites GQ_jumper 4 #45 November 8, 2006 note: Amazon this isn't geared specifically to you I just hit reply to your post. It was mentioned a few times that the verdict will be appealed, an dI can't remember if anyone pointed out or not that the appeal proccess is automatic in Iraq whenever there is a life sentence or death penalty at stake. I know it's a little off topic as to who timed what in accrodance with jupiter aligning with aquarius and the mid-terms, but I just thought I'd throw it out there. night everyone, I'm off to the gym and then bedHistory does not long entrust the care of freedom to the weak or the timid. --Dwight D. Eisenhower Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites DaVinci 0 #46 November 8, 2006 I like this part best: QuoteSummary: While it cannot definitively be said that the reason the senior Iraqi court in charge of Saddam Hussein's trial postponed its verdict in the case until two days before the November elections so that it would influence the midterms So they can't prove it, so it must be true Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Botellines 0 #47 November 8, 2006 Anyway, apparently capital punishment is never issued to any 70 year old or older according to Iraqui law. SH is 69 and will be 70 around April next year, so there is still another punch line in the story for the U.S when that Iraqui law gets abolished specially for SH. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites DaVinci 0 #48 November 8, 2006 Quoteso there is still another punch line in the story for the U.S when that Iraqui law gets abolished specially for SH. And what if it does not? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Prev 1 2 Next Page 2 of 2 Join the conversation You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account. Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible. Reply to this topic... × Pasted as rich text. Paste as plain text instead Only 75 emoji are allowed. × Your link has been automatically embedded. Display as a link instead × Your previous content has been restored. Clear editor × You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL. Insert image from URL × Desktop Tablet Phone Submit Reply 0 Go To Topic Listing
rehmwa 2 #32 November 6, 2006 He shouldn't have to give to charity. the government should just take it. why won't he support policies to take the money from rich heirs? ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 1,625 #33 November 6, 2006 QuoteHe shouldn't have to give to charity. the government should just take it. why won't he support policies to take the money from rich heirs? Of all the ways of becoming rich, inheriting wealth is just behind bank robbery as undeserving. On second thoughts, bank robbers had to make some effort and took some risks. If the govt. can't be persuaded to cut spending (that's a joke), then taking inherited wealth comes high on my list for raising revenue.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
sundevil777 93 #34 November 6, 2006 I know plenty of kids that work very hard on their family farms (and family businesses), yes there are still a lot of family farms in Ohio. I don't think they would agree with your "undeserving" label. Inheritance taxes on such families is an effective way to reduce the number of family farms. I think you're showing a mindset of 'taking it because they have it' that is just plain wrong. We as a country are so wealthy in large part because we can become wealthy without such government policies to prevent the accumulation of wealth.People are sick and tired of being told that ordinary and decent people are fed up in this country with being sick and tired. I’m certainly not, and I’m sick and tired of being told that I am Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 1,625 #35 November 6, 2006 QuoteI know plenty of kids that work very hard on their family farms (and family businesses), yes there are still a lot of family farms in Ohio. I don't think they would agree with your "undeserving" label. Inheritance taxes on such families is an effective way to reduce the number of family farms. So if you actually wanted to raise revenue to match government expenditures (because we all know expenditures will NOT be cut) where would you do it? Be realistic, a LOT of $$ needs to be raised.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 2,400 #36 November 6, 2006 >this is truly pathetic that anytime something good happens >someone somehow tries to tie it to the Bush administration . . . Well, hey, people were blaming the democrats for "timing" the release of the Foley messages! Is that truly pathetic as well? There's not much question that the verdict was delayed to coincide with the US election. The idea that no one involved in the trial of Saddam Hussein knew/cared about the US election isn't that supportable. Doesn't mean that Bush told them what day and time to release the verdict - but it's pretty naive to believe that it's a complete coincidence. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
sundevil777 93 #37 November 6, 2006 QuoteQuoteI know plenty of kids that work very hard on their family farms (and family businesses), yes there are still a lot of family farms in Ohio. I don't think they would agree with your "undeserving" label. Inheritance taxes on such families is an effective way to reduce the number of family farms. So if you actually wanted to raise revenue to match government expenditures (because we all know expenditures will NOT be cut) where would you do it? Be realistic, a LOT of $$ needs to be raised. Expenditures can be cut. At least the rate of increase can be slowed, especially if it doesn't get labeled as a cut by the Dems in congress. Tax revenues have been going way up lately, due to a thriving economy. However, I do favor sweeping reform of the tax code. Of course many favor a flat income tax with an exemption for the first XX amount of dollars earned (some have proposed around 30K). Another way would be a sales tax only system that excludes food, and housing up to a certain amount per month. Both ideas face a lot of opposition due to entrenched interests. I don't think inheritance taxes can provide very much revenue.People are sick and tired of being told that ordinary and decent people are fed up in this country with being sick and tired. I’m certainly not, and I’m sick and tired of being told that I am Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 1,625 #38 November 7, 2006 QuoteQuote Expenditures can be cut. Very droll. Which party will do that, since neither of the major parties has ever shown an inclinaton in that direction? Over the last 40 years spending has gone up faster under Republican administrations. The only difference is that Republicans run up huge debts while Dems raise taxes.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites rehmwa 2 #39 November 7, 2006 QuoteIf the govt. can't be persuaded to cut spending (that's a joke), then taking inherited wealth comes high on my list for raising revenue. Lovely, good for you, nicely done. Spoken like a true parent. How do you handle the scenario where Junior is made a business partner with Dad and then Dad kicks off? Do you say that's not inheritance and Junior takes over? Do you shut down the factory and send all the employees into the street? Do you give the factory to the government? Or all the employees (I already know this is your dream). what about the family farm? Who deserves it more than the son or daughter that worked it throughout their childhood? I do agree with one thing - our two parties CAN'T be persuaded to cut spending. ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites idrankwhat 0 #40 November 7, 2006 QuoteImagine that. 2 days before the USA elections Quote this is truly pathetic that anytime something good happens someone somehow tries to tie it to the Bush administration engineering the outcome to happen to tie it in with a certain milestone. Why is it "pathetic"? They've done it numerous times before. By now it should be considered "business as usual". http://mediamatters.org/items/200610260010 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Amazon 7 #41 November 7, 2006 QuoteWhy is it "pathetic"? They've done it numerous times before. By now it should be considered "business as usual". Hey when you set up a puppet govenment.. you get to pull the strings.. From your link... incase they will not click on it because its not on the approved reading list.... Saddam Hussein verdict postponed until two days before U.S. election: Will the media turn a skeptical eye? Summary: While it cannot definitively be said that the reason the senior Iraqi court in charge of Saddam Hussein's trial postponed its verdict in the case until two days before the November elections so that it would influence the midterms, the postponement suggests several obvious questions, including, most importantly: Given the Bush administration's history of timing national security-related actions to the political calendar, has the date for the verdict's release been set to provide maximum political benefit for the administration and congressional Republicans? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites shropshire 0 #42 November 7, 2006 <> WTF? Taking someones life, any life is just plain wrong and can never be considered in anyway good in a civilized world. . (.)Y(.) Chivalry is not dead; it only sleeps for want of work to do. - Jerome K Jerome Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites jenfly00 0 #43 November 7, 2006 QuoteQuoteWhy is it "pathetic"? They've done it numerous times before. By now it should be considered "business as usual". Hey when you set up a puppet govenment.. you get to pull the strings.. From your link... incase they will not click on it because its not on the approved reading list.... Saddam Hussein verdict postponed until two days before U.S. election: Will the media turn a skeptical eye? Summary: While it cannot definitively be said that the reason the senior Iraqi court in charge of Saddam Hussein's trial postponed its verdict in the case until two days before the November elections so that it would influence the midterms, the postponement suggests several obvious questions, including, most importantly: Given the Bush administration's history of timing national security-related actions to the political calendar, has the date for the verdict's release been set to provide maximum political benefit for the administration and congressional Republicans? They're saving the 'Orange Alerts' for the presidential elections.----------------------- "O brave new world that has such people in it". Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Amazon 7 #44 November 7, 2006 QuoteThey're saving the 'Orange Alerts' for the presidential elections. Hell I think they are sitting on something even better.. a RED alert or two.. to show the american people just how dangerous our enemies really are. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites GQ_jumper 4 #45 November 8, 2006 note: Amazon this isn't geared specifically to you I just hit reply to your post. It was mentioned a few times that the verdict will be appealed, an dI can't remember if anyone pointed out or not that the appeal proccess is automatic in Iraq whenever there is a life sentence or death penalty at stake. I know it's a little off topic as to who timed what in accrodance with jupiter aligning with aquarius and the mid-terms, but I just thought I'd throw it out there. night everyone, I'm off to the gym and then bedHistory does not long entrust the care of freedom to the weak or the timid. --Dwight D. Eisenhower Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites DaVinci 0 #46 November 8, 2006 I like this part best: QuoteSummary: While it cannot definitively be said that the reason the senior Iraqi court in charge of Saddam Hussein's trial postponed its verdict in the case until two days before the November elections so that it would influence the midterms So they can't prove it, so it must be true Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Botellines 0 #47 November 8, 2006 Anyway, apparently capital punishment is never issued to any 70 year old or older according to Iraqui law. SH is 69 and will be 70 around April next year, so there is still another punch line in the story for the U.S when that Iraqui law gets abolished specially for SH. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites DaVinci 0 #48 November 8, 2006 Quoteso there is still another punch line in the story for the U.S when that Iraqui law gets abolished specially for SH. And what if it does not? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Prev 1 2 Next Page 2 of 2 Join the conversation You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account. Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible. Reply to this topic... × Pasted as rich text. Paste as plain text instead Only 75 emoji are allowed. × Your link has been automatically embedded. Display as a link instead × Your previous content has been restored. Clear editor × You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL. Insert image from URL × Desktop Tablet Phone Submit Reply 0 Go To Topic Listing
rehmwa 2 #39 November 7, 2006 QuoteIf the govt. can't be persuaded to cut spending (that's a joke), then taking inherited wealth comes high on my list for raising revenue. Lovely, good for you, nicely done. Spoken like a true parent. How do you handle the scenario where Junior is made a business partner with Dad and then Dad kicks off? Do you say that's not inheritance and Junior takes over? Do you shut down the factory and send all the employees into the street? Do you give the factory to the government? Or all the employees (I already know this is your dream). what about the family farm? Who deserves it more than the son or daughter that worked it throughout their childhood? I do agree with one thing - our two parties CAN'T be persuaded to cut spending. ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
idrankwhat 0 #40 November 7, 2006 QuoteImagine that. 2 days before the USA elections Quote this is truly pathetic that anytime something good happens someone somehow tries to tie it to the Bush administration engineering the outcome to happen to tie it in with a certain milestone. Why is it "pathetic"? They've done it numerous times before. By now it should be considered "business as usual". http://mediamatters.org/items/200610260010 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Amazon 7 #41 November 7, 2006 QuoteWhy is it "pathetic"? They've done it numerous times before. By now it should be considered "business as usual". Hey when you set up a puppet govenment.. you get to pull the strings.. From your link... incase they will not click on it because its not on the approved reading list.... Saddam Hussein verdict postponed until two days before U.S. election: Will the media turn a skeptical eye? Summary: While it cannot definitively be said that the reason the senior Iraqi court in charge of Saddam Hussein's trial postponed its verdict in the case until two days before the November elections so that it would influence the midterms, the postponement suggests several obvious questions, including, most importantly: Given the Bush administration's history of timing national security-related actions to the political calendar, has the date for the verdict's release been set to provide maximum political benefit for the administration and congressional Republicans? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites shropshire 0 #42 November 7, 2006 <> WTF? Taking someones life, any life is just plain wrong and can never be considered in anyway good in a civilized world. . (.)Y(.) Chivalry is not dead; it only sleeps for want of work to do. - Jerome K Jerome Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites jenfly00 0 #43 November 7, 2006 QuoteQuoteWhy is it "pathetic"? They've done it numerous times before. By now it should be considered "business as usual". Hey when you set up a puppet govenment.. you get to pull the strings.. From your link... incase they will not click on it because its not on the approved reading list.... Saddam Hussein verdict postponed until two days before U.S. election: Will the media turn a skeptical eye? Summary: While it cannot definitively be said that the reason the senior Iraqi court in charge of Saddam Hussein's trial postponed its verdict in the case until two days before the November elections so that it would influence the midterms, the postponement suggests several obvious questions, including, most importantly: Given the Bush administration's history of timing national security-related actions to the political calendar, has the date for the verdict's release been set to provide maximum political benefit for the administration and congressional Republicans? They're saving the 'Orange Alerts' for the presidential elections.----------------------- "O brave new world that has such people in it". Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Amazon 7 #44 November 7, 2006 QuoteThey're saving the 'Orange Alerts' for the presidential elections. Hell I think they are sitting on something even better.. a RED alert or two.. to show the american people just how dangerous our enemies really are. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites GQ_jumper 4 #45 November 8, 2006 note: Amazon this isn't geared specifically to you I just hit reply to your post. It was mentioned a few times that the verdict will be appealed, an dI can't remember if anyone pointed out or not that the appeal proccess is automatic in Iraq whenever there is a life sentence or death penalty at stake. I know it's a little off topic as to who timed what in accrodance with jupiter aligning with aquarius and the mid-terms, but I just thought I'd throw it out there. night everyone, I'm off to the gym and then bedHistory does not long entrust the care of freedom to the weak or the timid. --Dwight D. Eisenhower Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites DaVinci 0 #46 November 8, 2006 I like this part best: QuoteSummary: While it cannot definitively be said that the reason the senior Iraqi court in charge of Saddam Hussein's trial postponed its verdict in the case until two days before the November elections so that it would influence the midterms So they can't prove it, so it must be true Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Botellines 0 #47 November 8, 2006 Anyway, apparently capital punishment is never issued to any 70 year old or older according to Iraqui law. SH is 69 and will be 70 around April next year, so there is still another punch line in the story for the U.S when that Iraqui law gets abolished specially for SH. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites DaVinci 0 #48 November 8, 2006 Quoteso there is still another punch line in the story for the U.S when that Iraqui law gets abolished specially for SH. And what if it does not? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Prev 1 2 Next Page 2 of 2 Join the conversation You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account. Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible. Reply to this topic... × Pasted as rich text. Paste as plain text instead Only 75 emoji are allowed. × Your link has been automatically embedded. Display as a link instead × Your previous content has been restored. Clear editor × You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL. Insert image from URL × Desktop Tablet Phone Submit Reply 0
Amazon 7 #41 November 7, 2006 QuoteWhy is it "pathetic"? They've done it numerous times before. By now it should be considered "business as usual". Hey when you set up a puppet govenment.. you get to pull the strings.. From your link... incase they will not click on it because its not on the approved reading list.... Saddam Hussein verdict postponed until two days before U.S. election: Will the media turn a skeptical eye? Summary: While it cannot definitively be said that the reason the senior Iraqi court in charge of Saddam Hussein's trial postponed its verdict in the case until two days before the November elections so that it would influence the midterms, the postponement suggests several obvious questions, including, most importantly: Given the Bush administration's history of timing national security-related actions to the political calendar, has the date for the verdict's release been set to provide maximum political benefit for the administration and congressional Republicans? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
shropshire 0 #42 November 7, 2006 <> WTF? Taking someones life, any life is just plain wrong and can never be considered in anyway good in a civilized world. . (.)Y(.) Chivalry is not dead; it only sleeps for want of work to do. - Jerome K Jerome Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jenfly00 0 #43 November 7, 2006 QuoteQuoteWhy is it "pathetic"? They've done it numerous times before. By now it should be considered "business as usual". Hey when you set up a puppet govenment.. you get to pull the strings.. From your link... incase they will not click on it because its not on the approved reading list.... Saddam Hussein verdict postponed until two days before U.S. election: Will the media turn a skeptical eye? Summary: While it cannot definitively be said that the reason the senior Iraqi court in charge of Saddam Hussein's trial postponed its verdict in the case until two days before the November elections so that it would influence the midterms, the postponement suggests several obvious questions, including, most importantly: Given the Bush administration's history of timing national security-related actions to the political calendar, has the date for the verdict's release been set to provide maximum political benefit for the administration and congressional Republicans? They're saving the 'Orange Alerts' for the presidential elections.----------------------- "O brave new world that has such people in it". Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Amazon 7 #44 November 7, 2006 QuoteThey're saving the 'Orange Alerts' for the presidential elections. Hell I think they are sitting on something even better.. a RED alert or two.. to show the american people just how dangerous our enemies really are. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
GQ_jumper 4 #45 November 8, 2006 note: Amazon this isn't geared specifically to you I just hit reply to your post. It was mentioned a few times that the verdict will be appealed, an dI can't remember if anyone pointed out or not that the appeal proccess is automatic in Iraq whenever there is a life sentence or death penalty at stake. I know it's a little off topic as to who timed what in accrodance with jupiter aligning with aquarius and the mid-terms, but I just thought I'd throw it out there. night everyone, I'm off to the gym and then bedHistory does not long entrust the care of freedom to the weak or the timid. --Dwight D. Eisenhower Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DaVinci 0 #46 November 8, 2006 I like this part best: QuoteSummary: While it cannot definitively be said that the reason the senior Iraqi court in charge of Saddam Hussein's trial postponed its verdict in the case until two days before the November elections so that it would influence the midterms So they can't prove it, so it must be true Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Botellines 0 #47 November 8, 2006 Anyway, apparently capital punishment is never issued to any 70 year old or older according to Iraqui law. SH is 69 and will be 70 around April next year, so there is still another punch line in the story for the U.S when that Iraqui law gets abolished specially for SH. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DaVinci 0 #48 November 8, 2006 Quoteso there is still another punch line in the story for the U.S when that Iraqui law gets abolished specially for SH. And what if it does not? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
