Saddam's Sentencing Super Sunday! [Archive]

View Full Version : Saddam's Sentencing Super Sunday!

Yerdaddy

11-04-2006, 08:15 AM

<a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/11/04/AR2006110400350_pf.html" target="_blank">Iraq waits nervously to hear if Saddam will hang</a>The army was on alert with all leave canceled and state television said a curfew will keep Baghdad and two flashpoint provinces locked down on Sunday. A source in the prime minister's office said it was not clear how long it would last.Saddam's chief lawyer Khalil al-Dulaimi said Saddam believed the verdict was timed to boost President George W. Bush before U.S. mid-term elections on November 7, and urged a delay.Former U.S. attorney general Ramsey Clark, who leads an international group of lawyers involved in the defense, said Saddam would almost certainly receive the death sentence but it would be "victors' justice."First of all, Ramsey Clark is a scumbag. Saddam, 69, and seven co-accused have been charged with crimes against humanity for the killing of 148 Shi'ite villagers after an attempt on his life in the town of Dujail in 1982.Even if he is sentenced to death, it may be many months, even years, before he is hanged as appeals are heard. Saddam is due back in court on Tuesday in another trial, for genocide against ethnic Kurds.FEARS OF VIOLENCEIraqi state television said an indefinite curfew would be imposed in Baghdad and the provinces of Diyala and Salahaddin, Saddam's home province, from early on Sunday morning.The Defense Ministry on Friday canceled all leave for army officers in anticipation of the verdict.Saddam remains a deeply divisive figure in a country riven by sectarian violence between the Sunni Arab minority and the Shi'ites, who were oppressed by Saddam but now dominate political power. Various Sunni Arab insurgent groups see him as a figurehead in their resistance against U.S. troops.While the eyes of the world may be turned to the trial, many Iraqis are preoccupied with relentless sectarian violence and insurgent attacks killing hundreds every week.Some are accusing the Bush adminstration of having the verdict come just before the mid-term elctions. Don't know, or really care if it's true. At the same time Saddam is likely to be convicted, it could be followed with an upsurge in violence, which would then draw attention to the fact that the violence is already about at the war's peak recently, with the highest US deaths since February of 2004 last month. (I guess I just drew attention to that fact. Oops!)

johnniewalker

11-04-2006, 08:32 AM

I got my money on not guilty.

reeshy

11-04-2006, 09:10 AM

<img width="170" height="182" border="0" src="http://myspace-905.vo.llnwd.net/00007/50/90/7990905_m.jpg" />"If the glove don't fit........"!!!!!!!

ChrisTheCop

11-04-2006, 11:39 AM

if the wmds werent found, then i didnt put 200 shi'ites in the ground.

Yerdaddy

11-05-2006, 12:20 AM

A spirited debate so far in this thread. You guys are all drunk, aren't you!?<a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/11/05/AR2006110500135.html">Hussein Sentenced to Death</a> Former Iraqi dictator to be hanged for his role in a brutal crackdown nearly 25 years ago in Dujail.Must be just breaking because the story behind the link is just a fragment and doesn't mention Saddam's conviction. Probably be the full story when you guys wake up. It did have this:BAGHDAD, Iraq (AP) -- Iraq's High Tribunal convicted three Saddam Hussein co-defendants of murder and torture on Sunday and sentenced them to up to 15 years in prison. A fourth defendant was acquitted for lack of evidence. Former Iraqi Vice President Taha Yassin Ramadan is sentenced to life in prison for premeditated murder in Dujail case.The chief judge also ordered former U.S. Attorney General Ramsey Clark expelled from the verdict session.Ha! Fuck you, you crazy old dick!

Se7en

11-05-2006, 12:27 AM

The far left seems to be divided on this verdict.Half of them seem to be upset that he got death, citing the trial as a 'sham', and the other have seems to be replying with the oh so witty "I wish it was Bush instead."LOLZ

CuzBum

11-05-2006, 12:31 AM

Ben Kingsley really knows how to take control of a court room!

Yerdaddy

11-05-2006, 12:44 AM

Se7en wrote: The far left seems to be divided on this verdict.Half of them seem to be upset that he got death, citing the trial as a 'sham', and the other have seems to be replying with the oh so witty "I wish it was Bush instead."LOLZWhat the fuck are you talking about? The verdict was like 20 minutes ago. If you're going to pull shit out of your ass for a breaking subject at least leave it in there until it's at least physically possible.

CuzBum

11-05-2006, 12:49 AM

sr71blackbird

11-05-2006, 01:13 AM

Yerdaddy wrote: Se7en wrote: The far left seems to be divided on this verdict.Half of them seem to be upset that he got death, citing the trial as a 'sham', and the other have seems to be replying with the oh so witty "I wish it was Bush instead."LOLZWhat the fuck are you talking about? The verdict was like 20 minutes ago. If you're going to pull shit out of your ass for a breaking subject at least leave it in there until it's at least physically possible.He is right though, because they have been building and building this reaction for weeks.  You can honestly say you have not seen the top news storys on Yahoo and other major sites about how a death verdict will cause a civil war?  Come on!  They are absolutley hoping this turns into a blood bath and as many of our troops die as possible...just so they can say see?  See???

Yerdaddy

11-05-2006, 01:22 AM

sr71blackbird wrote: Yerdaddy wrote: Se7en wrote: The far left seems to be divided on this verdict.Half of them seem to be upset that he got death, citing the trial as a 'sham', and the other have seems to be replying with the oh so witty "I wish it was Bush instead."LOLZWhat the fuck are you talking about? The verdict was like 20 minutes ago. If you're going to pull shit out of your ass for a breaking subject at least leave it in there until it's at least physically possible.He is right though, because they have been building and building this reaction for weeks.  You can honestly say you have not seen the top news storys on Yahoo and other major sites about how a death verdict will cause a civil war?  Come on!  They are absolutley hoping this turns into a blood bath and as many of our troops die as possible...just so they can say see?  See???I have to ask. This is sarcasm right?

sr71blackbird

11-05-2006, 01:25 AM

Not at all.  I am sorry, but this is what they want in the end.

CuzBum

11-05-2006, 01:35 AM

sr71blackbird wrote: Not at all.  I am sorry, but this is what they want in the end. I'd expect an 8 paragraph response, citing sources, from Yerdaddy soon.

Yerdaddy

11-05-2006, 01:44 AM

sr71blackbird wrote: Not at all.  I am sorry, but this is what they want in the end. OK. Who is "they", and where can I find the examples of them wanting dead soldiers? I'm a news junkie with a special obsession with Iraq and I didn't even realize Saddam's verdict was coming until I started this thread last night. And I'm looking at the past <a href="http://news.yahoo.com/fc/world/iraq/feature_articles/1;_ylt=Akw8ScAARy214h6OBgLbdbBX6GMA;_ylu=X3oDMTBiM W04NW9mBHNlYwMlJVRPUCUl" target="_blank">Iraq: Featured Articles</a> on Yahoo for the last week and I don't see anything like you're describing. There's plenty of articles about the level of violence - unrelated to the Saddam verdict - which are based on the statements and reports of the US military and Iraqi government. What articles came out yesterday about extra security precautions taken by the US and Iraqi forces was standard reporting coming straight from US military press conferences. I can't see anything on which you could possibly be basing your accusations on.

Yerdaddy

11-05-2006, 01:50 AM

CuzBum wrote: sr71blackbird wrote: Not at all.  I am sorry, but this is what they want in the end. I'd expect an 8 paragraph response, citing sources, from Yerdaddy soon.I'm on vacation!I'll start writing tonight. Single space?

CuzBum

11-05-2006, 01:53 AM

Yerdaddy wrote: CuzBum wrote: sr71blackbird wrote: Not at all.  I am sorry, but this is what they want in the end. I'd expect an 8 paragraph response, citing sources, from Yerdaddy soon.I'm on vacation!I'll start writing tonight. Single space?Damn straight single spaced, and don't forget to indent!

HBox

11-05-2006, 02:02 AM

Yerdaddy wrote: sr71blackbird wrote: Not at all. I am sorry, but this is what they want in the end. OK. Who is "they"  <img width="362" height="475" border="0" src="http://www.critcononline.com/images/they%20live.gif" />

sr71blackbird

11-05-2006, 02:10 AM

Do you expect that they would put an article that I can quote from, outlining their agenda? It is not a personal thing guys, I respect both of you.  It is pretty obvious that almost every news agency and web site and many people in general are against the war effort.  The whole idea of the war was to get Sadaam out and help Iraq become a free country, and though obviously many people do not agree with it, it is a noble effort.

HBox

11-05-2006, 02:19 AM

sr71blackbird wrote: Do you expect that they would put an article that I can quote from, outlining their agenda? It is not a personal thing guys, I respect both of you. It is pretty obvious that almost every news agency and web site and many people in general are against the war effort. The whole idea of the war was to get Sadaam out and help Iraq become a free country, and though obviously many people do not agree with it, it is a noble effort. WHO IS THEY?!?!?! The Illuminati? The Jews? The Free Masons? Microsoft? Communists? The KKK? Disney? Nazis? Wal-Mart? Muslims? Majestic 12? The World Banking Organziation? The Gays? Globalizationists? China? Islamo-facists? Regular old facists? Skinheads? WHO? IN GOD'S NAME WHO!?!?!?!? 

This message was edited by HBox on 11-5-06 @ 6:20 AM

sr71blackbird

11-05-2006, 02:20 AM

They is YOU!!  <img src="http://www.ronfez.net/messageboard/tiny_mce/plugins/emotions/images/bye.gif" border="0" />  

This message was edited by sr71blackbird on 11-5-06 @ 6:21 AM

CuzBum

11-05-2006, 02:23 AM

The Jews?<img src="http://www.martinirepublic.com/wp-content/images/borat.jpg" border="0" />

FUNKMAN

11-05-2006, 02:28 AM

sr71blackbird wrote: Do you expect that they would put an article that I can quote from, outlining their agenda? It is not a personal thing guys, I respect both of you.  It is pretty obvious that almost every news agency and web site and many people in general are against the war effort.  The whole idea of the war was to get Sadaam out and help Iraq become a free country, and though obviously many people do not agree with it, it is a noble effort. Joe,Did you ever hear that saying "don't cut off your nose to spite your face"?   Do you really believe the costs we've incurred and continue to do so are a fair tradeoff to getting Saddam out of power. The leader of a country that was not attacking us or threatening to attack us and when it comes down to it he was just busting balls.3,000 Soldiers Dead / 15,000-20,000 blinded, burned, lost limbs / approx 50,000 dead iraqis "innocent and enemy / a trillion dollars(they talk 300 billion but in my opinion there hiding the true cost)  and the costs continue to mount.The only thing that is noble is the dedication of the US Soldier.

HBox

11-05-2006, 02:39 AM

CuzBum wrote:  The Jews? <img border="0" src="http://www.martinirepublic.com/wp-content/images/borat.jpg" />  The chocolate faces?

Yerdaddy

11-05-2006, 04:36 AM

[/quote]Do you expect that they would put an article that I can quote from, outlining their agenda? I expect you to have some evidence to back your claim, if that claim is that the "media" wants soldiers to die just to hurt Bush's... approval ratings? His party's dominance of Congress? What you're claiming is that an intire industry, which is critical to having an educated populous is essentially treasonous, and that would be a pretty important fact, if true, and an extemely hostile accusation to make, if not true. And, if it were true, there would certainly be some evidence - available right there on thier own news outlets, to demonstrate it. You cited the existence of specific examples. All I'm saying is show me where they are.[quote]It is not a personal thing guys, I respect both of you.  It is pretty obvious that almost every news agency and web site and many people in general are against the war effort.  The whole idea of the war was to get Sadaam out and help Iraq become a free country, and though obviously many people do not agree with it, it is a noble effort. I respect you too. I expect those outrageous claims from se7en. He's proven his predjudices and agendas, and I tear his posts apart mainly for fun. And, for a long time now, he has little credibility with even conservatives on the board. But the whole point of free speech is that, by being able to challenge ideas, those that reflect the truth will come to light. I think you're ideas here are completely unbased on truth, and yet are popularly held by large segments of the population. Therefore, I have to challenge you on them. For example, you say: It is pretty obvious that almost every news agency and web site and many people in general are against the war effort."Almost every news agency... [is] against the war effort" is a specific charge that can be demonstrated by evidence. The opinion of the newspapers are expressed daily by their editorial staffs. Let's look at the major newspapers' views on the invasion of Iraq, by the Columbia Journalism Review:Here’s what these six editorial pages did write, during the crucial six-week period between Powell’s speech and the beginning of hostilities on March 19, 2003. They ranged from hawkish without a shade of doubt (The Wall Street Journal and, to a lesser extent, the Chicago Tribune), to prowar but conflicted (The Washington Post and USA Today), to antiwar without United Nations approval (The New York Times and Los Angeles Times). None of these six unconditionally opposed war. Neither did any of them throw their weight behind intellectually appealing, but nevertheless unofficial, prowar arguments. These included the so-called “liberal hawk” position, which focused less on Hussein’s status as an imminent threat and more on the moral case for overthrowing a murderous tyrant. In other words, of the six papers we studied, for the most part, the ones that supported war also accepted Bush’s justifications for it. It is not "pretty obvious" that these papers were against the war. They took complex views towards what should and should not be done, with some of them publicly in support of the war. And if you mean by "against the war effort" that they want us to lose, or want soldiers to die, then that's an extreme accusation and you'll have to back it up with pretty serious proof because it's far from obvious.And you cannot claim that the single, or even primary rationale for this war was to free the Iraqi people and give them democracy. If you are, you'll have to demonstrate how they were supposed to do that when they never had enough troops to secure the country. I want to keep this under 8 pages, (I'm on vacation!), so I'll put the onus on you to make the case that it was. I just don't have it in me to let you get away with accusing thousands of journalists of, essentially, treason without taking some responsibilit

Sheeplovr

11-05-2006, 05:11 AM

sentenced to death by hanging for crimes against humanityLame

cougarjake13

11-05-2006, 05:19 AM

they should expose him to small doses of all the kinds of torture he performed on his people while he's in powerenough to make him feel extreme amounts of pain but not enough to kill him

Recyclerz

11-05-2006, 05:19 AM

Yerdaddy, you must have missed the memo: If you vote for a Democrat the Terrorists win.<a href="http://worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=52747">http://worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=52747</a><a href="http://worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=52775">http://worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=52775</a>If this World Net Daily site turns out to be a parody site,  I apologize but in my defense it is really hard to tell sometimes.And here's a link to a clip from Fox news referring to the story<a href="http://mediamatters.org/items/200611040006">http://mediamatters.org/items/200611040006</a> Back on topic, I'm glad Saddam will be doing the marionette dance but W's Big Adventure still wasn't worth it.

This message was edited by Recyclerz on 11-5-06 @ 9:21 AM

ChrisTheCop

11-05-2006, 05:52 AM

As much of a conclusion jumper as I may be, I gotta agree that although NO American ( I hope!) WANTS more american troops to die, I can see Hilary and her ilk checking the papers every morning and being "pleased" that the number of deaths went up (because they told us so!), and if/when it drastically increases as a result of this conviction, do you really think you wont see a campaign ad or 2 using that stat to benefit their campaign??? Theyre probably already being made in hopes that it happens. What a waste of campaign dollars if it doesnt.But congrats to the tribunal, for getting their job done. Question for those who know better than I (which is most of you here), can Sadaam appeal this over and over? Will it ever actually happen?

Mr.Pants

11-05-2006, 05:55 AM

Hanging? What century is this?

CuzBum

11-05-2006, 05:59 AM

Hangings are great, especially when the knot fails to dislocate the neck and you have to watch someone suffocate!

ShelleBink

11-05-2006, 06:07 AM

FUNKMAN wrote: sr71blackbird wrote: Do you expect that they would put an article that I can quote from, outlining their agenda? It is not a personal thing guys, I respect both of you. It is pretty obvious that almost every news agency and web site and many people in general are against the war effort. The whole idea of the war was to get Sadaam out and help Iraq become a free country, and though obviously many people do not agree with it, it is a noble effort. Joe,Did you ever hear that saying "don't cut off your nose to spite your face"? Do you really believe the costs we've incurred and continue to do so are a fair tradeoff to getting Saddam out of power. The leader of a country that was not attacking us or threatening to attack us and when it comes down to it he was just busting balls.3,000 Soldiers Dead / 15,000-20,000 blinded, burned, lost limbs / approx 50,000 dead iraqis "innocent and enemy / a trillion dollars(they talk 300 billion but in my opinion there hiding the true cost) and the costs continue to mount.The only thing that is noble is the dedication of the US Soldier.   Amen to that brother.  While I respect the choices that many of the soldiers made years ago to join the armed forces ((before 9/11)), part of me just wants them home so I can see them and know they're alright.  It may be selfish, but I don't care.

furie

11-05-2006, 07:18 AM

Mr.Pants wrote: Hanging? What century is this?

should this thread be moved to 'Old School'?

Fez4PrezN2008

11-05-2006, 03:57 PM

Does Saddam doing a spandau ballet really solve anything or really make anyone feel better? He may deserve it, but I think its just going to make things worse in the middle east.

suggums

11-05-2006, 04:15 PM

se7ens a clown

dereckfishboy

11-05-2006, 05:30 PM

Fez4PrezN2008 wrote: Does Saddam doing a spandau ballet really solve anything or really make anyone feel better? He may deserve it, but I think its just going to make things worse in the middle east.  The fact that he's almost seventy pretty much makes me feel like he got away with everything he did for the most part. Lived a rich full life (except for the last few years).

Bulldogcakes

11-05-2006, 06:08 PM

Fez4PrezN2008 wrote: Does Saddam doing a spandau ballet really solve anything or really make anyone feel better? He may deserve it, but I think its just going to make things worse in the middle east. I'll assume you dont mean the 80's UK band, and mean this  
Took their name from the Nazi guard phrase decribing the death
contortions of executed Jewish prisoners in the gas chambers at Spandau.   <a href="http://www.nndb.com/music/216/000036108/" target="_self" title="I know this much is true.">I know this much is true.</a>         

This message was edited by Bulldogcakes on 11-5-06 @ 10:11 PM

epo

11-05-2006, 07:12 PM

sr71blackbird wrote: Not at all.  I am sorry, but this is what they want in the end. This is the type of baseless accusation by the far right-wing in this country that has to end now.  Republicans run around claiming this shit and rarely ever get called on it; rarely does anybody make them prove it.  Of course when pressed they wilt.  Liberals in this country need to call them on it every time to ruin every ounce of credibility they have.  Exhibit A:  This morning on Meet the Press, Elizabeth Dole claimed that in Iraq "Democrats are content with losing."  Rahm Emanuel almost bit her head off for that crap and thank god he did.

A.J.

11-06-2006, 03:59 AM

Sheeplovr wrote: sentenced to death by hanging for crimes against humanityLame I hope Boris can fit him in.<img height="200" src="http://www.movieactors.com/photos/BlazeSaddle11.jpeg" width="274" border="0" />

This message was edited by A.J. on 11-6-06 @ 10:47 AM

Jujubees2

11-06-2006, 06:26 AM

sr71blackbird wrote: Do you expect that they would put an article that I can quote from, outlining their agenda? It is not a personal thing guys, I respect both of you.  It is pretty obvious that almost every news agency and web site and many people in general are against the war effort.  The whole idea of the war was to get Sadaam out and help Iraq become a free country, and though obviously many people do not agree with it, it is a noble effort. That's funny because I thought someone got up on national TV and told us that we invaded Iraq becauuse they had weapons of mass destruction.  And recently, I thought he said that this was part of "the war on terror".  Geez, I wish he would get his story straight. And now that Saddam has been found guilty, maybe it's time to put someone else on trial for torturing and killing innocent Iraqis:<img height="240" src="http://www.rageboy.com/images/george-w-bush.jpg" width="200" border="0" />

Furtherman

11-06-2006, 06:49 AM

sr71blackbird wrote: The whole idea of the war was to get Sadaam out and help Iraq become a free country, and though obviously many people do not agree with it, it is a noble effort. It was?  From the beginning?  And when we leave, whether it be a year or 10 years from now, they won't tear themselves apart with a civil war?  We had no right stepping in their shit.  What about the other countries ruled by brutal dictators, warlords and corrupt officials?  Why aren't we helping out North Korea?Burma?Zimbabwe?Swaziland?Because we will not.  Our troops will never invade those countries to install democracy.But yet we did Iraq because....  well, I think most of us are still trying to figure that out.  Meanwhile, back at the real Legion of Doom, Afghanistan, yea... we're losing it there.  There is the real danger.  The return of the Tailban, the gathering strength of Al Quedia.And every day we stay in Iraq breeds another insurgent.  Another family who will swear revenge on Americans.  Another future terrorist who will kill out of spite and hatred.There is no nobility.

CofyCrakCocaine

11-06-2006, 07:38 AM

Quote: They are absolutley hoping this turns into a blood bath and as
many of our troops die as possible...just so they can say see?  See??? Having been one to always be quick to lambast the Left when they make baseless judgemental statements that are utterly rooted in just their opinion and little to no fact, I must say that I find this sentiment to be morally repugnant. This is something I consider ideological hate-mongering, in which someone tries to villainize the hell out of an entire group of people in one fell-swoop of a sentence (which they state as though it's the unshakable truth) just because they are of a different political swing from themselves. 'They' didn't want the War in Iraq, so 'they' must be wishing the worst upon our countrymen? I consider this sentiment in line with statements like 'Bush is Hitler', 'I wish Bush would be shot' (you really want Dick as Prez?!!), and 'Conservatives are Evil because they're, uh, conservatives'. Do we (meaning most Americans) want to get out of Iraq? You bet we do, and each person wants withdrawel for his or her own personal reasons. Some people want the soldiers to come home and not die anymore. Some want the War to end because of the damage it's done to the budget and overall morale. Some want it to end so that the war in terror can be waged in places where our attention is more needed. Some want it to end because they're bored of hearing it. Fuck 'em. Does the majority of news media want this? Not necessarily. The Wall Street Journal, a teensy weensy little-known publication, is an ardent supporter of the Iraq War. I could also mention the multitudes of conservative newspapers, pamphlets, radio shows, and television shows that will support the war to their last breath. Everything on Fox News is Pro-Iraq. Even the New York Times has a number of conservative columnists who for at least a few years supported the war in Iraq, and still adamantly support the war on terror, as do I. I saw the editor for the New Yorker, David Remnick, give a speech at FDU last week in which he said that he had been for the war in Iraq initially because he supported U.S. intervention in Kosovo and saw what happened when no one intervened in Rwanda- even though he said that now he knows it was a mistake to support this particular war. He also said that the staff at New Yorker was not initially against the war in Iraq until the problems of insurgency started to prove that we were on a very bad road. None of these news media journalists strike me as people who hope as many U.S. soldiers die in Iraq just to prove a stupid fucking point. For most Americans your sweeping sentiment is as rational as saying 'I hope my mom dies because I told her not to go outside today for fear of the burgeoning geese population, as her death would prove me right nyah nyah'. I think there are plenty of liberals out there who are scumbags and do wish things in Iraq to go badly, but I don't presume to make such a sweeping blanket statement that all the people in the media or liberals in general who are against Iraq are against the survival of our soldiers. I will go so far as to point out that a proposed re-implementation of a military Draft in 2003 was proposed by two Democrats, who may or may not have been hoping to make the Republicans look bad by getting a Draft started (that's up to your interpretation- I don't know what to think myself); this was rejected, as you all know. It's been 3 or so years since I last checked the bill out and I can't remember which .gov website I got it from. I don't even know if you can find it now because it was rejected a couple years ago. I'm sure it's on record somewhere. But this does not mean that everyone is a scumbag who will go to any length just to prove a point, and I have yet to find any evidence of people in the news m

Doctor Manhattan

11-06-2006, 07:39 AM

Sheeplovr wrote: sentenced to death by hanging for crimes against humanityLame I'm sure they would like to do something more elaborate and cruel to him, but they don't want to look as barbaric and crazy and Saddam.I would have had him do something from the Saw films (with a dude with a machete waiting for him just in case he does make it out of the device alive)

Sheeplovr

11-06-2006, 07:52 AM

I'm
sure they would like to do something more elaborate and cruel to him,
but they don't want to look as barbaric and crazy and Saddam.I
would have had him do something from the Saw films (with a dude with a
machete waiting for him just in case he does make it out of the device
alive)i ment lame that they are executing him

Yerdaddy

11-11-2006, 02:31 PM

<a href="http://www.iht.com/articles/2006/11/09/news/saddam.php" target="_blank">BAGHDAD:</a> Prime Minister Nuri Kamal al-Maliki of Iraq predicted in a televised interview that former President Saddam Hussein would be hanged by the end of the year. Court officials said, however, that the prime minister's prediction on Wednesday was unrealistic, considering the timing of the appeals process and the sheer volume of evidence that the appellate judges would have to review. It was far more likely, they said, that the hanging would not take place until January at the earliest, and probably later.Under Iraqi law, a nine-judge appellate court will begin its review of the death sentences against Saddam and two of his co-defendants 30 days from Sunday, when the sentences were handed down. If the appellate judges uphold the rulings, the executions must be carried out within 30 days.I had no idea it could be this quick. I thought they were going to keep him around for other trials.

FUNKMAN

11-11-2006, 03:28 PM

Yerdaddy wrote: <a href="http://www.iht.com/articles/2006/11/09/news/saddam.php" target="_blank">BAGHDAD:</a> Prime Minister Nuri Kamal al-Maliki of Iraq predicted in a televised interview that former President Saddam Hussein would be hanged by the end of the year. Court officials said, however, that the prime minister's prediction on Wednesday was unrealistic, considering the timing of the appeals process and the sheer volume of evidence that the appellate judges would have to review. It was far more likely, they said, that the hanging would not take place until January at the earliest, and probably later.Under Iraqi law, a nine-judge appellate court will begin its review of the death sentences against Saddam and two of his co-defendants 30 days from Sunday, when the sentences were handed down. If the appellate judges uphold the rulings, the executions must be carried out within 30 days.  I had no idea it could be this quick. I thought they were going to keep him around for other trials. their gonna hang him on the christmas tree at rahmanafeller centerdoes anybody really give a camels cock anyway?<img src="http://www.ronfez.net/messageboard/tiny_mce/plugins/emotions/images/tongue.gif" border="0" />

Maxville

11-12-2006, 11:57 AM

Whem do we start the betting pool?  My money is on Saddam pulling an ol' Goering and never seeing a gallows.

cougarjake13

11-12-2006, 01:24 PM

Doctor Manhattan wrote: Sheeplovr wrote: sentenced to death by hanging for crimes against humanityLame I'm sure they would like to do something more elaborate and cruel to him, but they don't want to look as barbaric and crazy and Saddam.I would have had him do something from the Saw films (with a dude with a machete waiting for him just in case he does make it out of the device alive)i was thinking more like the penis sword strap on from seven straight up his ass

reeshy

11-12-2006, 01:27 PM

Why don't we make a board event about this????

keithy_19

11-12-2006, 02:57 PM

I think, you should have all the poeple Saddam has affected during his life and have them give him a  paper cut.