http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/4567341.stm
Thoughts?
Printable View
That's a little over the top. Unnecessary. But he is kinda cute. I mean, what?
Where are THE REST of the pictures? :mad2:
Perhaps I should've said SERIOUS thoughts. And why do you want to see the rest of the pictures?
I think this is pretty ridiculous. I know that the Sun is far from reputable as far as their "coverage" goes, but there is a line of decency, and I think they blew it up.
They shouldn't have done this. And thier only excuse is that it's okay to do because he killed hundreds of thousands of people? What a joke. I hope Saddam wins the lawsuit.
I knew he wore tighty whities.
I honestly don't care either way about this though.
I find the whole thing rather humorous personally. I saw the picture and laughed and said "is that real?" when I was at Walmart the other day...and now that Saddam is sueing makes it even more amusing...
But I mean, I think it's rediculous that they did such in the first place. It was unecessary and I too hope Saddam wins the lawsuit (which will be even more amusing).
now this isn't about the pictures but about a lovely legal loop hole.
sadamme huessein is technically innocent. he hasn't been found guilty and so is innocent. most of all saying he is guilty is illegal. and...... if you say it enough you can never find him guilty. because when you try and get any kind of jury together the defence will throw out every possible juror because they have been exposed to papers like the sun which say "he is guilty" and so everyone thinks him guilty and he can't get a fair trial. and if he can't get a fair trail he can't be tried. if he an't be tried he can't be found guilty. and therefore can only be deemed innocent. so not only is he legally innocent now but will always be legally innocent. yes he may be guilty and we all know that but saying so deems him innocent. isn't that a lovely catch-22.
same goes for osama. though he was already found guilty of the african bombings under laws meant for the mafia.
i think it is really unfair on saddam to have those photos taken, he is a human being too, even considering the crimes he "may"(i guess i must say that after cloud no.9's post) have commited, the Sun has no right to publish those pictures especially on the front page, it's not news it's just scandalous :choc:
saddam was a tyrant.
but he deserves privacy too!
stuff like this is just to keep us from the real issues the world is dealing with right now.
There are other judging systems beside the Jury System. Here, in 1960, after Adolph Aichmann, head of the extermination under Hitler, was caught, the supreme court assembled 8 judges which tried him, brought witnesses, and he was found guilty because all evidence showed so. Same goes for Saddam - there's more evidence and witnesses than you could view and hear in a life-time, all pointing to him being god-damned guilty.Quote:
the defence will throw out every possible juror
there is of course the war crimes court......... but america doesn't like the idea of that.
you could try him under iraqi law.... but that brings up all sorts of questions of bias cos every iraqi wants him.
yes he is guilty. yes we all know that. but it is gonna be very difficult to try him.
but he needs to be tried soon. he has been held for a long time now without trial. it is not fair to anyone to keep holding him in this manner for such a length of time.