Thread: Justice Served
View Single Post
  #13  
Old 10-20-2005, 09:27 AM
MMMMMM MMMMMM is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 4,103
Default My View And Elaboration

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
There's simply no chance he isn't guilty. Sentence first, verdict afterwards.


[/ QUOTE ]



I guess I'm in a small minority, I don't support the death penalty even for this guy. Your suggestion of a guilty until proven innocent based justice system makes me sick.


[/ QUOTE ]

A little elaboration on my part is apparently called for.

"Sentence first, verdict afterwards" is an intended literary reference to Lewis Carroll's (Charles Dodgson's) little masterpiece, Alice In Wonderland, with its perfect caricature of a kangaroo court trial. The accused Knave of Hearts, the proceedings presided over by the King of Hearts ("Do you take me for a dunce?"), and the accompanying cast of characters and scenery, has left an indelible impression upon my memory.

My reference had two thrusts, besides an attempt at facetious humor: that Saddam most assuredly is guilty; can anyone seriously doubt it?--hence the trial is indeed all for show purposes.

Whether that makes it an actual kangaroo trial is another question, though: my view is that it is important for the Arab world to be shown exactly the extent of the crimes of Saddam, in part as a rebuff to Baathist ideology and to totalitarianism--the Arab world desperately needs to move away from such political models. What better way to help accomplish that than serious public expose? That was why I asked the question of Cyrus: to what purpose the trial? Not to DISCOVER whether he is guilty or not, but to PROVE it publicly.

I certainly don't support the kind of justice system you inferred from my post, and sorry for not making that clear. However, I don't apologize for casting aspersions on the misguided notion that Saddam might not be guilty (if anybody here thinks that he really might not be). ACPlayer in his initial post seemed to subtly suggest that Saddam might not get a fair shake (and thereby be wrongly found guilty). If Saddam gets railroaded, that would only matter in public view, not in terms of his actual guilt--as anybody with half a brain already knows. Still, I support a full and fair trial for him. But practically speaking, in Saddam's case, it might as well be "Sentence first, verdict afterwards"...regardlesss of whether the trial is fair or not.
Reply With Quote