French lawyer offers to represent Saddam in court.

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

Pepsei

Lifer
Dec 14, 2001
12,895
1
0
Originally posted by: heartsurgeon
Oh my....

French lawyer Jacques Verges offers to defend Saddam:

Referring to allegations of atrocities, Verges said: "It must be established whether everything that happened was rumour or not.."

why am i not surprised.
linky
You're no better than Saddam if you think he doesn't deserve a lawyer. Even Bush said he deserves a fair trial. Bush's got 100 times more integrity than you do.
 

boran

Golden Member
Jun 17, 2001
1,526
0
76
even a mass murderer gets appointed an advocate in the US, so why should saddam be refused one ? and does the nationality of the advocate matter ? it shouldnt, because the task of an advocate is to defend his client, even if he does not agree with his actions (if your defendant is clearly guilty you might try to go for a lighter punishment) tho it seems that this french advocate might be seeking some publicity I do not think he would crawl back if his offer gets accepted, it IS a challenge, not one that I'd like to do tho, because some people do associate an advocate with the defendant and think the advocate is agreeing with his client (that's pointed at you dari, heartsurgeon and nick1985)
 

Spencer278

Diamond Member
Oct 11, 2002
3,637
0
0
Originally posted by: Pepsei
Originally posted by: heartsurgeon
Oh my....

French lawyer Jacques Verges offers to defend Saddam:

Referring to allegations of atrocities, Verges said: "It must be established whether everything that happened was rumour or not.."

why am i not surprised.
linky
You're no better than Saddam if you think he doesn't deserve a lawyer. Even Bush said he deserves a fair trial. Bush's got 100 times more integrity than you do.

Damn now thats an insult
 
Jan 12, 2003
3,498
0
0
Originally posted by: KGB
Originally posted by: heartsurgeon
So do you throw darts at a map to figure out who to hate, or is this part of some sick routine you engage in every morning?
tisk, tisk, typical liberal personal attack.
STFU... he's saying what's on his mind. :| Idiot, you posted it..what were you expecting.. "Ohh lets jump on heartsurgeon's banmdwagon and bash the stoopid french frogs"

Ban HeartSurgeon :|

Fvckin "conservatives" always watching their back cuz the liberals will attack them..
Fvcking morons..

[edit]...change of heart.[/edit]

 
Jan 12, 2003
3,498
0
0
Originally posted by: Gaard

Lately, however, I find his Galt impersonations irritating. Why do grown men feel the need to do this?

Are you that partisan where you feel a need to attack ANYONE who posts anything about the French? We post a thread with evidence about their weapons dealings with Saddam, in the face of U.N. resolutions, and we are the bad guys; I post about the failures of the French government and the 15,000+ people who died when the heat went over 90 degrees, and yet again, I am the bad guy...you really need to take a look at yourself and change your partisan ways. Then and only then will you be able to think for yourself.
 

GrGr

Diamond Member
Sep 25, 2003
3,204
0
76
For those who like to pretend that US sponsorship of Saddam never happened:Iraq: Declassified Documents of U.S. Support for Hussein

Washington Post


Iraq: Declassified Documents of U.S. Support for Hussein

With Joyce Battle
Middle East Analyst, National Security Archive at George Washington University
Thursday, Feb. 27, 2003; 11 a.m. ET

The National Security Archive at George Washington University has published a series of declassified U.S. documents detailing the U.S. embrace of Saddam Hussein in the early 1980?s. The collection of documents, published on the Web, include briefing materials, diplomatic reports of two Rumsfeld trips to Baghdad, reports on Iraqi chemical weapons use during the Reagan administration and presidential directives that ensure U.S. access to the region's oil and military expansion.

....

NSA documents

For example:

Document 26: National Security Decision Directive (NSDD 114) from Ronald W. Reagan. "U.S. Policy toward the Iran-Iraq War," November 26, 1983.

President Ronald Reagan directs that consultations begin with regional states willing to cooperate with the U.S. on measures to protect Persian Gulf oil production and its transshipment infrastructure. The U.S. will give the highest priority to the establishment of military facilities allowing for the positioning of rapid deployment forces in the region to guard oil facilities.
etc.

President Reagan was clearly prepared to go to war to protect US oil interests in the Gulf region. This is what has happened now. Saddam is just a red herring for the gullible.





 

burnedout

Diamond Member
Oct 12, 1999
6,249
2
0
Originally posted by: xxxxxJohnGaltxxxxx

Are you that partisan where you feel a need to attack ANYONE who posts anything about the French? We post a thread with evidence about their weapons dealings with Saddam, in the face of U.N. resolutions, and we are the bad guys; I post about the failures of the French government and the 15,000+ people who died when the heat went over 90 degrees, and yet again, I am the bad guy...you really need to take a look at yourself and change your partisan ways. Then and only then will you be able to think for yourself.
Face it, Galt. You are "teh eval one". ;):D

Seriously though, glad to see you back. It's seldom that I have an opportunity to converse with a fellow 'Iron Brigade' member.
 

EagleKeeper

Discussion Club Moderator<br>Elite Member
Staff member
Oct 30, 2000
42,591
5
0
Originally posted by: GrGr
For those who like to pretend that US sponsorship of Saddam never happened:Iraq: Declassified Documents of U.S. Support for Hussein

Washington Post


Iraq: Declassified Documents of U.S. Support for Hussein

With Joyce Battle
Middle East Analyst, National Security Archive at George Washington University
Thursday, Feb. 27, 2003; 11 a.m. ET

The National Security Archive at George Washington University has published a series of declassified U.S. documents detailing the U.S. embrace of Saddam Hussein in the early 1980?s. The collection of documents, published on the Web, include briefing materials, diplomatic reports of two Rumsfeld trips to Baghdad, reports on Iraqi chemical weapons use during the Reagan administration and presidential directives that ensure U.S. access to the region's oil and military expansion.

....

NSA documents

For example:

Document 26: National Security Decision Directive (NSDD 114) from Ronald W. Reagan. "U.S. Policy toward the Iran-Iraq War," November 26, 1983.

President Ronald Reagan directs that consultations begin with regional states willing to cooperate with the U.S. on measures to protect Persian Gulf oil production and its transshipment infrastructure. The U.S. will give the highest priority to the establishment of military facilities allowing for the positioning of rapid deployment forces in the region to guard oil facilities.
etc.

President Reagan was clearly prepared to go to war to protect US oil interests in the Gulf region. This is what has happened now. Saddam is just a red herring for the gullible.
Look at your history 20+ years ago. At that time, the Islamic clerics in Iran had just finished taking control of the hostages, they were threating to close down the straits (whcih would have affected the world economy), invaded the US embassy and taken American hostages.

Iraq was an religious enemy of Iran. "enemy of my enemy is my ally" (paraphrase)

Because we had been at war with England, does that mean that we should not have supported them in WWI?

 

Fencer128

Platinum Member
Jun 18, 2001
2,700
1
91
Look at your history 20+ years ago. At that time, the Islamic clerics in Iran had just finished taking control of the hostages, they were threating to close down the straits (whcih would have affected the world economy), invaded the US embassy and taken American hostages.

Iraq was an religious enemy of Iran. "enemy of my enemy is my ally" (paraphrase)

Because we had been at war with England, does that mean that we should not have supported them in WWI?
I see your point - however you chose a bad example. The UK wasn't ruled by a mass murdering dictator.

Cheers,

Andy
 

DT4K

Diamond Member
Jan 21, 2002
6,944
2
81
Probably Chirac's attempt to keep Saddam quiet about their "business relationships".
 

Hayabusa Rider

Admin Emeritus & Elite Member
Jan 26, 2000
50,872
4,216
126
Originally posted by: xxxxxJohnGaltxxxxx
Originally posted by: heartsurgeon
So do you throw darts at a map to figure out who to hate, or is this part of some sick routine you engage in every morning?
tisk, tisk, typical liberal personal attack.

Isn't that the truth...
How odd.

I remember when I was ripping Clinton a new one for dishonesty.

Back then, it seems I was called a "typical conservative"

Now I am doing the same thing for the same reason, and now I am a "typical liberal"

Odd how I remain consistent to principle, yet the world shifts around me, changing from liberal to conservative. Or does it?

Perhaps being tied to an ideology and having to back a person rather than a principle (in this case honesty) isn't a good thing.

Poor me, I don't get to support liars or incompetents simply because they happen to be from "my" party.

Tisk, tisk.
 

Ultima

Platinum Member
Oct 16, 1999
2,893
0
0
The prejudice against the french on these boards sometimes comes across as downright racist. I never see anything done about it though, while if someone uses the word 'gay' as a synonym for 'stupid', 'idiot', whatever, everyone makes a big hoopla about it.
 

dahunan

Lifer
Jan 10, 2002
18,191
3
0
Originally posted by: Ultima
The prejudice against the french on these boards sometimes comes across as downright racist. I never see anything done about it though, while if someone uses the word 'gay' as a synonym for 'stupid', 'idiot', whatever, everyone makes a big hoopla about it.

Thank you...

I wonder how many of these people realize that the US would still be under British Rule had it not been for the Massive Financial and Military Assistance from the French ;)

http://www.voy.com/22043/14.html
Historians also stress the importance of the direct assistance that the European allies gave to the Americans in their victory over the British. It is probably not going too far to say that America owes its independence to foreign intervention and aid, especially from France. The French monarchy sent arms, clothing, and ammunition to America; it also sent soldiers and the French Navy. Most importantly, the French kept the United States government solvent by lending it the money to keep the Revolution alive. The magnitude of French support of the American Revolution can be glimpsed at the battle of Yorktown. There, the majority of George Washington's 15,000 man Continental Army were French soldiers. Washington's men were clothed by the French, the rifles they used were French, and French gold paid their wages. Nor must we forget that it was the French Navy that trapped Cornwallis's soldiers at Yorktown by preventing English ships sent from New York from rescuing the British army. Perhaps the final irony of the French monarchy's assistance to America (and proving once again that no good deed goes unpunished) is that it led to the financial collapse of the French ancient regime. And the bankruptcy of Louis XVI was one of the major causes of the French Revolution
 

Dari

Lifer
Oct 25, 2002
17,134
38
91
Originally posted by: dahunan
Originally posted by: Ultima
The prejudice against the french on these boards sometimes comes across as downright racist. I never see anything done about it though, while if someone uses the word 'gay' as a synonym for 'stupid', 'idiot', whatever, everyone makes a big hoopla about it.

Thank you...

I wonder how many of these people realize that the US would still be under British Rule had it not been for the Massive Financial and Military Assistance from the French ;)

http://www.voy.com/22043/14.html
Historians also stress the importance of the direct assistance that the European allies gave to the Americans in their victory over the British. It is probably not going too far to say that America owes its independence to foreign intervention and aid, especially from France. The French monarchy sent arms, clothing, and ammunition to America; it also sent soldiers and the French Navy. Most importantly, the French kept the United States government solvent by lending it the money to keep the Revolution alive. The magnitude of French support of the American Revolution can be glimpsed at the battle of Yorktown. There, the majority of George Washington's 15,000 man Continental Army were French soldiers. Washington's men were clothed by the French, the rifles they used were French, and French gold paid their wages. Nor must we forget that it was the French Navy that trapped Cornwallis's soldiers at Yorktown by preventing English ships sent from New York from rescuing the British army. Perhaps the final irony of the French monarchy's assistance to America (and proving once again that no good deed goes unpunished) is that it led to the financial collapse of the French ancient regime. And the bankruptcy of Louis XVI was one of the major causes of the French Revolution
It was a marriage of convenience. We and the French hated the British (at the time). Once the tie that binds unwinded, there was a speedy divorce.
 

dahunan

Lifer
Jan 10, 2002
18,191
3
0
Originally posted by: Dari
Originally posted by: dahunan
Originally posted by: Ultima
The prejudice against the french on these boards sometimes comes across as downright racist. I never see anything done about it though, while if someone uses the word 'gay' as a synonym for 'stupid', 'idiot', whatever, everyone makes a big hoopla about it.

Thank you...

I wonder how many of these people realize that the US would still be under British Rule had it not been for the Massive Financial and Military Assistance from the French ;)

http://www.voy.com/22043/14.html
Historians also stress the importance of the direct assistance that the European allies gave to the Americans in their victory over the British. It is probably not going too far to say that America owes its independence to foreign intervention and aid, especially from France. The French monarchy sent arms, clothing, and ammunition to America; it also sent soldiers and the French Navy. Most importantly, the French kept the United States government solvent by lending it the money to keep the Revolution alive. The magnitude of French support of the American Revolution can be glimpsed at the battle of Yorktown. There, the majority of George Washington's 15,000 man Continental Army were French soldiers. Washington's men were clothed by the French, the rifles they used were French, and French gold paid their wages. Nor must we forget that it was the French Navy that trapped Cornwallis's soldiers at Yorktown by preventing English ships sent from New York from rescuing the British army. Perhaps the final irony of the French monarchy's assistance to America (and proving once again that no good deed goes unpunished) is that it led to the financial collapse of the French ancient regime. And the bankruptcy of Louis XVI was one of the major causes of the French Revolution
It was a marriage of convenience. We and the French hated the British (at the time). Once the tie that binds unwinded, there was a speedy divorce.

Then maybe we should give back the Statue Of Liberty?
 

Pers

Golden Member
Jan 12, 2001
1,603
1
0
hicks piss me off. how do you guys get internet connections in your trailers??
 

lozina

Lifer
Sep 10, 2001
11,707
5
0
tisk tisk, typical republicans- generalized attacks against entire cultures. :p

 

EagleKeeper

Discussion Club Moderator<br>Elite Member
Staff member
Oct 30, 2000
42,591
5
0
Originally posted by: Pers
hicks piss me off. how do you guys get internet connections in your trailers??
Is there not a phone bill surcharge that is targeted for satellitte internet(broadband) connections for the rural areas.?
Hicksville is classified by the US Census as rural. :evil:
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY