||Marklbetya 07:45 pm MST 12/30/06|
|In reply to:||re: Yawn... - Max 05:42 pm MST 12/30/06|
|Actually, I think that when someone deprives someone else of their rights, the same laws they violated shouldn't be upheld to protect him.|
> Perhaps I am just of an idealist mindset but I believe, as
> the Constitution of my country states, that all human
> beings have natural rights including due process of law
> and that no person ought to be deprived of such rights.
> Thus, just as much as I disagree with Saddam’s trial I
> disagree with "what some poor suckers go through in an
> Islamic Sharia court of law in that region." I also
> believe that ones action cannot be used in an effort to
> negate his right to due process, hence just because
> someone deprived a person of his rights does not mean that
> that person can be deprived of his own rights.
> Interestingly the Military Commissions Act signed by Lord
> Bush in October allows for evidence to be obtained by a
> person who tortured other people even though it disallows
> torture of other detainees. The absurdity of disregarding
> due process in Saddam’s trial is manifest.
> > > Saddam's trial, like Nuremberg, sets an ugly
> > > precedent for permissible judicial practices.
> > I don't see the judical process that Saddam went through
> > any worse than what some poor suckers go through in an
> > Islamic Sharia court of law in that region.
> > At the end of the day, we all know he was guilty, so we
> > could all do this little dance called 'due process' but it
> > wouldn't change a damn thing.
> > Pud
|Previous:||re: Yawn... - Max 05:42 pm MST 12/30/06|
|Next:||re: Yawn... - Max 08:46 pm MST 12/30/06|