Tariq Aziz Sentenced To Death

[Betty Boop]

In the same week that Wikileaks has published the Iraq war logs, a horrific catalogue of civilian deaths and torture, Tariq Aziz has been sentenced to death by hanging. Al Maliki's government trying to divert attention away from the revelations in the logs ?

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2010/oct/26/tariq-aziz-story-iraq?intcmp=239

[CropleyWasGod]

In the same week that Wikileaks has published the Iraq war logs, a horrific catalogue of civilian deaths and torture, Tariq Aziz has been sentenced to death by hanging. Al Maliki's government trying to divert attention away from the revelations in the logs ?

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2010/oct/26/tariq-aziz-story-iraq?intcmp=239

I share your cynicism. Whilst not a fan of the death penalty (and not wanting to turn this into a 3 pager on that subject), I have no confidence in it being anything other than a politically expedient decision.

[khib70]

In the same week that Wikileaks has published the Iraq war logs, a horrific catalogue of civilian deaths and torture, Tariq Aziz has been sentenced to death by hanging. Al Maliki's government trying to divert attention away from the revelations in the logs ?

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2010/oct/26/tariq-aziz-story-iraq?intcmp=239
And what kind of death awaits the hundreds of Iraqis compromised by this idiot website's publication of the logs, aided and abetted by the self-righteous numpties of the Guardian?

Maybe they're more worthy of your sympathy than one of the senior figures in Saddam's fascist regime. Or at least,maybe the majority Shia population might be more deserving of it than the surviving Baathist thugs who have been running a campaign of murder and assassination for many years. But I suppose,having taken to the streets to oppose the removal of Saddam's homicidal clique, you might as well take to them to save the life of one of its members now.

[IndieHibby]

I share your cynicism. Whilst not a fan of the death penalty (and not wanting to turn this into a 3 pager on that subject), I have no confidence in it being anything other than a politically expedient decision.

so he wouldn't have got the death penalty had the leaks not been published? genuine question - not stirring...

[AK86]

could the whole of Tony Blairs cabinet now be sentenced to hanging for "illegal deaths"?

And Bush still walks free:confused:

Its no surprise that half the world hate us

[Betty Boop]

And what kind of death awaits the hundreds of Iraqis compromised by this idiot website's publication of the logs, aided and abetted by the self-righteous numpties of the Guardian?

Maybe they're more worthy of your sympathy than one of the senior figures in Saddam's fascist regime. Or at least,maybe the majority Shia population might be more deserving of it than the surviving Baathist thugs who have been running a campaign of murder and assassination for many years. But I suppose,having taken to the streets to oppose the removal of Saddam's homicidal clique, you might as well take to them to save the life of one of its members now.

Can you explain how hundreds of iraqis have been compromised by Wikileaks publication of human rights abuse, torture and civilian deaths ? You can't help yourself with the cheap personal digs once again. Are you annoyed because Wikileaks has exposed the Americans for what they are, pathological
liars. They are morally bankrupt, turning a blind eye to torture and death squads, while lecturing other countries on their human rights record.

[CropleyWasGod]

so he wouldn't have got the death penalty had the leaks not been published? genuine question - not stirring...

I don't think it's the leaks that were the reason for the sentence; I agree that he would have got the same penalty regardless.

However, "justice" in some countries does often actually mean "political expediency". Given the unstable history in the Middle East and Arab world, I don't think it unreasonable to at least have some suspicions.

The leaks, of course, merely give the Iraqi Government/Courts a little bit more "moral justification" to pass that sentence without too much international disapproval.

[Phil D. Rolls]

And what kind of death awaits the hundreds of Iraqis compromised by this idiot website's publication of the logs, aided and abetted by the self-righteous numpties of the Guardian?

Maybe they're more worthy of your sympathy than one of the senior figures in Saddam's fascist regime. Or at least,maybe the majority Shia population might be more deserving of it than the surviving Baathist thugs who have been running a campaign of murder and assassination for many years. But I suppose,having taken to the streets to oppose the removal of Saddam's homicidal clique, you might as well take to them to save the life of one of its members now.

A rather immature post. Why not just stick to the topic instead of trying to start a discussion based on supposition?

[khib70]

A rather immature post. Why not just stick to the topic instead of trying to start a discussion based on supposition?
Eh? Isn't the major point of the OP the supposition that Aziz's death sentence is based on some kind of American led political conspiracy?

What's immature is publishing sensitive information on a website without having a clue what you're doing, just to have another dig at the USA and anyone else who has displaced good ole Saddam.

[Phil D. Rolls]

Eh? Isn't the major point of the OP the supposition that Aziz's death sentence is based on some kind of American led political conspiracy?

What's immature is publishing sensitive information on a website without having a clue what you're doing, just to have another dig at the USA and anyone else who has displaced good ole Saddam.

What I'm talking about is this tirade:


But I suppose,having taken to the streets to oppose the removal of Saddam's homicidal clique, you might as well take to them to save the life of one of its members now.

"Suppose" being the key word. You know nothing about people posting, yet you assume to comment on their beliefs. That is what I call supposition.

FYI, it is not necessarily a case of taking sides for some people, it is a matter of wanting the truth. A case of exercising those freedoms, and showing those values that some claim were denied to the Iraquis.

[khib70]

What I'm talking about is this tirade:



"Suppose" being the key word. You know nothing about people posting, yet you assume to comment on their beliefs. That is what I call supposition.

FYI, it is not necessarily a case of taking sides for some people, it is a matter of wanting the truth. A case of exercising those freedoms, and showing those values that some claim were denied to the Iraquis.
Silly me. I thought the whole point of a forum was that people could comment on other peoples' beliefs. I didn't realise you had to know them personally first.

The "tirade" you mention above is a perfectly legitimate analysis of the anti-war movement, which is not exclusive to myself. Read "What's Left" by Nick Cohen. People may not agree with that analysis, but, tough.

It's a shame they didn't take to the streets on behalf of these freedoms and values over the 24 years when Saddam was violently denying them to the Iraqis.

[Phil D. Rolls]

Silly me. I thought the whole point of a forum was that people could comment on other peoples' beliefs. I didn't realise you had to know them personally first.

The "tirade" you mention above is a perfectly legitimate analysis of the anti-war movement, which is not exclusive to myself. Read "What's Left" by Nick Cohen. People may not agree with that analysis, but, tough.

It's a shame they didn't take to the streets on behalf of these freedoms and values over the 24 years when Saddam was violently denying them to the Iraqis.

You just keep ignoring any point that is made that might not suit your agenda.

Whatever you say, because there is no reasoning with you as far as I can see. You are right in your world, I am right in mine.

My point is you assume beliefs on other people's behalf. I can't speak for anyone else, but I object to having beliefs ascribed to me just because I seek the truth.

[RyeSloan]

Originally Posted by Filled Rolls

"Suppose" being the key word. You know nothing about people posting, yet you assume to comment on their beliefs. That is what I call supposition.

FYI, it is not necessarily a case of taking sides for some people, it is a matter of wanting the truth. A case of exercising those freedoms, and showing those values that some claim were denied to the Iraquis.

You could say exactly the same regarding volunteers helping improve old age pensioners environment but that didn't stop you supposing it was just a crass marketing ploy from the big bad banks and evil capitalism at work did it?

Pot Kettle Black ?

[Phil D. Rolls]

You could say exactly the same regarding volunteers helping improve old age pensioners environment but that didn't stop you supposing it was just a crass marketing ploy from the big bad banks and evil capitalism at work did it?

Pot Kettle Black ?

I'm sorry you didn't get a chance to read my replies on that thread. If you had you would have seen me say that my criticism was that a private company was using volunteer labour to bump up their profits.

The old people pay a lot of money to stay in that home, and IMO they deserved a garden as part of their fees. The other point was that the people donating their charity might have directed their efforts more efficiently.

I certainly didn't use emotive language on the subject like you did, and I also don't need lectured on care of the elderly. If it was your relative who was being ripped off you might have had a different take.

Just because I disagree with your viewpoint on the banks and capitalism there is no need to ridicule that. I never said anything as childish as big bad banks", that would have detracted from the facts.

I wonder which part of this post you'll give most attention to. :wink:

[RyeSloan]

I'm sorry you didn't get a chance to read my replies on that thread. If you had you would have seen me say that my criticism was that a private company was using volunteer labour to bump up their profits.

The old people pay a lot of money to stay in that home, and IMO they deserved a garden as part of their fees. The other point was that the people donating their charity might have directed their efforts more efficiently.

I certainly didn't use emotive language on the subject like you did, and I also don't need lectured on care of the elderly. If it was your relative who was being ripped off you might have had a different take.

Just because I disagree with your viewpoint on the banks and capitalism there is no need to ridicule that. I never said anything as childish as big bad banks", that would have detracted from the facts.

I wonder which part of this post you'll give most attention to. :wink:

No it wasn't the whole gist of your OP was to have a go at RBS....in fact the thread title mentioned Financial Institutions. Seems a strange title if you indeed wanted mainly to have a go at the company using the volunteers services and not the one providing it or others like it since you used the plural.

I also don't think my wording was emotive on that thread and happened to agree that charities rather than private business should be the main beneficieries of such giving.

And since you brought up the subject of emotive language, you seem plenty capable yourself...please point out where I have ridiculed or lectured you. Furthermore on this thread alone you have used the words "tirade" and "immature" who's being emotive now?

And finally as for facts it was you suggesting the staff involved would be getting buffets and other perks was it not?...possibly a bit of supposition on your part there?

As I said Pot Kettle Black. :greengrin

[khib70]

You could say exactly the same regarding volunteers helping improve old age pensioners environment but that didn't stop you supposing it was just a crass marketing ploy from the big bad banks and evil capitalism at work did it?

Pot Kettle Black ?
:agree:

Noticed that myself:rolleyes:

[Phil D. Rolls]

No it wasn't the whole gist of your OP was to have a go at RBS....in fact the thread title mentioned Financial Institutions. Seems a strange title if you indeed wanted mainly to have a go at the company using the volunteers services and not the one providing it or others like it since you used the plural.

I also don't think my wording was emotive on that thread and happened to agree that charities rather than private business should be the main beneficieries of such giving.

And since you brought up the subject of emotive language, you seem plenty capable yourself...please point out where I have ridiculed or lectured you. Furthermore on this thread alone you have used the words "tirade" and "immature" who's being emotive now?

And finally as for facts it was you suggesting the staff involved would be getting buffets and other perks was it not?...possibly a bit of supposition on your part there?

As I said Pot Kettle Black. :greengrin

Harumph. Sorry, if I was a tad prickly yesterday, I'm not quite sure why.

I thought you were making out that didm't care about the residents of the home. I am not really sure what the difference between descriptive and emotive are, but I was trying to be descriptive.

Yes the thread opened up with an attack on RBS cynicism, and it developed into a discussion over morality of private firms abusing voluntary labour - which neither you nor Khib have responed to.

I'm sure he's delighted to have you as a lawyer. :greengrin






:agree:

Noticed that myself:rolleyes:

Bolt Weenie.

[khib70]

Bolt Weenie.
Now that's maturity.:cool2:

[Phil D. Rolls]

No it wasn't the whole gist of your OP was to have a go at RBS....in fact the thread title mentioned Financial Institutions. Seems a strange title if you indeed wanted mainly to have a go at the company using the volunteers services and not the one providing it or others like it since you used the plural.

I also don't think my wording was emotive on that thread and happened to agree that charities rather than private business should be the main beneficieries of such giving.

And since you brought up the subject of emotive language, you seem plenty capable yourself...please point out where I have ridiculed or lectured you. Furthermore on this thread alone you have used the words "tirade" and "immature" who's being emotive now?

And finally as for facts it was you suggesting the staff involved would be getting buffets and other perks was it not?...possibly a bit of supposition on your part there?

As I said Pot Kettle Black. :greengrin

Everything you say about me is right. I have distracted from the real point here, which is that two private companies have used the concept of charity to further their own commercial ends.

Straight question - is it right or wrong to use voluntary work to increase your profits?

ps There is a handy smiley for Pot Calling Kettle, I'll show you where it is for a small donation to my chosen charity. :greengrin

[RyeSloan]

Everything you say about me is right. I have distracted from the real point here, which is that two private companies have used the concept of charity to further their own commercial ends.

Straight question - is it right or wrong to use voluntary work to increase your profits?

ps There is a handy smiley for Pot Calling Kettle, I'll show you where it is for a small donation to my chosen charity. :greengrin

If the charity work completed by RBS happens to have direct benefit on their business then what's the problem? I don't happen to think that it would as their business is clearly suffering a cost but would appear to be a win/win if it did.

I have no idea as to what company was the beneficiary of such work, if they indeed do make a profit from that home or had the cash available to do the work themselves. Not sure why you had to ask the 'straight question' as I stated quite clearly on the thread in question that I would prefer charities to be the beneficiaries of such volunteering however I then went on to say that I am finding it increasingly difficult to tell some charities apart from 'profit making' companies.

Finally it's worth mentioning that almost all businesses use voluntary work to make their costs smaller, anyone who works beyond their contracted hours and receives no overtime would fall into this category and there is millions of people that do this in Britiain everyday, me being one of them!

As for the OP...you play with the devil you might just get burnt although I must admit that Tariq Aziz came across more like someones uncle than a despots right hand man!

[Betty Boop]

An excellent edition of Dispatches looking at the unreported horror of civilian deaths, and the abuse and torture of detainees, exposed by Wikileaks.

http://www.channel4.com/programmes/dispatches/4od#3134558

[Phil D. Rolls]

If the charity work completed by RBS happens to have direct benefit on their business then what's the problem? I don't happen to think that it would as their business is clearly suffering a cost but would appear to be a win/win if it did.

I have no idea as to what company was the beneficiary of such work, if they indeed do make a profit from that home or had the cash available to do the work themselves. Not sure why you had to ask the 'straight question' as I stated quite clearly on the thread in question that I would prefer charities to be the beneficiaries of such volunteering however I then went on to say that I am finding it increasingly difficult to tell some charities apart from 'profit making' companies.

Finally it's worth mentioning that almost all businesses use voluntary work to make their costs smaller, anyone who works beyond their contracted hours and receives no overtime would fall into this category and there is millions of people that do this in Britiain everyday, me being one of them!

As for the OP...you play with the devil you might just get burnt although I must admit that Tariq Aziz came across more like someones uncle than a despots right hand man!

Tariq Aziz, who's that again? :greengrin

I suppose there are shades of grey on the charity issue. I suppose the thing that upset me most was that the owners of the care home didn't do the garden up out of their own pocket.

Most people would see the garden as forming part of the whole package that was sold to the resident or their family. It wasn't like the company used voluntary work to reduce costs for the residents, they used it to increase their shareholders profits.

As for RBS, they really should know better, and I would think it would be wise for them to think things through before getting involved in them.