Canada still mum on the Saddam execution

[crazymf]

Yeah, maybe on second thought, Saddam shouldn't have been hung.

Maybe they just should have cut out his vocal chords so he couldn't communicate with his followers, cut off his nuts so he couldn't breed, cut off his fingers so he couldn't write to his followers, and then stuffed him back into his rathole to live the rest of his life in peace.

Yeah, maybe they were a bit tough on him.....

[Ricki Bobbi]

In an American poll, 75% supported capital punishment and 47% supported the death penalty.

Evidence for these facts?

[BC_chick]

Where have I been? This is true?!?!?!?

Full Text of Stephen Harper's 1997 speech.

OMG!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I'd heard bits and pieces of that speech, but I disregarded it as anti-Harper propaganda.

That's truly disturbing..... and insulting..... and infuriating.

[madmax]

Balls. If your son murdered someone should you go to jail for life?

That depends if you gave him the weapon or plotted in the Murder. See Moore above and the answer is yes? It was only the reverse onus, that was struck down.

We have countless cases of where people who failed to prevent a crime were not held culpable.

This isn't about failing to prevent a crime. It is the level of participation.

The US supported Saddam against Iran but it was his decision to go to war. It was his decision to butcher his own people and invade Kuwait. Most of Saddam's weaponry came from the former Soviet Union.

It was also his decision to Gas the Kurds, he had been doing it for years before Halabja, the most notorious one, but the US said nothing, and when Halabja was exposed in the Iranian Media, the USA muddied the waters and blamed Iran for the gassing of their allies,then the US said, it was inconclusive who did it. Inconclusive until they choose to bring it up in both 91 and 2003 when it suited their purposes better.

Conventional weapons came from the USSR. Bio Chemical Weapons came from....

According Iraq's report to the UN, the know-how and material for developing chemical weapons were obtained from firms in such countries as: the United States, West Germany, the United Kingdom, France and China.[1] By far, the largest suppliers of precursors for chemical weapons production were in Singapore (4,515 tons), the Netherlands (4,261 tons), Egypt (2,400 tons), India (2,343 tons), and West Germany (1,027 tons). One Indian company, Exomet Plastics (now part of EPC Industrie) sent 2,292 tons of precursor chemicals to Iraq. The Kim Al-Khaleej firm, located in Singapore and affiliated to United Arab Emirates, supplied more than 4,500 tons of VX, sarin, and mustard gas precursors and production equipment to Iraq

As you can see, these were All countries allied with the USA.

Americans get it when they fail to stop every slime ball on earth from acting badly and then they get accused of imposing themselves as the worlds policeman when they do. All they are doing is putting their own interests first like every other country.

That is a correct statement, and shows the difficulties of being a superpower and leader of the world. You will be subject to criticism and you will make mistakes.

[madmax]

Your timeline is a little off. The last people actually executed in Canada were put to death in 1962. So this Moore person would have been ok if he had been convicted 30 years ago.

He was released in 89 going back 30 years would be 59. It was also part of a quote that I failed to box in quotes and weren't my words, but that of the police force whom want his DNA.

[Wilber]

That is a correct statement, and shows the difficulties of being a superpower and leader of the world. You will be subject to criticism and you will make mistakes.

This applies to anyone. If you do nothing, all you can be critisized for is doing nothing and you can never make a mistake, but what good are you?

[watching&waiting]

Saddam got the death penalty and I am not one of those who thinks that there should never be a death penalty for anything, but rather I believe that people who while in a position of power and misuse that power against the people should face the most severe of all penalties for that crime. If that crime was the deaths of over 100 people, then that would qualify as death penalty in that case. Unlike here death sentences are carried out in 30 days or less. Saddam was brought to the gallows quickly to put an end to those who would have used this to rally around. I think that what was done and the way it was done, was proper and right. The Arab worlds have many more disturbing ways and methods of taking lives, so this was quite tame.

I do not think there ever was any doubt that Saddam was responsible for large numbers of autrocities again the Iraqi people, and even though he was never tried on these other deaths, his own death by hanging does make it seem to be that justice has been done.

As for here in Canada and the death penalty goes, I support it for as I said the most heinous of crimes, and for those who use their positions of power to take the lives of others. I.E. if a police officer is caught killing a suspect during his interogation, that would qualify as a death sentence. If the RCMP commissioner said to open fire on a group of otherwise friendly protestors, that would as well. Just as the death of an officer in the commission of a crime should be as well. Any child molester that kills his victims, should also be given the death sentence. I would bet that the majority of people on this board can also say what things they would support the death sentence for.

But for now we do not have a death sentence in place. I am not mad that I do not get to see my own view taken as a matter of law, but I will say that down the road we will see a change in things, and I can wait till then. There are a very large number of Canadians who would vote for capital punishment, but I can think of many things I would rather see done first before visiting that issue.

[Canadian Blue]

If Saddam had it coming so did those who allowed him to do it, and that would be George Herbert Bush

DEATH TO GEORGE BUSH

as well as the leaders of Canada, Great Britian, France, Germany, China, Russia, Denmark, Norwary, Finland, Mexico, Singapore, Malaysia, Australia, New Zealand, etc.

Do you realize how rediculous that claim is now since you have stated that all leaders who were around when Iraq gassed Kurd's and did nothing about it deserve to be hanged like Saddam.

According Iraq's report to the UN, the know-how and material for developing chemical weapons were obtained from firms in such countries as: the United States, West Germany, the United Kingdom, France and China

France and China were against the war in Iraq.

2. I don't care when that speech of Harper's was given. Did he not mean it? Has he changed his mind since Bush, if you think that, I would like you to back it up. By all accounts he is as staunchly behind Bush and his doctrines as ever.

Get off it, I've had about enough of the Larouchite in the 9/11 thread and his paranoia, now we have a bunch of paranoia in this thread as well.

As for the speech from 1997 so what, Clinton was the president, and what's wrong with believing in what the Republican's were trying to attain back then which was smaller government.

As for all the left wingers on here getting their pantie tied up in a know about a speech made nearly ten years ago, remember what Pierre Elliot Trudea believed in when he was a youth. PET was much more extreme than Harper ever was.

Catchme's paranoia is really entertaining, about as entertaining as Polynewbies!!!

Moreover, we are in Afghanistan to free up the USA in Iraq, of course we have a say in it. Notwithstanding is the fact we are not a capital punishment country and always speak out against its use, until now that is. An black eye for Canada on the world stage because of Harper.

No we aren't in Afghanistan to free up the USA in Iraq, we have been in Afghanistan since 2001. You are once again basing all of this rhetoric on falsehoods and emotion's rather than facts.

What is irritating me in all of this though, is the oppositions silence on it! Harper's silence you expect, he is a weak kneed USA sychophant that was a traitor to Canadians before he took office. This was when he and Stockwell took ads out in the NY Times and spoke on Fox TV saying Canadians were in favour of the Iraq invasion, and wanted to go, when indeed we were not in favour, and did not want to move outside UN sanctions.

So anybody who disagrees with Liberal party policy is a traitor? Honestly, this is pretty sickening. I though Liberalism supported freedom of speech and expression not fascism in the name of political correctness. From the poll's I saw during the Iraq invasion Canadian's were divided on the issue, as was most of the world. In the end it was faulty intelligence, and the mishandling of the occupation by the pentagon.

2) Even if we as a nation had not taken a position as stated above, I still wonder why Harper was so adament about speaking out against what Chinese people do to their own people in their own courts... if that's how he really feels about what goes on "out there."

Because Saddan Hussein isn't an innocent political dissenter, ever hear of the Nuremburg Trials. To compare Saddam Hussein to someone supporting free speech in China is like comparing Goebbel's to a holocaust survivor.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuremburg_Trials

Yep. They (the opposition) know that anything that they say on the issue will be twisted into little sound-bytes by the Harpercrites as "the left supporting Saddam" instead of what it really is - "the left supporting Canadian values as established by our committments to the UN."

The left is the only supporter of "Canadian values", wow somehow I doubt that's true. Harpercrites is a partisan label, I don't think were allowed to call the Liberal lieberal's on here now are we.

Canadian values are established by the UN, I hope not. Sure we are a part of the UN, but are values shouldn't come from a building in New York.

I am against the death penalty as well, I think Saddam should not have been hung. However all of the nutbar comment's about hanging George Bush, and this paranoia about Stephen Harper is so idiotic to me.

[Fortunata]

Canadian Blue, in your post you said:

So anybody who disagrees with Liberal party policy is a traitor? Honestly, this is pretty sickening. I though Liberalism supported freedom of speech and expression not fascism in the name of political correctness. From the poll's I saw during the Iraq invasion Canadian's were divided on the issue, as was most of the world. In the end it was faulty intelligence, and the mishandling of the occupation by the pentagon.

Your first sentence is a complete misrepresention of what was said. In fact, my take on what was said is that the Opposition's silence was completely understandable because they are lily livered politicians but that Harper's silence was not understandable. Number 1, a Prime Minister (you know, Steve Harper) is supposed to represent this country and speak to world events, and Number 2, he has been outspoken over the last few years about supporting the US in Iraq (you know ousting Saddam and giving what's left of living citizens democracy) and other US positions. Honestly this total, imo, deliberate, unreasonable trolling misrepresentation is pretty sickening.

The polls at the time of the invasion supported the then governments decision of not joining in that invasion. Some 70% - 30% against IIRC.

In the end it was not faulty intelligence, imo, since the intelligence was there if you wanted to listen to it, that there were no wmd and Saddam was not in cahoots with al qaeda. That's IF you wanted to listen to it. Obviously lots of people, including the Bush Whitehouse, didn't. They were going after blood and that's all that would satisfy their thirst. And most Americans and many Canadians bought into their off the wall propoganda.

[B. Max]

Our government, on the other hand, who insists on speaking out against un-Canadian values as we did with China... has been awfully silent on the issue....

What pro canadian value fits here, let them out to kill again. In Iraq's case we are talking about death by government. Governments who condone keeping Saddam and his henchmen around should be viewed with some suspicion. Keeping in mind that leftist governments around the world have a genocide record of some where around a hundred million in the last hundred years. Harper got it right again.

[Argus]

Argus, a couple of things:

1. I do not think that the majority of Canadians support the death penalty. Many Canadians can't even figure out that capital punishment means the death penalty. Sounds weird but it's true.

And yet when polls show Canadians favour Kyoto, even though they clearly know nothing about it or what it entails, or when polls show Canadians support this or that program, ie, the Liberals so-called National Child Care program, you and your ilk trumpet them as the will of the people.

When the polls disagree with you suddenly it's just an error in polling questions and information.

I think most people know what capital punishment is and what it involves.

2. I don't care when that speech of Harper's was given. Did he not mean it? Has he changed his mind since Bush, if you think that, I would like you to back it up. By all accounts he is as staunchly behind Bush and his doctrines as ever.

The US and its Republican party have changed considerably over the years. As has Canada.

[Argus]

Where have I been? This is true?!?!?!?

Full Text of Stephen Harper's 1997 speech.

OMG!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

This is not what I regard as intellectually impressive commentary.

I'd heard bits and pieces of that speech, but I disregarded it as anti-Harper propaganda.

That's truly disturbing..... and insulting..... and infuriating.

Really? Why? Pick something he said and argue against it.

[Guest American Woman]

Every country who rejects capital punishment - in spite of their stance for or against the Iraq war - have issued a statement against the execution of Saddam. Every one except Canada that is.

Even staunch Iraq-war supporters like Britain and Italy spoke out against it.

Our government, on the other hand, who insists on speaking out against un-Canadian values as we did with China... has been awfully silent on the issue....

To my knowledge, Blair hasn't made a statement at all, and wouldn't he be the logical spokesperson for Britian? Makes me wonder about his silence. And in Australia, Howard seemed to speak only of admiration for the Iraqi people for giving Saddam a fair trial.

I do wonder if Saddam's execution will make him a martyr.

[Fortunata]

And yet when polls show Canadians favour Kyoto, even though they clearly know nothing about it or what it entails, or when polls show Canadians support this or that program, ie, the Liberals so-called National Child Care program, you and your ilk trumpet them as the will of the people.

When the polls disagree with you suddenly it's just an error in polling questions and information.

I think most people know what capital punishment is and what it involves.

The US and its Republican party have changed considerably over the years. As has Canada.

What a bilous attack. You must have gotten up on the wrong side of the bed. Too much partying last night or what there Argus?

Me and my ilk? How dishonest. I have no "ilk". I am my own person and I speak for me. I parrot no party line and I parrot no ideology. If I quote a poll, it is a poll not my personal spin on a poll, nor what I wish the poll to be.

And, please do quote references to how you came to the conclusion that proves your statement:

When the polls disagree with you suddenly it's just an error in polling questions and information.

As for many Canadians knowing there is no difference between capital punishment and the death penalty, it's true. Don't ask me how they don't know but somehow "many" don't make the connection. This was on a news program some time ago.

As for the rest, keep on making excuses for Harper. That's all you do for most of what he does whether you realize it or not.

[Canadian Blue]

As for the rest, keep on making excuses for Harper. That's all you do for most of what he does whether you realize it or not.

You keep it going with nonstop empty rhetoric against Harper as well. So in the end wouldn't you expect the conservatives on here to support him against unfounded accusations.

In the end it was not faulty intelligence, imo, since the intelligence was there if you wanted to listen to it, that there were no wmd and Saddam was not in cahoots with al qaeda. That's IF you wanted to listen to it. Obviously lots of people, including the Bush Whitehouse, didn't. They were going after blood and that's all that would satisfy their thirst. And most Americans and many Canadians bought into their off the wall propoganda.

I'm pretty sure most intelligence agencies came out saying Iraq had WMD's, even the French. The difference was between the nation who wanted Weapon's Inspectors to continue their work, and those who believed an invasion was needed. They found out their were no WMD's after the invasion.

I don't think the Bush Whitehouse wanted to drink the blood of Iraqi men, women, and children, as you seem to suggest. That is just a rediculous and irrational statement on your part.

Honestly this total, imo, deliberate, unreasonable trolling misrepresentation is pretty sickening.

Look at the line that is in bright red.

[Topaz]

I don't think you could find a one person that wouldn't say that Hussein wasn't guilty of the crimes BUT, the way the Iraqi government moved so fast to have him hung! I read on line, that even some of the Kurds members of government didn't like the way it was carried out. The US is saying they had nothing to do with it, it was the Iraqi government. How stupid does the US think people of the world are? They had him in custody, they flew his body to its location for buriel, besides invading, against international law, into Iraq to take him out. You will never see GW on trial in his own country and found gulity for lying about the war, but of course, if he was, he can pardon himself or the next President can. That one thing about America government its really corrupt!!

[Riverwind]

I don't think you could find a one person that wouldn't say that Hussein wasn't guilty of the crimes BUT, the way the Iraqi government moved so fast to have him hung!

Keeping Saddam alive would create nothing but grief for the Iraqis - he had to be removed from the picture. The 'fairness' of his trial is irrelevant. The protections provided by the trial process exist to protect people that could be wrongly convicted - a wrongful conviction was not possible in this case since his guilt is so well documented.

Punishing Bush for his crimes has nothing to do with this issue either. Saddam does not deserve to live simply because Bush and company are allowed to roam free.

[Canadian Blue]

You will never see GW on trial in his own country and found gulity for lying about the war, but of course, if he was, he can pardon himself or the next President can. That one thing about America government its really corrupt!!

Then you would have a trial for every world leader who was in the coalition of the willing. As well why stop their, why not put every senator, congressman, and intelligence official on trial. Really be a bit more rational, government's have done much worse than Bush has ever done. Honestly, I like how people got up in arm's over Harper addressing human rights in China, yet now everyone is pissed off that Harper isn't attacking the American's.

[Fortunata]

You keep it going with nonstop empty rhetoric against Harper as well. So in the end wouldn't you expect the conservatives on here to support him against unfounded accusations.

Empty rhetoric? I don't think so. I put down my opinion which is as valid as yours.

I'm pretty sure most intelligence agencies came out saying Iraq had WMD's, even the French. The difference was between the nation who wanted Weapon's Inspectors to continue their work, and those who believed an invasion was needed. They found out their were no WMD's after the invasion.

I heard the intelligence before the war. There was some that was just so outlandish that I was amazed by the amount of people who bought in, such as Powell's presentation before the UN. BBC, CBC, CTV and other networks also had knowledgeable people present "the other side". The side that said what the US government was handing out was bs. You should have listened to both sides maybe.

I don't think the Bush Whitehouse wanted to drink the blood of Iraqi men, women, and children, as you seem to suggest. That is just a rediculous and irrational statement on your part.

You chose to take that literally, that is your problem. You are being ridiculous because you want to be.

Look at the line that is in bright red.

Meaning they were going to war; their minds were made up and nothing was going to disuade them. But you knew what I meant didn't you? Childish games.

[Canadian Blue]

I heard the intelligence before the war. There was some that was just so outlandish that I was amazed by the amount of people who bought in, such as Powell's presentation before the UN. BBC, CBC, CTV and other networks also had knowledgeable people present "the other side". The side that said what the US government was handing out was bs. You should have listened to both sides maybe.

Yet you can't seem to bring up proof that intelligence agencies were saying their were no WMD's in Iraq.

You chose to take that literally, that is your problem. You are being ridiculous because you want to be.

Calm down with the rhetoric.

Meaning they were going to war; their minds were made up and nothing was going to disuade them. But you knew what I meant didn't you? Childish games.

I disagree with the war in Iraq, but it's not as simply as many of the left and some on the right would like it to be. I think you have no idea what's going on, and the majority of the protestors had no idea what was going on.

[jdobbin]

Yet you can't seem to bring up proof that intelligence agencies were saying their were no WMD's in Iraq.

http://www.cnn.com/2006/US/04/23/cia.iraq/index.html

There were several agents and reports floating around sayng that evidence of weapons was not to be found.

I think that American officials were over the top when they said that the U.N. inspectors were incompetent or corrupt when they couldn't find weapons.

I remember reading the Washington Post just before the war and saying, "just a minute..."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A...anguage=printer

[Catchme]

Where have I been? This is true?!?!?!?

Full Text of Stephen Harper's 1997 speech.

OMG!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I'd heard bits and pieces of that speech, but I disregarded it as anti-Harper propaganda.

That's truly disturbing..... and insulting..... and infuriating.

There are reasons why people are anti-Harper and none of them are propaganda.

Guess Harper should not have been talking so disrespectfully of the what the PM of Canada does, cause we now know what he is doing for sure.

From his 1997 speech:

"Of our two legislative houses, the Senate, our upper house, is appointed, also by the Prime Minister, where he puts buddies, fundraisers and the like. So the Senate also is not very important in our political system.

And we have a Supreme Court, like yours, which, since we put a charter of rights in our constitution in 1982, is becoming increasingly arbitrary and important. It is also appointed by the Prime Minister. Unlike your Supreme Court, we have no ratification process.

So if you sort of remove three of the four elements, what you see is a system of checks and balances which quickly becomes a system that's described as unpaid checks and political imbalances.

What we have is the House of Commons. The House of Commons, the bastion of the Prime Minister's power, the body that selects the Prime Minister, is an elected body.

[Fortunata]

I heard the intelligence before the war. There was some that was just so outlandish that I was amazed by the amount of people who bought in, such as Powell's presentation before the UN. BBC, CBC, CTV and other networks also had knowledgeable people present "the other side". The side that said what the US government was handing out was bs. You should have listened to both sides maybe.

Yet you can't seem to bring up proof that intelligence agencies were saying their were no WMD's in Iraq.

You chose to take that literally, that is your problem. You are being ridiculous because you want to be.

Calm down with the rhetoric.

Meaning they were going to war; their minds were made up and nothing was going to disuade them. But you knew what I meant didn't you? Childish games.

I disagree with the war in Iraq, but it's not as simply as many of the left and some on the right would like it to be. I think you have no idea what's going on, and the majority of the protestors had no idea what was going on.

Since the interviews were on tv I can't give you an online link. CBC had as a regular, a former member of Iraq's nuclear team. He said over and over that the nuclear program had been discontinued (by the way he was no fan of Saddam and left because of him). He also said that over the period of time before he left Iraq, Iraq was destroying chemicals and weaponry. BBC had two regulars that basically said the same thing; also more than one former Iraqi that said the ties between Saddam and bin Laden were unfounded and that one of bin Laden's goals was to bring down Saddam and install an Islamic government. Looks like bin Laden just might win that one yet. At the beginning of the lead up CNN even (sorry, I don't get FOX) had CIA? people that discounted what the Whitehouse was giving as intelligence but that lasted only a short while because almost from the beginning, if an American was against the Iraq war they were labeled unAmerican.

As far as I don't know what is going on? I guess I and others "on the left" were better informed than the supporters of the war were weren't we? The protesters of war, b the way protested for many reasons, some of them even the right reasons.

Why are you trying to minimalize the non-supporters who turned out to be right about the wmd and the bin Laden tie bs?

[Canadian Blue]

Since the interviews were on tv I can't give you an online link. CBC had as a regular, a former member of Iraq's nuclear team. He said over and over that the nuclear program had been discontinued (by the way he was no fan of Saddam and left because of him). He also said that over the period of time before he left Iraq, Iraq was destroying chemicals and weaponry. BBC had two regulars that basically said the same thing; also more than one former Iraqi that said the ties between Saddam and bin Laden were unfounded and that one of bin Laden's goals was to bring down Saddam and install an Islamic government. Looks like bin Laden just might win that one yet. At the beginning of the lead up CNN even (sorry, I don't get FOX) had CIA? people that discounted what the Whitehouse was giving as intelligence but that lasted only a short while because almost from the beginning, if an American was against the Iraq war they were labeled unAmerican.

That doesn't really prove anything. Why don't you jdobbin's example and provide some links.

As far as I don't know what is going on? I guess I and others "on the left" were better informed than the supporters of the war were weren't we? The protesters of war, b the way protested for many reasons, some of them even the right reasons.

Not really, when someone says that George Bush should be hanged then it shows how out of touch you are with the world. People also think Canadian soldiers kill innocents in Afghanistan, even though they have no idea what goes on in Afghanistan.

[Fortunata]

That doesn't really prove anything. Why don't you jdobbin's example and provide some links.

It was enough for me to realize there was more to the story than the Whitehouse propoganda said. And, at the time, I didn't get that information from the internet, I got it from interviews on tv. If I could provide that then I would, and it is up to you whether you believe what I said I saw or not. You will choose not, but that is up to you. Events have proven those right.

Not really, when someone says that George Bush should be hanged then it shows how out of touch you are with the world. People also think Canadian soldiers kill innocents in Afghanistan, even though they have no idea what goes on in Afghanistan.

And you are attributing those statements or beliefs to me why?