Saddam Won’t Have Him No Jewish Lawyer
Al Bawaba reports,
Former Iraqi president Saddam Hussein’s daughter, Raghad, gave an interview to an Israeli journalist, in which she spoke of plans to hire an American lawyer, “as long as he’s not Jewish”.
Well good. Any Jew that would represent Saddam after he gave $10,000 gifts to the families of suicide bombers and dropped SCUDs on Tel Aviv during the Gulf War belongs on the Masada 2000 list.
Quick question: is “the families of suicide bombers” supposed to be equivalent to “the Joker’s evil henchmen” or something?
No, Sam, and here’s why. The theory is that if you know you’re poor, hungry family will get a big cash payout from Saddam, you would be much more likely to go out and be a suicide bomber. If you thought, for example, that their home would be bulldozed by Israelis and they would become destitute, homeless, and suffer even more, that might make you reluctant to do the same. It’s kind of like people who kill themselves so their family can collect the insurance money. They’re worth more to the ones they love dead than alive.
…and thus saddam provided incentive not just to suicide bombers, but to their families who celebrate with pride when their children become shihadis. they attend outlandish ceremonies where they receive their checks and are honored for the sacrifice they’ve made for palestinian “independence”…
Kunstler would have done it
and he was a dope Jew
Mobius this is a little nuts IMO
Despite Saddam launching a handfull of 40 year old rust bucket SCUDs, only two people got killed in Israel by all of those crappy SCUDs
“A spokesman for the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) told Middle East Watch that “many” of the Iraqi-modified Scud missiles were so poorly constructed that they broke up on re-entry into the atmosphere, resulting in several different ‘hits.'”
Yet you’re saying any Jew who would defend Saddam should be on a right wing hate list ?
er, johnny, i don’t want to come across like your usual critics, but uh, 2 dead jews isn’t enough for you?
My understanding was that families received 25 grand… can anyone clarify?
There are Jews who would defend Sadaam. They exist in that bizarre philosophical space where the extreme left wing and the extreme right wing are the exact the same thing.
Nobody got a sense of irony?
What happened to the French lawyer, Verges of Klaus Barbie fame (is that his name)? Talk about the crossroads for “the extreme left wing and the extreme right wing”. For those of you that are not familiar with this scumbag, he is a communist, Pol Pot, PLO-supporting, holocaust denying shit, who was bankrolled by Swiss-Nazi and wealthy Islamofascist financiers. And although his biogragphy reads like one of John Brown’s Mossad-CIA-9/11 conspiracy theories, the critical difference is that: it’s actually true. Anyway, I thought he was set to defend SH.
From the article:
Barak then suggested a few names, one of them Jewish-sounding. “Excellent, but he’s Jewish”, responded Saddam’s daughter. “You must understand that my father would never allow it. I don’t judge people, but I cannot cooperate with Jews”.
Such nonsense is worthy of Jewschool where: I may not have liked the holocaust, and I might think that the existence of Israel just may be related to what I perceive as a long history of global anti-Semitism, but I must relent that the industrialized slaughter of 6 million people represents an “equally valid” attempt to answer the Jewish Problem as any other.
ACTUALLY as far as I know nobody died from the scuds themselves but from choking from the gas mask or something like that.
on a personal note, a scud fell on my friend’s grandmother’s apartment. the whole area (not very pretty at first) was fixed up definitely made the area much better lookign and worth more money… so- scuds are good for the jews 🙂
That’s really disgusting. Maybe if you knew people in Israel who lived through the fear and agony of the Gulf War, you wouldn’t make such assinine comments.
Er, Ronen, if I am correct, Asaf did live through the Gulf War in Israel.
Actually Kunstler was a dope who happened to be Jewish not a dope Jew.
Uh… I assume y’all know about the presumption of innocence? It applies to any defendant. You can’t talk about what a scumbag Saddam Hussein was on one hand and then piss on any lawyer who would have the audacity to defend him on the other. Anyone is entitled to a proper defence, EVEN Saddam Hussein. If you think differently then you are ideologically closer to Saddam than you might think.
mobius wrote:
“2 dead jews isn’t enough for you?”
to give up on the idea (that Kunstler believed so strongly in) that everyone deserves a fair trial?
no.
even the top Nazis got a fair trial.
to give up on the idea (that Kunstler believed so strongly in) that everyone deserves a fair trial? no.
Unusually — and unlike the weirdness about Saddam having killed only two Jews (active support for suicide bombing would suggest otherwise) — I pretty much agree with Brown Babylonian here. There’s an International Criminal Defence Attorneys Assocation based here in Montreal whose point is exactly that.
My hunch, in passing, is that Jewish law would have something similar to say. But I’m not educated enough to know, and this is all Google told me when I asked. Anyone?
How could ANYONE (Jew or non-Jew) defend Saddam Hussain?! Let him find one of his own people who still support him (and there are quite a few around) to act as his counsel.
I suppose it doesn’t matter anyway since he is so evidently guilty but as Babylonian said, everyone has the right to a fair trial.
PS I don’t care how old and off target the scuds are, don’t be launching them at my people!
Ronen – mo is right. i lived through the scud period in israel. pretty young then but i clearly remember it. my comment about the scud falling on my friend’s grandparent’s house obviously wasnt to imply that scuds are really good for the jews.. i just thought it was funny.
[on a side note the scuds were mostly aimed to the Kyria if i am not mistaken. thus, based on IDF standards it would be fair to argue that the scud attack on Israel was a legitimate attack against military targets (sikul). luckily not all of us accept IDF standards…]
Hey Babylonian: Mobius never said SH didn’t deserve a fair trial. You are projecting. He just wondered aloud whether or not a Jew should feel comfortable defending someone like SH who believes that Jews are subhuman and that the Israeli people should be destroyed. I mean, I know you are just creaming your pants to defend Nazis in the name of Justice, but I think it is fair to at least speculate on the motivations of Jews who fetishize the defense of Jew haters. This is merely an etiological question. One might also wonder why a Jew decides to call himself “Babylonian” and choose to defend SH. Or why a Jew would pick an anglophilic nic like “John Brown”. Although I’m pretty sure they will go unaswered (this place is worse than LGF) these are Just questions, right?
Asaf wrote: –“ACTUALLY as far as I know nobody died from the scuds themselves but from choking from the gas mask or something like that.”
I lived in israel at the time, and i was old enough then to remember it. I clearly remember watching on the news and reading in every paper that one person died when the door from his buildings bomb shelter fell on him (as a result of the bombing).
–“on a side note the scuds were mostly aimed to the Kyria if i am not mistaken. thus, based on IDF standards it would be fair to argue that the scud attack on Israel was a legitimate attack against military targets (sikul). luckily not all of us accept IDF standards…]”
Where are you getting this info from? Also, even if you are right, it is still an unprovoked act of war against the jewish state.
Babylonian wrote–
“‘2 dead jews isn’t enough for you?’
to give up on the idea (that Kunstler believed so strongly in) that everyone deserves a fair trial?”
No, not giving up on the idea that everyone deserves a fair trial, but it doesnt have to be a jew who makes sure he has this fair trial.
above post by me.
“Where are you getting this info from? Also, even if you are right, it is still an unprovoked act of war against the jewish state. ”
we did the same to iraq a few years earlier, didnt we? what you mean uprovoked?
obviously i am not trying to justify the attack. it would make sense to bush, if not to israel.
regarding people killed from scuds – you are probably right.
johnny, i’m not saying he doesn’t deserve a fair trial. are you saying that he has to have a jewish lawyer in order to have a fair trial?
I was there during the attacks, and recall that there was a death or two due to heart/respiratory failure among those in/around the destroyed buildings. “Scared to death”, much like the boy frightened by the bear in New Hampshire yesterday.
The attacks actually saved lives, as I recall hearing, because the fear of being caught away from home in the event of a scud strike kept so many people off the roads that the automobile trauma rate went down strongly enough to more than make up for those injured and killed by missiles.
“we did the same to iraq a few years earlier, didnt we? what you mean unprovoked?”
Not a “few”, ten.
And whether iraq- a country openly hostile to israel, and calling for its destruction- building nuclear weapons is not a provocation is highly debatable.
Mobius:
You wrote: “johnny, i’m not saying he doesn’t deserve a fair trial. are you saying that he has to have a jewish lawyer in order to have a fair trial?”
You’ve misinterpreted me and I’m not sure where you’re getting the above from. I said exactly the opposite: That SH deserves a fair trial and that you never said otherwise despite JB’s accusation:
mobius [and JB] wrote:
“2 dead jews isn’t enough for you?”
to give up on the idea (that Kunstler believed so strongly in) that everyone deserves a fair trial?
no.
even the top Nazis got a fair trial.
(I was defending you.) I thought it particularly revealing that JB jumped to this conclusion. It points a kind of reactionary thinking on his part. I believed that you were arguing that it would take a rather strange Jew to possess a strong desire to defend SH. (And there is no shortage of strange Jews.) Where did anyone say SH doesn’t deserve a fair trial?
“The attacks actually saved lives, as I recall hearing, because the fear of being caught away from home in the event of a scud strike kept so many people off the roads that the automobile trauma rate went down strongly enough to more than make up for those injured and killed by missiles.”
Saddam saves Jewish lives!
(Slavery was great for the U.S. economy too!)
Jesus. What’s with all the Canucks here? Pretty whacky, eh?
Nomex’s point is pretty accurate and ironic, although it doesn’t exonerate Saddam of course. In the totality of Saddam’s [alleged] crimes, lobbing scuds onto Tel Aviv probably ranks pretty low, especially to an Iraqui tribunal. I suspect that the whole scud thing will be seen as exculpatory to your average Iraqui – “Yes, he committed all kinds of atrocities, that’s true, but he did attack the Zionists!”
mobius wrote:
but to their families who celebrate with pride when their children become shihadis. they attend outlandish ceremonies where they receive their checks and are honored for the sacrifice they’ve made for palestinian “independence”…
oh, kind of like the glorification of the Martyrs in the Irgun museum ?
Jonny the Jewish Hell’s Angel wrote:
someone like SH who believes that Jews are subhuman and that the Israeli people should be destroyed
Where did you read that Saddam said that ? I’m not saying he didn’t, I’ve just never heard of it. I wouldn’t blame him for harboring anger towards the Israeli and US governments. After all, we urged him into this stupid war with Iran saying we’d back him up. Then our best friends in the region, the Israelis – without any provocation at all – attack him out of the clear blue sky in 1981.
And then all of a sudden he finds that Reagan via Israel is supplying Iran with TOW missiles.
So what, even if he did want nukes? Most countries whose antagnoists have nukes end up wanting them too, as a deterrant. Israel introduced them to the middle east before anyone else and started a nuclear arms race in the middle east.
Jonny the Jewish Hell’s Angel wrote:
I mean, I know you are just creaming your pants to defend Nazis in the name of Justice
No, I simply defended justice. The Nazis were the worst of the worst, orders of magnitude worse than Saddam, and even they got a fair trial with real lawyers.. Then they got the penalty that they deserved. Justice was served. That’s fair, that’s the way we do it. Civilized countries don’t line people up like Pol Pot or Stalin and shoot them into mass graves without a fair trial.
Jonny the Jewish Hell’s Angel wrote:
One might also wonder why a Jew decides to call himself “Babylonian” and choose to defend SH.
I never defended Saddam by saying that everyone deserves a fair trial.. or otherwise.
What’s wrong with Babylonian ? My usage of it has nothing to do with Iraq. It’s from the reggae usage, not biblical.
Jonny the Jewish Hell’s Angel wrote:
Or why a Jew would pick an anglophilic nic like “John Brown”.
Again why not? I forget, are you Canadian or American ? John Brown is an American folk hero, and I am American before I’m a Jew, and a Human before American.
JB wrote:
Where did you read that Saddam said that ? I’m not saying he didn’t, I’ve just never heard of it. I wouldn’t blame him for harboring anger towards the Israeli and US governments.
Read about the Baath party. Its authoritarian politics and racist ideology predate any Israel-US alliance in the area.
JB wrote:
No, I simply defended justice….Civilized countries don’t line people up like Pol Pot or Stalin and shoot them into mass graves without a fair trial.
Yeah, nobody ever suggested otherwise. You assumed someone had. Some sort of reflex for you I imagine.
JB wrote:
What’s wrong with Babylonian ? My usage of it has nothing to do with Iraq. It’s from the reggae usage, not biblical.
The wigger thing fits the profile.
JB wrote:
John Brown is an American folk hero, and I am American before I’m a Jew, and a Human before American.
Well, I’m an animal before I’m a human. So I win.
No, I take it back. I’m a Jewish Hell’s Angel, man.
Ignoring the 29 comments made since I asked my question up at the top there … the assumption that house demolitions of suicide bombers have acted as deterrents has yet to be proven in any way, and in fact has been shown up as faulty in several places, i.e. with the attitude that the family will, by also suffering at Israel’s hands, “fight the occupation” in this way. Also, if one thinks that a person will be more likely to become a suicide bomber because of the economic benefits that will be conferred on their family, then shouldn’t Israel just be giving a lot of money to families of suspected suicide bombers?
Oh, one other point, tangentially related — most house demolitions are not directed against families of suicide bombers, but against Palestinians who have built on “unpermitted” land, usually after waiting for years for permits and not being granted them as a result of a pointed policy to prevent Palestinians from expanding their neighborhoods and towns.
I don’t think I was clear above — I meant that an implication of economic motives for suicide “martyrdom” also implies a corresponding ability of the Israeli government to head off this martyrdom by improving the Palestinian economic situation.
In any case, my only goal here is to muddy up the connection between giving money to families of suicide bombers and total evil. There are many other things Saddam did that were more overtly and obviously evil, like killing Kurds with chemical weapons.
er johnny the hell’s angel i was talking to johnny brown, not you
“er johnny the hell’s angel i was talking to johnny brown, not you’
OK.