17 Responses to Send in the clowns

  1. Denise says:
    December 14, 2005 at 6:17 am

    On the comment made by Krys Lanowski, I say a big amen!

    What’s disturbing about this story is that I’ll bet some nut will come out and declare a mistrial for Saddam all because of so called “torture” used by the allies. It’s crap like this that allows people like Saddam to go free.

       0 likes

  2. mark says:
    December 14, 2005 at 7:19 am

    The BBC is now an openly subversive group. UK citizens are forced to pay for this mendacious cadre who subvert the country when it’s at war. Time please..

       0 likes

  3. Bernard says:
    December 14, 2005 at 9:28 am

    “A jury of specially chosen undecided members of the public will give their verdict.” Specially chosen as in completely neutral presumably?

    I support Mark’s view. The BBC is becoming a threat to the life and liberty of the British citizen (particularly if they are white males – as the majority were within living memory!).

       0 likes

  4. Cockney says:
    December 14, 2005 at 10:24 am

    Assuming a half decent advocate of the US/UK position is appointed and the case is clear cut to any reasonable person, surely this is a good opportunity to demolish accusations which normally go relatively unchallenged on the Beeb?

    The bias is that we won’t be seeing any PC sensitive issues being similarly put on ‘trial’.

    Denise – be serious. One hopes that Iraqi law doesn’t allow for ‘some nut’ to randomly declare mistrials on the basis of something completely unconnected to the trial. Presumably there is sufficient evidence to convict Saddam without needing to torture it out of people. Given the obvious question marks about evidence extracted by torture one would hope that a reputable court would treat it with the required amount of scepticism if such evidence came before it, even if it incriminated someone as unpleasant as Saddam. We either want Iraq to be a functioning civilised democracy operating the rule of law or not – if not then why the **** are we spending billions hanging around the place??

       0 likes

  5. Jack Bauer says:
    December 14, 2005 at 10:58 am

    We should hold a special “THE BBC ON TRIAL” to explore what the BBC is guilty of.

       0 likes

  6. RightForScotland says:
    December 14, 2005 at 11:16 am

    I loved that comment by “Ian Neal, Richmond”

    Why is it that moonbats cannot hold their water? They are given the chance to comment on one of their pet subjects but cannot help but trot out the “Chimpy McBushHitler with the help of Halliburton and Cheney planned 9/11” bollocks. Why should we ever want to listen to them when what they say is such patent rubbish?

       0 likes

  7. David H says:
    December 14, 2005 at 11:34 am

    I can only assume that the one sensible comment on there – Krys Lanowski – is at the top to tempt us to read on. The rest is the usual sort of Guardian anti-war nonsense exemplified by Stephen Walker, Liverpool – Considering that the reason for going to war was Saddam Hussein’s possession of WMD, why, if he was too irresponsible to possess them, did the UK sell them to him in the first place?

    Yes, the two abiding lies of the anti-war left – but important to point out: 1) WMD were not the reason for going to war (and they did/do exist) 2) We did not sell him those weapons – you only have to look at http://www.SIPRI.org to find out who did.

       0 likes

  8. Bryan says:
    December 14, 2005 at 12:46 pm

    Yes, that sensible comment is right on top, probably to present the illusion of fair play. But if you have the patience to wade through the subsequent batch of standard left-wing angst you’ll get to some more of the sensible comments.

    I’m sure HYS isn’t getting enough brainwashed left-wing feedback, and so the moderators have to try to juggle with the comments to present an overall anti-war impression.

       0 likes

  9. Steve Mac says:
    December 14, 2005 at 2:48 pm

    And the program putting the insurgency on trial is scheduled for … When?

       0 likes

  11. Rob says:
    December 14, 2005 at 7:38 pm

    ‘Justice is relative’ screeches one righteous anti-war commentator on the BBC comments page. See, this is the kind of sentiment that troubles me about the anti-war mob – their inability to recognise, much less accept, that there IS such a thing as good and evil. It’s not at all relative. Saddam and his henchmen are evil but they get a pass because these people hate the democracy-promoting George Bush and Tony Blair far more.

    Where the Iraq war is concerned most of the BBC and others seem content to live in a strange kind of parallel universe where the values that most people live by just don’t apply. And the more the BBC script departs from reality the more bizarre it all gets. I mean Newsnight is ‘debating’ this issue at the same time that millions and millions of Iraqis are voting in Iraq’s first free elections precisely because of the actions of America and Britain!

    ‘War Crimes of the coalition’ – what next I wonder? A ‘War Crimes of the Unwilling’ perhaps? Yeah, the BBC could throw the spotlight on the disgraceful moral and philosophical dismissal of the plight of the Iraqi people in favour of smearing Bush and Blair at all costs. They could call ordinary Iraqis who lost loved ones under Saddam’s rule and have them demand that the anti-war advocates explain their furious opposition to toppling Saddam. That should be interesting. And I’m sure the BBC could find time to mention that the biggest sellers of arms to Iraq were Russia, France and China and to wonder out loud whether there might be some connection between that and the fact that all three of those countries voted ‘No’ in the UN to the invasion of Iraq.

       0 likes

  12. Robin says:
    December 14, 2005 at 8:46 pm

    I wouldnt worry.In the BBC world and our judiciarys world guilty people shouldnt be punished,they should be treated or understood.So if they do find against the coalition-us-they can bracket us as victims,not oppressers.In fact that means GWB can riot on a global scale.Or doesnt it count if you are a westerner?

       0 likes

  13. TomL says:
    December 14, 2005 at 9:12 pm

    Does anyone remember the footage of identifiable Iraqi Prisoners of War that was beamed around the world by the media during the invasion?

    Do you remember the self-righteous rage that consumed journalists and newsreaders….until they realised that they were the ones broadcasting it, and therefore culpable – not the Coalition, who were merely responsible for taking POWs, not filming and broadcasting them. They dropped that particular ‘War Crime’ story like a hot potatoe, within 24 hours.

    The footage used was in breach of the Geneva Convention on POWs, as it showed the faces of POWs, thereby taking away their dignity. The media are all guilty of a war crime.

    Trial anyone?

       0 likes

  14. Richard says:
    December 14, 2005 at 9:50 pm

    To their credit, the Beeb have published online a lot of opinions against the programme or for the war – including an important bit of mine (I’m from Bournemouth, if you want to find it) correcting some of the hysterical crap that was posted previously. Some of my information comes from blogs!

       0 likes

  15. Bill says:
    December 15, 2005 at 12:02 am

    I’m watching it and it’s a wonderful bit of show trailing. Stafford Smith is even shouting down ‘witnesses’ a la Roland Freisler.

       0 likes

  16. James Gaussen says:
    December 15, 2005 at 12:52 am

    What is so superb about the brain-dead Left is its ability for double-think.

    Anyone else notice that they are all braying “well, we sold Saddam WMDs anyway, so it’s our fault” at the moment.

    Hang on – weren’t all these people arguing very recently that Saddam didn’t HAVE any WMD?!

       0 likes

  17. Allan@Aberdeen says:
    December 15, 2005 at 9:03 am

    It’s also demonstrable that we (the anglosphere) sold Saddam less than 5% of equipment which could be used militarily. Russia, France and China sold more than 3/4 of Saddam’s military hardware. Is there some coincidence in their respective positions at the UN? Needs investigative journalists of the calibre employed by the BBC to check it.

       0 likes