Milosevic dies in jail

[Nono]

Quote by: rmnunez I can think of a couple of good reasons a critical lefty would be in despair over Slobo's death.

Rummie, once again your reasoning makes me laugh.
Slobo was a very sick man, both physically and mentally. He suffered from paranoia and delusions of grandeur.

You tell me why anyone interested in social justice would want anything to do with that old mafioso.

Saddam also wants to throw light on the time when the likes of Donald Rumsfeld were in bed with him. That would be amusing, I admit, but I dare you to assert that people like me would weap at his death.

You have a funny old way of doing a reductio ad absurdum number on your very own arguments -- sort of a form of debater's hari kiri.

[rmnunez]

Why presume critical lefties are interested in "social justice"? If you would find "amusing" having Rumsfeld, either Bush and others explaining their alleged past intimacy with dictators, why can't you see critical lefties who've been saying this all along will regret losing the chance of hearing those explanations? I doubt anyone expects to see any US president or cabinet member explaining past intimacies with former dictators when they get overthrown and brought to trial, but there was a hope refusing a summons would make the US look worse.

[Scribbler1]

Quote by: rmnunez Critical lefties hoped Slobo would demonstrate US presidents and their cabinets acted wrongfully in intervening, publicly display and broadcast their ulterior motives, plots and conspiracies which would reveal their unmitigated greed and malice. I think critical lefties regret the loss of that chance.

Okay, so in other words this is all opinion and no substance. Thank you.

[rmnunez]

Okay scribe, I was of the opinion critical lefties would regret Slobo's demise before he had the chance of calling some high united statian figures to the stand in his defence. Critical lefties did indicate US intervention in Yugoslavia was wrongful and guided by ulterior motives, so did Slobo.

[bishop]

well, there are tons of political blogs out there.. if you can find ONE "critical lefty" (whatever the hell that means) site that's sorry that milosevich died, you win a gold star..

if you can't, you should seriously consider dropping this line of bullshit that you're pushing...

[Scribbler1]

Quote by: rmnunez Okay scribe, I was of the opinion critical lefties would regret Slobo's demise before he had the chance of calling some high united statian figures to the stand in his defence. Critical lefties did indicate US intervention in Yugoslavia was wrongful and guided by ulterior motives, so did Slobo.

As long as you maintain it's your opinion that's okay with me. I disagree, of course, but I will defend your right to your baseless, right-wing opinions.

[rmnunez]

Former Yugoslav leader Slobodan Milosevic feared he was being poisoned in his detention cell in The Hague, his lawyer Zdenko Tomanovic said on Saturday hours after the tribunal announced Milosevic's death. "Today, I have filed an official request to the tribunal to have the autopsy carried out in Moscow, having in mind his claims yesterday that he was being poisoned in the jail," Tomanovic told reporters in The Hague. http://today.reuters.com/news/newsarticle.aspx? type=topNews&storyid=2006-03-11T180846Z_01_L11764575_RTRUKOC_0_US-WARCRIMES-MILOSEVIC-POISON.xml&rpc=22

I'll find some critical lefty regreting Slobo's premature passing, have seen plenty of them gleefully salivating in anticipation of Bush I and Rumsfeld getting summoned.

[bishop]

hell, i'd support putting bush and rumsfeld in front of a firing squad for crimes against our nation, but that doesn't mean that i am sorry that milosevich is dead... the connections you make, make absolutely no sense..

[Scribbler1]

Quote by: rmnunez >Former Yugoslav leader Slobodan Milosevic feared he was being poisoned in his detention cell in The Hague, his lawyer Zdenko Tomanovic said on Saturday hours after the tribunal announced Milosevic's death. "Today, I have filed an official request to the tribunal to have the autopsy carried out in Moscow, having in mind his claims yesterday that he was being poisoned in the jail," Tomanovic told reporters in The Hague. http://today.reuters.com/news/newsarticle.aspx? type=topNews&storyid=2006-03-11T180846Z_01_L11764575_RTRUKOC_0_US-WARCRIMES-MILOSEVIC-POISON.xml&rpc=22 I'll find some critical lefty regreting Slobo's premature passing, have seen plenty of them gleefully salivating in anticipation of Bush I and Rumsfeld getting summoned.

A link? My goodness, RM, you amaze me. This is so unlike you.

[rmnunez]

Not just one, its two (I think it should be just one)

[Sinner]

This shameful trial was a poor effort to legitimise genocide against Serbia. When it became perfectly clear that it couldn't be done, they simply murdered him.

It is naive to hope that any kind of justice can be served in todays world. The good news is, "God cannot be fooled" so the supreme justice will be served on those who truly deserve it, sexual pervert clinton and his masters.

[rmnunez]

Four examples of "critical lefties" (link included); Ramsey Clark, Esq., Bill Cecil, the "International Action Center" and "World Workers Party", who would regret Slobo's untimely passing before Mr. Clark's 'star witnesses' could be called:

As was the case at the Nuremberg trials, some accuse this trial of being political. A group associated with former U.S. Attorney General Ramsey Clark, an outspoken supporter of Milosevic and critic of U.S. foreign policy who has accused NATO of war crimes in the Balkans, passed out leaflets reading "Free Slobodan Milosevic! Jail George Bush!" to journalists at the trial today. "This is an illegal court," said Bill Cecil, who was passing out the fliers on behalf of Clark's group, the International Action Center. (The IAC is affiliated with the Workers World Party, which took the side of the Chinese regime against the Tiananmen movement.) "It's a private court that's funded by the U.S., the U.K., the belligerent parties, also by [financier George] Soros and private corporations like CNN. The judges are in complete collaboration with the prosecutors and with the arresting forces." From the outset, Milosevic has also rejected the Tribunal's legitimacy. As a sign of that rejection, the 60-year-old Serb, a graduate of Belgrade University law school, has refused to appoint lawyers to defend him and chosen to represent himself. In previous statements, Milosevic has vowed to call as witnesses world leaders and diplomats such as former U.S. President Bill Clinton and diplomat Richard Holbrooke, who at one time, Milosevic alleges, treated him as a peacemaker. Meantime, the ICTY has appointed a team of amici curiae, or friends of the court, to try to make sure the trial is fair to the former Serbian and Yugoslav president. http://www.salon.com/news/feature/20...ue/index1.html

I'm sure if any of the four make reference to Slobo's death, they won't fail to mention his prior concern expressed to his attorneys, that he was slowly being poisoned. If you are lucky, you might find reference to Slobo's defence. Defense has called for an autopsy. I doubt any of the four aforementioned "critical lefties" believed for a moment Slobo's case merited defense.

I think the US should bring a claim against the EU and ICJ for this blatant breach of human rights, no legitimate court in any jurisdiction should tolerate without enquiry the death of a prisoner at trial, is this any better than what the US is accused of in Guantanamo?

[Sonart]

.

Well dang, I think it's time to take a page from the VRWC playbook and declare that the Bush Whitehouse put out a hit on Slobbo and had him rubbed out to keep him from talking! :)

Yeah, that's it!

.

[rmnunez]

Have no idea what the VWRC handbook is about, but counsel for the defence, Mr. Clark, has already demanded an autopsy, amici may file briefs in support. I do think its ironic Slobo should die in EUer captivity and nobody is alleging abuse, while every time a "detainee" croaks at Guantanamo those EUers start pointing fingers.

[Scribbler1]

Quote by: rmnunez Have no idea what the VWRC handbook is about, but counsel for the defence, Mr. Clark, has already demanded an autopsy, amici may file briefs in support. I do think its ironic Slobo should die in EUer captivity and nobody is alleging abuse, while every time a "detainee" croaks at Guantanamo those EUers start pointing fingers.

Well, for one thing, we don't have pictures of a bunch of naked Slobodans in a pyramid or wearing hoods, etc.

And although I don't defend Clark, mainly because I don't like lawyers, you can't call a lawyer's actions on behalf of his client the actions of a "critical leftie" or anything OTHER than a lawyer doing his job. Like Johnnie Cochran's antics for O.J.Simpleton.

[Sonart]

.

Quote by: rmnunez Have no idea what the VWRC handbook is about, but

That would refer to the Vast Right Wing Conspiracy - the "Critical Right", if you will - of Clinton years fame. They showed an unflagging willingness to back even the most unsavory characters if they could get a scandalous criticism of Bill Clinton out of it, and to attribute to Clinton the most outrageous plots to silence such criticism.

And although I'm mystified by why Ramsey Clarke chooses to do what he does, a part of me has a grudging respect for his fanatic, and certainly high profile, devotion to the concept that even the worst criminals deserve an adequate legal defense.

Quote by: Scribbler1 Well, for one thing, we don't have pictures of a bunch of naked Slobodans in a pyramid or wearing hoods, etc.

Or documented evidence of torture.

.

[RickSp]

Quote by: Scribbler1 Can you kindly explain just what you meant by that? I see ZERO connection with the "critical left" and Slob unless it is just your usual attempt to fling any turd that floats past you at the liberals.

Of course you are a critical lefty, Scrib. Anyone who does not share rmnunez's conservative/crypo-authoritarian worldview is lumped into his one catch-all categorization. The gentleman's perspective leans sharply toward the Manichean.

[Scribbler1]

Quote by: Sonart documented evidence of torture. .

Nasty little story there. But you know what the BIGGEST problem I have with stories like these is?

I find myself no longer shocked to read them. It's just business as usual for the Bush administration. Sadly, many of the things this country once stood for, the things that made us stand out in the world which I would proudly point out to people from other countries, have been wiped away forever by this bumbling, smirking drug store cowboy.

[Scribbler1]

Quote by: RickSp Of course you are a critical lefty, Scrib. Anyone who does not share rmnunez's conservative/crypo-authoritarian worldview is lumped into his one catch-all categorization. The gentleman's perspective leans sharply toward the Manichean.

I AM???



Dang.

[rmnunez]

you can't call a lawyer's actions on behalf of his client the actions of a "critical leftie" or anything OTHER than a lawyer doing his job.

No, but Mr. Clark, like any attorney, can choose his clients. Mr. Clark's concurrent defense of Saddam suggests these are the sort of cases he likes to take. What do they have in common? In both the demanding party is the US government. It could be a coincidence that he has taken two succesive cases in opposition to US claims, maybe we should wait until he takes the Iranian ayatollah's case or maybe OBL's is he ever gets caught, before concluding he has some sort of preference, but it sure seems like he is a critical lefty.

It is natural for a critical lefty to criticise the label, they criticise everything. I realize their are tonalities and inflections, but as I've noted before, the epithet fits those who express their criticism of US foreign policy generally from leftish ideological perspective. Now and then some libertarian, Jeffersonian federalist, state's rightist or even a Christian fundamentalist, could get lumped in. These folks will, of course, criticise the misuse of the label. They want to discuss the finer aspects of whatever their perspective is, I don't want to discuss federalism, fundamentalism, state's rights, Jeffersonianism or any of their permutations, prefer to just focus on the criticism of US foreign policy. Figure the term is completely accurate for all those in opposition to the current administration's conservative policies and at least 50% accurate for all those who would be critical of the policy regardless of the prevailing political ideology of the administration.