An Outline Whereby ICTY Judges Should Judge Radovan Karadzic By Jill Starr At the end of the day, some three years from now in the final judgment of Radovan Karadzic%u2019s case being tried at the ICTY, and, in morally judging his guilt or innocence insofar as whether he is directly responsible for war crimes, genocide, crimes against humanity and isolated incidents of rape and summary executions during Srebrenica, first and foremost, the ICTY judges have a duty, a %u201DNoblesse oblige%u201D if you will (used to imply that with wealth, power and prestige come responsibilities of morality-even in judging Radovan Karadzic and the other Bosnian Serbs awaiting trials/appeals at the Hague%u2019s highest court), The ICTY judges have an international duty to compare, contrast and analyze the annals of human history of war, torture and war crimes before rendering their judgement in the case. Why? When analyzing rapes, executions, pilgrimages and torture of former wars,even dating back as far as Medieval Times, cases in point: American soldiers in Vietnam, the Roman Catholic Crusades, the Spanish Inquisition in which women were sexually tortured and burnt alive at the stake, as well as the Abu Ghraib torture scandal recently in Iraq, we discover that the soldiers guilty of these monstrous acts, are themselves guilty and should be tried and sentenced, HOWEVER, one can not rationally say that for instance President Bush was directly responsible for the Abu Ghraib torture scandal in Iraq merely owing to the matter of fact he was the United States President at that time. By the same token we can not reasonably conclude Radovan Karadzic is directly responsible and guilty for the crimes against humanity lower level Serb soldiers committed against Muslims in Srebrenica. For the American and international news media to at this premature point in time to try swaying everyone watching it daily insofar as the Karadzic case, and for this media to daily pronounce Karadzic%u2019s so-called %u201Dguilt%u201D saying %u201Dhe is responsible for the crimes that in actuality, may or may have not occurred at Srebrenica,%u201D even before the evidence and trial has even taken place and been presented; is morally wrong and illegal in and of itself. This entire judgement remains murky and leaves a tremendous %u201Dreasonable doubt%u201D hanging over whether Radovan Karadzic is directly responsible for ordering executions in Srebrenica.  View

Michael Jackson was one of the major influences on music as it exists today. It's sad he lived such a tortured life.  View

We need to STOP abusing the first amendment. It was put into place to protect us from being thrown in jail for saying you dislike the president, or that you don't believe in god or what have you. Claiming that a video of an animal being tortured and killed is protected under the first amendment is beyond absurd. It isn't really speech, nor is it press. It's a way for depraved individuals to make profits off of the suffering of living beings. Remember what Gandhi said: "The greatness of a nation and its moral progress can be judged by the way its animals are treated."  View

Are there any anchors out there worried about the legality or ethics of the alleged torture, or are they just concerned with the politics?  View

I don't think it's just about throwing the Bush admin under the bus. I suspect that this has more to do with information about U.S. treatment of terror suspects slowly beginning to go public. This info could have damaging diplomatic repercussions--as would any attempt to hide, or ignore it. He has to say something about torture, imprisonment, rendition, not just because staying silent hurts him politically, but also because if the allegations are true it would be wrong to stay silent.  View

Facts of Law are facts of Law. If there was a clear violation in the torture case then these people will have to be prosecuted. Chaney's excuse of " But it was a secussful means by which we got information, therefor the means justify the ends. Then torture is only illeagle if you get caught!! I don't think so. It is either legal or illegal. No middle ground in morals court.  View

Facts of Law are facts of Law. If there was a clear violation in the torture case then these people will have to be prosecuted. Chaney's excuse of " But it was a secussful means by which we got information, therefor the means justify the ends. Then torture is only illeagle if you get caught!! I don't think so. It is either legal or illegal. No middle ground in morals court.  View

Facts of Law are facts of Law. If there was a clear violation in the torture case then these people will have to be prosecuted. Chaney's excuse of " But it was a secussful means by which we got information, therefor the means justify the ends. Then torture is only illeagle if you get caught!! I don't think so. It is either legal or illegal. No middle ground in morals court.  View

Facts of Law are facts of Law. If there was a clear violation in the torture case then these people will have to be prosecuted. Chaney's excuse of " But it was a secussful means by which we got information, therefor the means justify the ends. Then torture is only illeagle if you get caught!! I don't think so. It is either legal or illegal. No middle ground in morals court.  View

Facts of Law are facts of Law. If there was a clear violation in the torture case then these people will have to be prosecuted. Chaney's excuse of " But it was a secussful means by which we got information, therefor the means justify the ends. Then torture is only illeagle if you get caught!! I don't think so. It is either legal or illegal. No middle ground in morals court.  View