Clark told the court reconciliation is essential.

  • News
  • Thread starter Mercator
  • Start date
He took a lot of weird cases, always on the unpopular side, and usually unwinnable. So, he's got a reputation as a crank, but he's really just dedicated to giving everyone a fair trial. He's also been associated with the 9/11 truth movement, which definitely doesn't help his reputation.In summary, William Ramsey Clark is a well-known and controversial political activist and attorney who served as the 66th United States Attorney General. He has a history of taking on unpopular cases and advocating for progressive and libertarian causes. His involvement in the Saddam Hussein trial has raised concerns about the fairness of the proceedings and his intentions for using it as a platform to criticize U.S. foreign policy. Whether he is
  • #1
Mercator
Clark told the court "reconciliation is essential."

Clark told the court "reconciliation is essential." He said unless the Iraqis think the trial is fair, it will divide rather than reconcile the country.

Is he a left wing nut, or the conscience of the USA? The above statement sounds reasonable enough.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
And Evo, I don't waste my time reading your private messages and if you "ban"me, I just use one of my other ID's. How many times do I have to tell you that what you do is futile? Focus on the discussion.
 
  • #3
Mercator said:
Clark told the court "reconciliation is essential." He said unless the Iraqis think the trial is fair, it will divide rather than reconcile the country.

Is he a left wing nut, or the conscience of the USA? The above statement sounds reasonable enough.
A google revealed http://www.latimes.com/news/nationw...ov29,1,2742523.story?coll=la-headlines-world":
The ex-attorney general, now a member of Iraqi's legal team, is known for flogging the political dimension rather than the criminal allegation. [emphasis added]

High-profile American lawyer Ramsey Clark came to the aid of Saddam Hussein on Monday, formally joining his team of attorneys. But although the former U.S. attorney general may have found the ultimate platform for his vehement opposition to the Iraq war, legal experts were divided over whether his participation would hurt or help the deposed dictator's case.

Clark, 77, has long been a champion of controversial causes and has had a roster of notorious clients, including a leader of the Rwandan genocide, former Yugoslav President Slobodan Milosevic and the Palestine Liberation Organization. Clark, who met with Hussein briefly before the U.S.-led invasion in 2003, had for months advised the ousted strongman's team in his defense against murder charges.

Based on the Dallas native's performances in previous high-profile trials, legal observers say he is almost certain to bypass the specific allegations against Hussein and instead will try to turn the proceedings into a forum for airing his grievances against U.S. foreign policy.
I agree that what he said sounds reasonable enough, but it would appear from his record that his intentions are likely to be anything but reasonable.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #4
russ_watters said:
A google revealed http://www.latimes.com/news/nationw...ov29,1,2742523.story?coll=la-headlines-world": I agree that what he said sounds reasonable enough, but it would appear from his record that his intentions are likely to be anything but reasonable.
I googled too and I got such a long list of attacks on him, linking him from the assasination of Kennedy to being a member of some obscure stalinist organization that I have no idea what to think of him. Strangely, Ramsey Clark sounds very familiar, but I don't know what he stands for.
Anyway, he is not a positively contributing factor to stability in Iraq. The whole Saddam trial is degrading into a farce. As you know, my point of view is, that now we're in the situation we're in, we have to make the best of it. Giving Saddam a forum to gain sympathy all over the world , with the aid of an ex-attorney general of the US, is not going to help.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #5
Clearly, there is no easy way to figure out what to do about Hussein - perhaps it would be better to hold off with the trial for another six months when (I suspect) the US will be pulling out. Then charges such as Clark's will be a lot weaker.
 
  • #6
Mercator said:
And Evo, I don't waste my time reading your private messages and if you "ban"me, I just use one of my other ID's. How many times do I have to tell you that what you do is futile? Focus on the discussion.
I'm not pm'ng you, the system notifies you when you get a warning. :rolleyes:
 
  • #7
Mercator said:
Clark told the court "reconciliation is essential." He said unless the Iraqis think the trial is fair, it will divide rather than reconcile the country.
Is he a left wing nut, or the conscience of the USA? The above statement sounds reasonable enough.

William Ramsey Clark (born December 18, 1927) political activist best known for his work in the U.S. Department of Justice, which included service as the 66th United States Attorney General under President Lyndon B. Johnson. He is a recipient of the Gandhi Peace Award and the son of another Attorney General and Justice of the Supreme Court, Tom C. Clark.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ramsey_Clark

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ramsey_Clark#Controversial_Activism

He seems to take clients whom most other attorneys would avoid. He seems to be to the left, possibly a mix of progressive and libertarian philosophies.
 

1. What does "reconciliation is essential" mean in this context?

"Reconciliation" in this context refers to the act of resolving conflicts and repairing relationships between individuals or groups. It is essential for the court to promote reconciliation in order to foster understanding and cooperation among the parties involved.

2. Why is reconciliation important in a court setting?

In a court setting, reconciliation is important because it can lead to a more peaceful and mutually beneficial resolution. It can also help prevent future conflicts and promote a sense of justice and fairness for all parties involved.

3. How does Clark's statement about reconciliation align with the goals of the court?

Clark's statement about reconciliation aligns with the goals of the court as it emphasizes the importance of finding a resolution that is satisfactory for all parties involved. This is in line with the court's goal of promoting fairness and justice.

4. What role does reconciliation play in the legal system?

Reconciliation plays an important role in the legal system as it allows for a more collaborative and peaceful resolution of conflicts. It also helps to promote a sense of understanding and empathy among all parties involved.

5. Can reconciliation be achieved in all court cases?

While reconciliation may not always be possible in every court case, it should always be considered as a potential solution. In cases where reconciliation is not achievable, the court must still strive to promote fairness and justice for all parties involved.

Similar threads

  • General Discussion
7
Replies
235
Views
20K
  • General Discussion
Replies
4
Views
652
Replies
6
Views
2K
Writing: Input Wanted Captain's choices on colony ships
  • Sci-Fi Writing and World Building
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • Art, Music, History, and Linguistics
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • General Discussion
2
Replies
36
Views
12K
Replies
12
Views
2K
Replies
10
Views
2K
Replies
28
Views
11K
  • General Discussion
Replies
15
Views
4K
Back
Top