then what the hell are we doing in Iraq?
Wasn't the whole idea to interfere with Saddam Hussain's Legal system?
I believe Schapelle is innocent. She at least deserves a fair trial. Why dont we start defending our own people and let the rest of the world have their war!
2006-09-26 19:03:54 · 6 answers · asked by miss2sexc 4 in Politics & Government ➔ Military
The thing is... The difference about Saddam is... It's... Err... The thing about Saddam... It's... He's an a**hole, and that's why we went in.
Look, Indonesia has a legal system, which on the surface does not breach any human rights. It is well within the powers of the Indonesian government to sentence Corby to death, but they gave her 20 years, which technically for Indonesia is a not-too-harsh-not-to-light sentence.
Iraq, on the other hand, based on the initial intelligence (that came out of Bush's a**), was a THREAT to Australia and her citizens. While one acted within her own powers, the other threatened ours, and hence we invaded.
2006-09-26 19:11:16 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
I support Schapelle too - but your Iraq analogy is utterly incorrect and is akin to comparing apples to oranges.
John Howard cannot influence the court system of Indonesia (which is based on the Dutch legal system), nor of any other country - nor could Kim Beazley if he was in power
Indonesia's court systems are out of whack - look at the term imposed on that scum Abu Bakir Bashir.. and then compare to the sentencing of Schapelle.
In Indonesia palms get greased far too often in their government, police force and military
2006-09-27 02:11:18 · answer #2 · answered by LadyRebecca 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The answer is very simple, in Iraq we are following Mr Bushes orders. As to to Schapelles innocent or not i am not to sure. However, the reason Honest John does not give a stuff about Schapelle, there are no votes in it.
2006-09-27 02:16:02 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
I agree mostly with abby,
Schapelle was found guilty with a fair trial,thats all that can be done, the government can't interfer with other countries courts the same as other countries can't interfer in our courts
2006-09-27 03:07:24 · answer #4 · answered by ausblue 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋
If you want to champion a cause, why not pick something worthwhile, I mean please Schapelle Corby.
Water conservation, staving children in third world countries,children orphaned by AIDS. Green house gas emissions.
You believe she is innocent, you are in the minority there but really it is not worth debate.
I do feel my time is well spent trying to divert you to a more noble or worthy pursuit.
2006-09-27 03:01:04 · answer #5 · answered by Random houses 1 · 2⤊ 0⤋
I agree to an extent. I believe that if you enter another country, it's your responsibility to abide by, and to know their laws. If you get caught breaking those laws you pay the penalty, whatever that may be. I don't think any government has a right to try to change those laws to suit one of it's citizens. I believe that the Government has done everything that it can legally. As for Iraq, I don't think we should be there. It's only because Johnny's so far up Bush's **** that he can see daylight out the other end.
2006-09-27 02:21:08 · answer #6 · answered by bougainvillaea 3 · 1⤊ 1⤋