Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by Fnord666 on Sunday December 03 2017, @10:27AM   Printer-friendly
from the does-this-smell-like-almonds? dept.

After hearing his guilty sentence upheld, convicted war criminal Slobodan Praljak took out a small bottle of poison and drank it. The act of defiance was streamed live to viewers around the world. Praljak died a few hours later:

It happened in the span of a few confused minutes.

Moments after hearing that his 20-year sentence for war crimes had been upheld, Slobodan Praljak defied the admonitions of his judges, declared his innocence a final time — and with eyes wide, as if shocked himself at what he was doing, put a tiny glass to his lips and gulped deeply. "I just drank poison," he exclaimed after lowering the glass. And the presiding judge asked for the curtains to be closed.

The end came quickly. Praljak died within hours Wednesday. But as Dutch authorities open their investigation into the incident at the international criminal tribunal for the former Yugoslavia, one difficult question promises to persist much longer: How exactly did the former Bosnian Croat general manage to commit suicide in a high-security courtroom in The Hague, Netherlands, and in front of viewers streaming the video live around the world?

There is reason — besides his swift death — to believe Praljak's declaration that he had indeed taken poison.

"There was a preliminary test of the substance in the container and all I can say for now is that there was a chemical substance in that container that can cause death," Dutch prosecutor Marilyn Fikenscher told The Associated Press. That said, the official cause of death will have to wait until an autopsy is completed.

Slobodan Praljak. The poison is thought to have been cyanide.


Original Submission

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
(1)
  • (Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday December 03 2017, @10:40AM (20 children)

    by Anonymous Coward on Sunday December 03 2017, @10:40AM (#604611)

    Having seen close and personal the American "justice" system (supposedly one of the best in the world), I have to report that I'm not at all convinced Slobodan's course of action is unjustified.

    Judicial systems tend to be Kabuki Theatre for ritualizing the exaltation of the powers and the relegation of the losers.

    • (Score: 5, Informative) by pvanhoof on Sunday December 03 2017, @11:28AM (19 children)

      by pvanhoof (4638) on Sunday December 03 2017, @11:28AM (#604617) Homepage

      The International Court of Justice is in The Hague, in The Netherlands. That's in Europe. Not in any of the countries in America (like the US).

      • (Score: 2, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday December 03 2017, @11:53AM (5 children)

        by Anonymous Coward on Sunday December 03 2017, @11:53AM (#604622)

        Doesn't change the point. That Court has also been accused of being nothing more than a kangaroo court, the purpose being not to find the truth or dispense justice, but to just fulfill the political desires of the courts paymasters and influencers.

        When I hear the name "International Court of Justice", I can't help but think the name was conceived in Irony. A bit like how North Korea calls itself the "Democratic Peoples Republic of Korea". The ICJ has about as much relevance to "Justice" as North Korea has with "Democracy".

        The less an entity is what it professes it is, the more it shoves it in your face.

      • (Score: 0, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday December 03 2017, @12:05PM (12 children)

        by Anonymous Coward on Sunday December 03 2017, @12:05PM (#604623)

        I said that having seen close and personal one of the best justice systems in the world, I have to say that I'm not impressed it, so I'm probably not going to be impressed with The Hague either.

        • (Score: 3, Informative) by c0lo on Sunday December 03 2017, @12:25PM (10 children)

          by c0lo (156) Subscriber Badge on Sunday December 03 2017, @12:25PM (#604627) Journal

          Having seen close and personal the American "justice" system

          ...
          I said that having seen close and personal one of the best justice systems in the world

          Say... what? USians "justice" system is, at best, a market place.

          --
          https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
          • (Score: 5, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday December 03 2017, @01:15PM (6 children)

            by Anonymous Coward on Sunday December 03 2017, @01:15PM (#604637)

            Say... what? USians "justice" system is, at best, a market place.

            You say that as if it were a bad thing.

            Fuckin' A right it is. Here in 'murikkka you can have all the justice you can afford.

            Because we're the best fuckin' country, douchebag!

            Why don't you go back to searching for the dingo that ate your baby and shut the fuck up?!?

            We [wikipedia.org] know [deathpenaltyinfo.org] how [aclu.org] to do [washingtonpost.com] it here!

            And we don't want you fuckin' furriners here anyway. So keep fucking the kangaroos and stay out of my country or you'll get what Justine Diamond [nbcnews.com] got. And she's not even a darkie.

            USA! USA! USA! USA! USA! USA! USA! USA! USA! USA! USA! USA!

            #MAGA Motherfucker!!!

            • (Score: -1, Redundant) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday December 03 2017, @02:31PM (1 child)

              by Anonymous Coward on Sunday December 03 2017, @02:31PM (#604656)

              See subject.

              • (Score: -1, Redundant) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday December 03 2017, @02:39PM

                by Anonymous Coward on Sunday December 03 2017, @02:39PM (#604659)

                naranja negro

            • (Score: -1, Spam) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday December 03 2017, @03:08PM

              by Anonymous Coward on Sunday December 03 2017, @03:08PM (#604672)

              See subject.

            • (Score: -1, Spam) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday December 03 2017, @04:40PM

              by Anonymous Coward on Sunday December 03 2017, @04:40PM (#604700)

              See subject.

            • (Score: -1, Spam) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday December 03 2017, @05:07PM

              by Anonymous Coward on Sunday December 03 2017, @05:07PM (#604711)

              See subject.

            • (Score: -1, Spam) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday December 03 2017, @06:41PM

              by Anonymous Coward on Sunday December 03 2017, @06:41PM (#604750)

              See subject.

          • (Score: -1, Spam) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday December 03 2017, @01:24PM

            by Anonymous Coward on Sunday December 03 2017, @01:24PM (#604640)

            So, no. It ain't a "market place".

          • (Score: -1, Spam) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday December 03 2017, @01:39PM

            by Anonymous Coward on Sunday December 03 2017, @01:39PM (#604643)

            So, no. It ain't a "market place".

            "Troll"? OK. I guess I'll repost.

          • (Score: -1, Flamebait) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday December 03 2017, @02:32PM

            by Anonymous Coward on Sunday December 03 2017, @02:32PM (#604657)

            So, no. It ain't a "market place".

            "Troll"? "Spam"? OK. I guess I'll repost.

        • (Score: -1, Spam) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday December 03 2017, @01:37PM

          by Anonymous Coward on Sunday December 03 2017, @01:37PM (#604642)

          So, no. It ain't a "market place".

          "Troll"? OK. I guess I'll repost.

  • (Score: 5, Insightful) by bzipitidoo on Sunday December 03 2017, @01:01PM (9 children)

    by bzipitidoo (4388) on Sunday December 03 2017, @01:01PM (#604636) Journal

    Typical. The sort of malignant psychopathic person who is capable of leading blindly loyal followers to commit atrocities against another group will in total sincerity declare that they are actually the victims of that same group and their acts are not revenge but for their own safety. They had to do it, to stop what was supposedly being done to them. Had to strike first, before the other group did worse, as they were undoubtedly planning.

    Hitler committed suicide rather than suffer capture by the Soviets. At any time, Hitler could have surrendered, could have stepped down, resigned. But he wouldn't. While Hitler was in power, surrendering was totally out of the question, not even on his radar.

    I don't know that a trial helps a whole lot with the root problem, which according to the book The Authoritarians ( https://theauthoritarians.org/ [theauthoritarians.org] ) is that about a third of the population are eager to follow a Great Leader anywhere, have a preference for being divided into "us" and "them" and being lead into conflict with "them". Possibly a destructive war thins and reduces their numbers and influence, but by the next generation or two, they're back.

    • (Score: 5, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday December 03 2017, @01:26PM (1 child)

      by Anonymous Coward on Sunday December 03 2017, @01:26PM (#604641)

      Because this is what the Nazi and similar racists are - a bunch of cowards. They are really scared shitless of the "others". Their fear results in driving themselves into the proverbial corner where the murders convinced themselves that they had "no choice" and is it them that are "victims". And they do this via echo chambers.

      So yes, they are a bunch of cowards. They will even kill themselves and not face justice for their heinous crimes. But don't judge them too harshly. Anyone that can be scared and divided against another is capable of doing the same things these cowards did. It's not evil that does this - it's fear that does this.

      • (Score: 0, Flamebait) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday December 03 2017, @07:56PM

        by Anonymous Coward on Sunday December 03 2017, @07:56PM (#604773)

        There's no justice in Hague, they're a kangaroo court. There is a reason they go after Praljak for the grave crime of breaking a bridge during wartime and not Bush or Obama for the petty crime of killing hundreds of thousands.

    • (Score: 5, Insightful) by bradley13 on Sunday December 03 2017, @02:22PM (3 children)

      by bradley13 (3053) on Sunday December 03 2017, @02:22PM (#604653) Homepage Journal

      "The sort of malignant psychopathic person who is capable of leading blindly loyal followers to commit atrocities against another group will in total sincerity declare that they are actually the vicitims of that same group and their acts are not revenge but for their own safety"

      You're absolutely right. And their view is totally sincere, and maybe not even totally wrong. Two sides, each hating the other, each avenging itself for atrocities that the other side commits, each outdoing the other until both have gone beyond the bounds of civilized behavior. Add in the essential need, in time of war, to dehumanize the enemy, and you have the perfect setting for war crimes.

        Every culture is capable of this. Look at Abu Ghraib, Guantanamo and CIA rendition for recent American examples.

      I have never been convinced that war crimes trials make a lot of sense. The people are prosecuted for violating laws imposed on them from outside their countries, and always after the fact. It looks a lot like legalized revenge, since it's always the losers who are put on trial. By all rights GW Bush, his staff, and their British counterparts should be put on trial for torture, Abu Ghraib, Guantanamo, and other crimes. Obama and his staff for the humanitarian disaster they created in Libya, plus the continuation of torture and of Guantanamo. But, no, Bush and Obama both "won", so they're safe.

      --
      Everyone is somebody else's weirdo.
    • (Score: 4, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday December 03 2017, @02:59PM (1 child)

      by Anonymous Coward on Sunday December 03 2017, @02:59PM (#604669)

      > about a third of the population are eager to follow a Great Leader anywhere, have a preference for being divided into "us" and "them" and being lead into conflict with "them".

      Well, fuck. Notice that Trump's approval rating hovers around 35% or so :/

      • (Score: 2, Informative) by Sulla on Sunday December 03 2017, @03:54PM

        by Sulla (5173) on Sunday December 03 2017, @03:54PM (#604687) Journal

        People keep saying this but so far he has escalated our current military engagements less than Obama did. I am not saying that will last, but currently he doing better than Bush and Obama did. Syria conflict is dying down pretty fast, Iraq is looking good, nothing tood to say about Afghanistan but he has told the saudis and isrealis to fug off when they tried to drag us into lebanon. Has met with russians and chinese a lot regarding north korea.

        Tldr trump is not yet the warmonger the left claims, and in the current environment if he wanted it the senate and congress (both sides) would give it to him

        --
        Ceterum censeo Sinae esse delendam
    • (Score: 2, Interesting) by fustakrakich on Sunday December 03 2017, @05:41PM

      by fustakrakich (6150) on Sunday December 03 2017, @05:41PM (#604725) Journal

      A better explanation [wikipedia.org] was written 85 years ago... (Also notable is who ordered his books to be burned) Of course we can go back to Plato, if you want.

      --
      La politica e i criminali sono la stessa cosa..
  • (Score: 2) by deadstick on Sunday December 03 2017, @02:57PM (1 child)

    by deadstick (5110) on Sunday December 03 2017, @02:57PM (#604668)

    IANAD, but it's my understanding that a lethal one-shot dose of cyanide would have shown its effects -- rather grisly ones -- much faster than they could "close the curtains".

  • (Score: 5, Interesting) by crafoo on Sunday December 03 2017, @04:43PM (1 child)

    by crafoo (6639) on Sunday December 03 2017, @04:43PM (#604702)

    He was not a war criminal. He was accused but not convicted. Unable to convict him they instead kept him imprisoned for nearly 20 years, the term of the original sentence, using bureaucratic rules.

    Incidentally the original war crimes charge was for the destruction of a bridge. It was deemed valuable to the immigrant islamic population and the destruction caused undue hardship to that population.

    Praljak was a university teacher, a community organizer, had multiple degrees. He volunteered to drive invaders from his homeland.

    • (Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Monday December 04 2017, @02:29PM

      by Anonymous Coward on Monday December 04 2017, @02:29PM (#605045)

      what part of "convicted war criminal Slobodan Praljak" do you not get ?

  • (Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday December 03 2017, @05:11PM (3 children)

    by Anonymous Coward on Sunday December 03 2017, @05:11PM (#604714)

    Imagine the US civil war, but with great powers taking the side of the south. The secession succeeds, and Lincoln, Grant etc are handed over by the Northern States to an "international criminal court". Sometimes rather willingly, because the surviving North wants trade access to British North America and other areas of influence of those countries that broke the old union apart.

    • (Score: 1) by khallow on Sunday December 03 2017, @06:33PM (1 child)

      by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Sunday December 03 2017, @06:33PM (#604745) Journal
      Yes, it's so unfair that your criminals were on the losing side.
      • (Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday December 03 2017, @06:55PM

        by Anonymous Coward on Sunday December 03 2017, @06:55PM (#604754)

        Criminals always are on the losing side. Otherwise they would be heroes like Lincoln and Sherman.

    • (Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday December 03 2017, @07:12PM

      by Anonymous Coward on Sunday December 03 2017, @07:12PM (#604760)

      I think going further back is even more telling. Had the American revolution failed, the people we know as the founding fathers would have almost certainly faced "trial" and summary execution in kangaroo courts. And the execution, in English style at the time, would likely have been to have each man publicly drawn and quartered. [wikipedia.org] Link for those unfamiliar with how exactly barbaric the English remained for centuries. And of course instead of being the founding fathers they would be considered terrorists, criminals, and so on.

      It really makes one consider how much history is written by the victor. Or at least was. Imagine if the internet had existed during times of the American revolution. Being able to see how the events unfolded in the public eye, two centuries later, would have been absolutely fascinating. Or even in more contemporary times - imagine seeing the progression in the public eye from the Weimar Republic to Nazi Germany. The internet era ensures the most great epoch will be something that people of the future will be able to see clearly - regardless of who wins.

  • (Score: -1, Troll) by jmorris on Sunday December 03 2017, @07:10PM (1 child)

    by jmorris (4844) on Sunday December 03 2017, @07:10PM (#604757)

    So this guy (along with his side) committed the grave sin of defeating the wrong enemy. When you win you don't face a war crimes tribunal, so obviously they lost. Since they defeated what they thought was their enemy it is obvious this assumption was mistaken. From the Wiki page it is clear he did nothing that should be wrong in a sane world. He did nothing no American or British general did not do when needed, back when their countries actually won wars. Their enemy was the International System that desired their deaths at the hand of the Muslims it had taken the side of. They should have been fighting for their independence from the U.N.

    One of his "crimes" was destroying religious institutions. That crime does not even make sense when applied to Islam, which he was fighting. They do not accept the concept of a division between "mosque and state" at all. They don't even consider it wrong to use a mosque as an arms depot, command post, etc. That is entirely a Western notion. And accusing someone who was in a total war for survival against Islam of "persecution on religious ground" is a farce.

    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday December 03 2017, @08:45PM

      by Anonymous Coward on Sunday December 03 2017, @08:45PM (#604788)

      jmorris/Balkans/Ottoman Empire/Janissarie: it all makes sense now. jmorris is a young Christian boy, kidnapped at a very young age, raised to fight the enemies of the Caliphate! Makes almost too much sense, if you know what I mean.

(1)