dead Hosni Mubarak

[JR976evil 906]

It appears the coma wasn't permanent, as he's now 'refusing food'.

 

Yeah, right.

 

regards,

Hein

 

Well if I was facing the prospect of a kangaroo court and swift execution I guess I wouldn't be hungry either

[Windsor 2,233]

It appears the coma wasn't permanent, as he's now 'refusing food'.

 

Yeah, right.

 

regards,

Hein

 

Well if I was facing the prospect of a kangaroo court and swift execution I guess I wouldn't be hungry either

 

If he does hang we don't get points...which is a bit unfair considering he was still President at the beginning of the year. Had he been deposed or sentenced to death back in December I could understand why points wouldn't be awarded.

 

For example, Tariq Aziz is also on my list because he is said to be in poor health. If he got hanged, however, I would accept that no points could be awarded because I knew there was the possibility he may be executed when I chose him.

 

In my opinion, there is a world of difference between the two scenarios.

 

Osama bin Laden was executed...points were awarded for that.

[themaninblack 2,112]

It appears the coma wasn't permanent, as he's now 'refusing food'.

 

Yeah, right.

 

regards,

Hein

 

Well if I was facing the prospect of a kangaroo court and swift execution I guess I wouldn't be hungry either

 

If he does hang we don't get points...which is a bit unfair considering he was still President at the beginning of the year. Had he been deposed or sentenced to death back in December I could understand why points wouldn't be awarded.

 

For example, Tariq Aziz is also on my list because he is said to be in poor health. If he got hanged, however, I would accept that no points could be awarded because I knew there was the possibility he may be executed when I chose him.

 

In my opinion, there is a world of difference between the two scenarios.

 

Osama bin Laden was executed...points were awarded for that.

 

An execution is administered by the state. Osama bin Laden was murdered by US special forces, therefore scoring points...

[maryportfuncity 10,647]

Either way, this one could get tricky. The man is used to exercising ultimate power and is reacting the way most tyrannical types do when deprived of control...by trying to control anything he can. It amounts to recklessly endangering his health and is suicidally dangerous, though most likely will kill him through major organ failure, or a stroke; meaning he'll accrue only normal points. He's never going to be well enough to be convicted or executed, IMHO.

[Windsor 2,233]

It appears the coma wasn't permanent, as he's now 'refusing food'.

 

Yeah, right.

 

regards,

Hein

 

Well if I was facing the prospect of a kangaroo court and swift execution I guess I wouldn't be hungry either

 

If he does hang we don't get points...which is a bit unfair considering he was still President at the beginning of the year. Had he been deposed or sentenced to death back in December I could understand why points wouldn't be awarded.

 

For example, Tariq Aziz is also on my list because he is said to be in poor health. If he got hanged, however, I would accept that no points could be awarded because I knew there was the possibility he may be executed when I chose him.

 

In my opinion, there is a world of difference between the two scenarios.

 

Osama bin Laden was executed...points were awarded for that.

 

An execution is administered by the state. Osama bin Laden was murdered by US special forces, therefore scoring points...

 

Perhaps. But you should take in to account the fact that when Mubarak was chosen by deadpoolers back in December, they were not to know that his entire regime was going to collapse and that he could potentially be executed in the space of 12 months. He was chosen in the spirit of the game - he was an ailing leader who was apparently dying of cancer. We did not choose him because we knew he was likely to be executed - or even that there was a possibility he could be executed.

 

This is different to Saddam Hussein in 2006 - where execution was likely at the beginning of the year - and entirely different to Barzan Ibrahim al-Hasan al-Tikriti and Awad Hamad al-Bandar who we knew would be executed in 2007.

[Magere Hein 1,400]

If he does hang we don't get points...which is a bit unfair considering he was still President at the beginning of the year. Had he been deposed or sentenced to death back in December I could understand why points wouldn't be awarded.

 

For example, Tariq Aziz is also on my list because he is said to be in poor health. If he got hanged, however, I would accept that no points could be awarded because I knew there was the possibility he may be executed when I chose him.

 

In my opinion, there is a world of difference between the two scenarios.

 

Osama bin Laden was executed...points were awarded for that.

 

An execution is administered by the state. Osama bin Laden was murdered by US special forces, therefore scoring points...

Perhaps. But you should take in to account the fact that when Mubarak was chosen by deadpoolers back in December, they were not to know that his entire regime was going to collapse and that he could potentially be executed in the space of 12 months. He was chosen in the spirit of the game - he was an ailing leader who was apparently dying of cancer. We did not choose him because we knew he was likely to be executed - or even that there was a possibility he could be executed.

 

This is different to Saddam Hussein in 2006 - where execution was likely at the beginning of the year - and entirely different to Barzan Ibrahim al-Hasan al-Tikriti and Awad Hamad al-Bandar who we knew would be executed in 2007.

 

regards,

Hein

[themaninblack 2,112]

It appears the coma wasn't permanent, as he's now 'refusing food'.

 

Yeah, right.

 

regards,

Hein

 

Well if I was facing the prospect of a kangaroo court and swift execution I guess I wouldn't be hungry either

 

If he does hang we don't get points...which is a bit unfair considering he was still President at the beginning of the year. Had he been deposed or sentenced to death back in December I could understand why points wouldn't be awarded.

 

For example, Tariq Aziz is also on my list because he is said to be in poor health. If he got hanged, however, I would accept that no points could be awarded because I knew there was the possibility he may be executed when I chose him.

 

In my opinion, there is a world of difference between the two scenarios.

 

Osama bin Laden was executed...points were awarded for that.

 

An execution is administered by the state. Osama bin Laden was murdered by US special forces, therefore scoring points...

 

Perhaps. But you should take in to account the fact that when Mubarak was chosen by deadpoolers back in December, they were not to know that his entire regime was going to collapse and that he could potentially be executed in the space of 12 months. He was chosen in the spirit of the game - he was an ailing leader who was apparently dying of cancer. We did not choose him because we knew he was likely to be executed - or even that there was a possibility he could be executed.

 

This is different to Saddam Hussein in 2006 - where execution was likely at the beginning of the year - and entirely different to Barzan Ibrahim al-Hasan al-Tikriti and Awad Hamad al-Bandar who we knew would be executed in 2007.

 

Shit happens mate, that's the way of the game. A lot of people weren't 100% sure that Osama bin Laden was alive, but they still picked him.

 

If Mubarak gets the noose before the end of the year then tough tits

[Windsor 2,233]

It appears the coma wasn't permanent, as he's now 'refusing food'.

 

Yeah, right.

 

regards,

Hein

 

Well if I was facing the prospect of a kangaroo court and swift execution I guess I wouldn't be hungry either

 

If he does hang we don't get points...which is a bit unfair considering he was still President at the beginning of the year. Had he been deposed or sentenced to death back in December I could understand why points wouldn't be awarded.

 

For example, Tariq Aziz is also on my list because he is said to be in poor health. If he got hanged, however, I would accept that no points could be awarded because I knew there was the possibility he may be executed when I chose him.

 

In my opinion, there is a world of difference between the two scenarios.

 

Osama bin Laden was executed...points were awarded for that.

 

An execution is administered by the state. Osama bin Laden was murdered by US special forces, therefore scoring points...

 

Perhaps. But you should take in to account the fact that when Mubarak was chosen by deadpoolers back in December, they were not to know that his entire regime was going to collapse and that he could potentially be executed in the space of 12 months. He was chosen in the spirit of the game - he was an ailing leader who was apparently dying of cancer. We did not choose him because we knew he was likely to be executed - or even that there was a possibility he could be executed.

 

This is different to Saddam Hussein in 2006 - where execution was likely at the beginning of the year - and entirely different to Barzan Ibrahim al-Hasan al-Tikriti and Awad Hamad al-Bandar who we knew would be executed in 2007.

 

Shit happens mate, that's the way of the game. A lot of people weren't 100% sure that Osama bin Laden was alive, but they still picked him.

 

If Mubarak gets the noose before the end of the year then tough tits

 

Is he not on your list like?

 

With regards bin Laden, that was a calculated pick for those deadpoolers. They were aware of the risks when they picked him. Those of us who picked Mubarak didn't have that luxury - mainly because we aren't psychic.

[themaninblack 2,112]

It appears the coma wasn't permanent, as he's now 'refusing food'.

 

Yeah, right.

 

regards,

Hein

 

Well if I was facing the prospect of a kangaroo court and swift execution I guess I wouldn't be hungry either

 

If he does hang we don't get points...which is a bit unfair considering he was still President at the beginning of the year. Had he been deposed or sentenced to death back in December I could understand why points wouldn't be awarded.

 

For example, Tariq Aziz is also on my list because he is said to be in poor health. If he got hanged, however, I would accept that no points could be awarded because I knew there was the possibility he may be executed when I chose him.

 

In my opinion, there is a world of difference between the two scenarios.

 

Osama bin Laden was executed...points were awarded for that.

 

An execution is administered by the state. Osama bin Laden was murdered by US special forces, therefore scoring points...

 

Perhaps. But you should take in to account the fact that when Mubarak was chosen by deadpoolers back in December, they were not to know that his entire regime was going to collapse and that he could potentially be executed in the space of 12 months. He was chosen in the spirit of the game - he was an ailing leader who was apparently dying of cancer. We did not choose him because we knew he was likely to be executed - or even that there was a possibility he could be executed.

 

This is different to Saddam Hussein in 2006 - where execution was likely at the beginning of the year - and entirely different to Barzan Ibrahim al-Hasan al-Tikriti and Awad Hamad al-Bandar who we knew would be executed in 2007.

 

Shit happens mate, that's the way of the game. A lot of people weren't 100% sure that Osama bin Laden was alive, but they still picked him.

 

If Mubarak gets the noose before the end of the year then tough tits

 

Is he not on your list like?

 

With regards bin Laden, that was a calculated pick for those deadpoolers. They were aware of the risks when they picked him. Those of us who picked Mubarak didn't have that luxury - mainly because we aren't psychic.

 

 

But that's what fucking HAPPENS, Windsor!

 

We have someone who was a dictator for nigh on 30 years. Think about it, there might have been a chance that one day he may get overthrown. Comes with the territory. Saddam could have been slung out of power, charged, convicted and hung all in 2003, it just so happened he didn't.

 

That's life Windsor, or rather that's death. Tomorrow you could get run over by Alex Salmond in his motor, and posthumously get 15 hits, storming to an improbable victory over DDT and you wouldn't be there to celebrate it!

 

You choose who you want under whatever criteria you like but after that its up to the gods.

 

That's the game, son - it's life and death!

[Windsor 2,233]

That's the game, son - it's life and death!

 

Exactly. That's why if Mubarak does hang, we should get the points and, furthermore, we should get the unnatural death bonus.

 

We have someone who was a dictator for nigh on 30 years. Think about it, there might have been a chance that one day he may get overthrown. Comes with the territory.

 

That is a fairly weak argument. Are you suggesting that we should shy away from dictators because there is always a possibility they might be overthrown? I think you know that argument is bullshit.

 

We all know that the "no execution" rule was brought in specifically to prevent participants from choosing candidates who they knew were likely to be executed in the near future. This does not apply to Mubarak who was sitting safe in December 2010. The fact that he had managed to hold on to power for 30 year, more or less with the backing of the West, showed that he knew what he was doing. Furthermore, had his actions not led to the deaths of protesters - something which happened in February 2011 - the likelihood is that he wouldn't be facing execution today.

[themaninblack 2,112]

That's the game, son - it's life and death!

 

Exactly. That's why if Mubarak does hang, we should get the points and, furthermore, we should get the unnatural death bonus.

 

We have someone who was a dictator for nigh on 30 years. Think about it, there might have been a chance that one day he may get overthrown. Comes with the territory.

 

That is a fairly weak argument. Are you suggesting that we should shy away from dictators because there is always a possibility they might be overthrown? I think you know that argument is bullshit.

 

We all know that the "no execution" rule was brought in specifically to prevent participants from choosing candidates who they knew were likely to be executed in the near future. This does not apply to Mubarak who was sitting safe in December 2010. The fact that he had managed to hold on to power for 30 year, more or less with the backing of the West, showed that he knew what he was doing. Furthermore, had his actions not led to the deaths of protesters - something which happened in February 2011 - the likelihood is that he wouldn't be facing execution today.

 

I'm not suggesting you pick anybody. You pick who you bloody well like as long as they are not already dead and not under 18. I'm struggling to understand what your point is. Besides, Hosni Mubarak isn't even fucking dead yet. He could a) die of starvation die naturally of cancer c) get murdered in prison or on bail d) executed after a trial e) get eaten alive alive by hermit crabs. Even if he was on trial, we don't know the intricacies of Egyptian justice. There may not even BE a fucking death penalty, particularly if the whole system is turned on it's head. So he was fucking safe and dandy, so was Eric Honeker, so was Rupert fucking Murdoch! You can't predict with any certainty what exactly is going to happen. So you picked him, what did you want to happen? That's he stays in power and dies in his sleep just so you get a few points. Try telling that to the people in Cairo...

 

Your argument is fucking bullshit. You can't predict the future with 100% certainty. If you did, you'd win every year and what a boring load of shite that would be. Take Amy Winehouse. It is not a given at this stage that she died unnaturally. Yes, she undoubtedly contributed to her demise by consuming a load of drugs, but until that coroner gives his verdict I cannot give any extra points at this stage. Most on the DDP picked her because there was a chance that she's either do herself in or overdose. There's a chance there might be neither. Thems are the breaks mate, take it or leave it, and I'm sure not bending the rules on the spurious notion that you didn't know what was going to happen to some pick or other. You could still pick him even if he did face execution, because he might croak before the hangman comes to town.

[Windsor 2,233]

I think you are being unreasonable.

 

I am very well aware that Mubarak is not yet dead. I am merely making the argument that if he is executed in 2011, points should still be awarded to those who chose him. My point is clear. He was chosen in the spirit of the game. He wasn't chosen because it was believed he would be executed and therefore a guaranteed hit. The fact that he is in the position he is now is down to a twist of fate which we couldn't have seen coming in December 2010.

 

You know full well what the non-execution rule is for, and you know full well that Hosni Mubarak is exempt from that rule under the circumstances. It's not rule bending - it's keeping to the spirit of the game. Not the predictability of death, but the unpredictability of death.

[themaninblack 2,112]

I think you are being unreasonable.

 

I am very well aware that Mubarak is not yet dead. I am merely making the argument that if he is executed in 2011, points should still be awarded to those who chose him. My point is clear. He was chosen in the spirit of the game. He wasn't chosen because it was believed he would be executed and therefore a guaranteed hit. The fact that he is in the position he is now is down to a twist of fate which we couldn't have seen coming in December 2010.

 

You know full well what the non-execution rule is for, and you know full well that Hosni Mubarak is exempt from that rule under the circumstances. It's not rule bending - it's keeping to the spirit of the game. Not the predictability of death, but the unpredictability of death.

 

Yes, and that also includes the unpredictability of how they died as well.

 

This the rule:

 

No executed prisoners. Picks can be accepted if they are on Death Row but die of other causes.

 

So what happens if I do award points? I'll probably get an email from someone who'll argue that he was executed and thus teams that picked him shouldn't be awarded points. [Edit: In particularly if unnatural points bonus was awarded]

Do you want me to get rid of the 13th day rule as well because it wouldn't be fair (to you) that such and such died on that date and one of yours didn't?

Or that someone died on their birthday and none of your picks did? Both those rules are open to chance. As in some cases the unnatural death rule.

 

I'll throw you a bone and open this up for discussion as I know it's a contentious rule. My stance is clear as is yours so let's see what others think about it...

[angryGreatness 96]

I see what Windsor's talking about. Back in December we had no idea Mubarak was at risk for execution, just bladder cancer/old age.

 

If Mubarak was arrested in say October 2010, then I would say no points should be awarded in an execution. If execution is not predictable, then all's fair. If his execution date is set for 2012, then nobody will get points when he is hung/shot/injected ect.

 

That being said, we don't even know if Mubarak will live to see his execution, if he even is sentenced to death. Let's put a hold on the issue till this hearing is over.

[Madame Defarge 21]

A police officer has already been sentenced to death for shooting at protesters even though he insists he only meant to disperse the crowd...so it's pretty certain that Mubarak will meet the same fate.

 

I picked him for both illness and the ( I thought ) possiblity of assassination, but admittedly I'm biased because he's on my team.

 

How about some input from from a knowledgeable yet objective source, maybe even a North Egyptian. Anubis?

[Davey Jones' Locker 1,324]

Weak and refusing solid food: http://www.abc.net.au/news/2011-07-28/muba...g-trial/2813982

[Magere Hein 1,400]

This the rule:

 

No executed prisoners. Picks can be accepted if they are on Death Row but die of other causes.

 

So what happens if I do award points? I'll probably get an email from someone who'll argue that he was executed and thus teams that picked him shouldn't be awarded points. [Edit: In particularly if unnatural points bonus was awarded]

Do you want me to get rid of the 13th day rule as well because it wouldn't be fair (to you) that such and such died on that date and one of yours didn't?

Or that someone died on their birthday and none of your picks did? Both those rules are open to chance. As in some cases the unnatural death rule.

 

I'll throw you a bone and open this up for discussion as I know it's a contentious rule. My stance is clear as is yours so let's see what others think about it...

I already nodded my agreement with Windsor's post above. Before I explain my reasoning I want to state that, obviously, you run the game and you make and apply rules as you see fit.

 

As I understand it, the purpose of the "no executed prisoners" rule is to exclude picks that are too easy. This rule makes good sense if the candidate has been, or is about to be, sentenced to death, before the beginning of the year for which he or she is picked. In countries like the US this a normal scenario, since the time between a suspect being condemned to death and his or her execution (if it happens at all) is normally counted in years rather than months.

 

In some countries, say Iran or China, the time between arrest and execution may be a matter of weeks. When, at the time the DDP lists are handed in, there's no reasonable expectation that a candidate is to be executed, and yet in that DDP year his or her life ends up against a wall or on a gurney, a gallows or the stake, the purpose of the rule is defeated and its application seems unfair.

 

With regard to mr Mubarak, the latter situation applies. At the end of 2010 he was an ill, but firmly seated dictator. No one could reasonably expect him to be overthrown and tried within a few months. As I see it, should he indeed be condemned to death and executed in 2011, it seems unfair to not award DDP points for his death. One may dispute an "unnatural death bonus" in that case, since being executed is almost a natural cause of death for murderous dictators.

 

In case mr Mubarak lives to see 2012, the "no executed prisoners" rule is, of course, fully in force in that year.

 

Edit to add: while I had a pint of Guinness in the local Irish bar I did some more thinking on this subject. It occurred to me that there's another reason why in mr M's case the "no executed prisoners" shouldn't apply: on 31 December 2010 he wasn't a prisoner.

 

regards,

Hein

[Octopus of Odstock 2,200]

My opinion, as an ex host and as a current player (although you would've thought differently after this pants year), is Hein probably has it hit on the button.

 

I was keen to bring it in because I didn't think it was fair, like I did before I was a host to pick people who would be executed and we knew they would be executed - it seems going against the grain of the guesswork involved. I mean it wouldn't be fair for people next year or if the DDP was August-August to pick the two Antiguan murderers - death penalty is likely.

 

However, I think if points are allowed, it should definitely be a "natural" death as the players involved picked them in the spirit of that... as much as I'm aware anyway.

 

 

Personally, I don't think he'll be executed anyway, but I don't fancy his long-term health chances.

[Godot 149]

Whatever happens to Mubarak I would have thought that rules applying to this year's picks would need to apply and could only be changed for next year. But the Mubarak situation might prompt a tweak to the no executions rule which is a generally sensible rule introduced to stop people picking death row certs. I could understand Windsor's dismay if Mubarak is strung up, shot or whatever before the year end, but as MIB says, that's life.... or not. On the other hand re-tweak, it's very rare that someone is hauled for trial and executed within the same year. Nicolae Ceausescu comes to mind. You'd have been miffed about losing points on him, as Windsor is now, in advance, sitting there in Fraserburgh, scanning the Cairo news bulletins, chewing his fingernails and eating spiders. I made that last bit up.

[DevonDeathTrip 2,358]

Stick to your guns, TMIB. Dissent in the ranks should be dealt with using an iron fist and demonstrators demanding change in the regime's policy should be machine gunned if they fail to desist. Mubarak would do exactly the same if he were running the DDP.

[Windsor 2,233]

The Health Minister has deemed Mubarak fit to face trial next Wednesday. So it's not looking good for either Mubarak or my points at the moment.

 

I'm away to the garden to console myself with a spot of comfort eating...

[Paul Bearer 6,102]

I'm with Windsor on this one, and as Hein stated we didn't know he'd be a prisoner at the end of 2010.

[Godot 149]

Stick to your guns, TMIB. Dissent in the ranks should be dealt with using an iron fist and demonstrators demanding change in the regime's policy should be machine gunned if they fail to desist. Mubarak would do exactly the same if he were running the DDP.

Crawler, you should be docked DDP points for sucking up. I reckon 50 would be reasonable.

[time 8,615]

Stick to your guns, TMIB. Dissent in the ranks should be dealt with using an iron fist and demonstrators demanding change in the regime's policy should be machine gunned if they fail to desist. Mubarak would do exactly the same if he were running the DDP.

Crawler, you should be docked DDP points for sucking up. I reckon 50 would be reasonable.

 

If he's docked 50, points, can I have them, because I picked my team based on the expectation that they would all die within the year. Here we are, nearly 7/12ths through the year and not one hit. Its not within the spirit of the game!

 

For what its worth, my opinion is that TMIB is absolutely correct - the rules state that the executed earn no points - no riders or exclusions about whether they are already on death row exist, so [Alan Sugar mode]with regret[/Alan Sugar mode], no points if he gets executed.

 

However, Windsor has raised a point that needs addressing should the situation actually arise in the future, and a simple amendment to the rules, disallowing anyone already sentenced to death but allowing anyone who wasn't (at the start of the contest) should suffice.

 

From next year.

 

But, as has already been said, its TMIB's decision to make, and he's made it.

[Windsor 2,233]

If he's docked 50, points, can I have them, because I picked my team based on the expectation that they would all die within the year. Here we are, nearly 7/12ths through the year and not one hit. Its not within the spirit of the game!

 

The difference is that if executed my candidate would be DEAD, whereas yours would still be ALIVE.

Thus I should get points because my candidate was DEAD, and you shouldn't because yours are still ALIVE.