Talk:Kangaroo court

this pic would be interesting on the article: File:I Vote to Shoot the Messenger.jpg Borisblue 03:34, 12 November 2005 (UTC)

Citations sought for alleged kangaroo courts

I have commented out the following:

Examples of alleged kangaroo courts amounting to 'judicial lynching' include the Kansas evolution hearings and the Romanian military court which sentenced Nicolae Ceauşescu to death.{{fact}}<!--citation required for example, not whether they are verifiable court cases but whether any reputable source has referred to the case as a kangaroo court-->

<!--Besides the above-mentioned 'lynching logic' is to the disadvantage of the suspect, the term kangaroo court can also apply in the opposite direction, when the charge is not given a fair chance, as allegedly happened when a US military court cleared Christopher Van Goethem from his negligent homicide indictment for the murder of the Romanian singer Teo Peter.{ Commented out this assertion - citation required for it to be reincluded. Citation required, not whether it is a verifiable court case, or whether there was a miscarriage of justice, but whether any reputable source has referred to the conduct of the case as a kangaroo court - none of the four sources previously provided used that form of words, in which case reference to the Van Goethem case does not belong here-->

The absence of citations since requested over a month ago means that these assertions of alleged kangaroo trials cannot be assured to meet the policies of Verifiability and No original research--A Y Arktos\^talk 00:28, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

How about looking obvious places, perhaps for example kansas evolution hearings? As for the others, this place can get verification-happy instead of using common sense. — Dunc|☺ 21:13, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

• I fail to see that the vandalism accusation in User:Duncharris's edit is merited when I had raised the issue here and he had not discussed on talk page before making the edit with inappropriate commentary thereby violating WP:NPA. Furthermore, requesting of citations does not mean the requesting editor has to go searching for them - read Wikipedia:Citing sources which states: "This means that any material that is challenged and has no source may be removed by any editor." I had allowed plenty of time for citation of sources. The cite given at the end of the second para for the article on the Kansas evolution hearings does not mention the word "kangaroo". I am not going to search the other sources. I suggest the labelling may well be a POV edit by a wikipedian until citation proved otherwise. I am not interested in editing the hearings article and hence have not asked for citations there but it applies also.--A Y Arktos\^talk 21:22, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

This must be deliberate trolling. Are you seriously saying that you're too stupid or lazy to go look at Kansas evolution hearings? — Dunc|☺ 21:34, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

No I am not trolling, and I find the suggestion offensive. You are being uncivil and too lazy to even read my comment properly. You have also failed to note that I raised the matter over 1 month ago with no response. I have, as stated above, looked at the hearings article; I also looked at the first citation provided. It did not mention kangaroo courts even though it is a citation against a paragraph with a kangaroo court assertion - all other refs were at the end of the article and not clearly labelled as suggesting "kangaroo court" (nor need they be). I think the reference to kangaroo courts in the Kansas hearings article is compromised but I am not going to go there - not my country, any contribution I would make would be limited. WP:Cite does not require me to look for references, it requires any editor who wants to keep the assertion in there to find a ref. Not a matter of being verification happy, but seeking verification in this instance seems to me appropriate.--A Y Arktos\^talk 21:49, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

• Thank you to JoshuaZ for the citation. I note in passing Dunchariss's highly inappropriate use of the rollback button, behaviour also commented also by another editor on his talk page. His comments here do not justify the use of the roll back.--A Y Arktos\^talk 21:55, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

Collective Noun

In Australia here we say a troop of kangaroos, not a court of kangaroos. Kransky 12:45, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

Nuremburg trials under "Mock Justice"

I removed the following text (bolded portion) from the article, seeing as it is a highly emotionally and politically charged statement made with no citation, as well as being far too vague. —Clement Cherlin 12:15, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

Two other example are Roland Freisler's "processes" against the enemies of the National-Socialist regime, and the Nuremburg trials convicting the enemies of Liberal democracy.

RACIST EDITING AND DELETION FROM WIKIPEDIA CENSORS

interesting deletion and removal of edits from Database...Can we talk about Orwellian terrors?? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Chazzj (talk • contribs) 09:36, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

Until you start editing by Wikipedia's rules, then you will be treated as somebody who doesn't wish to follow Wikipedia's rules. This isn't your own blog now, you have rules to follow. Have a look at the top of your user page as Sarah suggested. Until then, you can call everybody all the names under the sun. Shot info 09:40, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

i wonder if this server is in australia and come under Racial discrimination act 1975 and the human rights act 1986.....

"COMMON LAW is the LAW of the PEOPLE, by the PEOPLE and for the PEOPLE. It is made by the congregations of twelve Freemen as JURORS, who ask “So help me God” for them to administer JUSTICE and JUSTICE is “the protection of rights and the punishment of wrongs”, and “In a civilized society, the purpose of a court is the vindication of men’s rights and the enforcement of just causes” (Lord Denning). However, a KANGAROO COURT is “a Court which acts unfairly, or dishonestly, or disregards legal rights or disregards legal procedures”."

But let me put a question to answers.yahoo.com regarding racist censorship on wikipedia ;) Chazzj 09:52, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

A simple look around Wikipedia (perhaps by using that litle "search" utility on every page) would reveal where Wikipedia is located. And it ain't in Kansas :-). Sure, do what you want. Wikipedia answer's to it's editors, not Yahoo. Feel free to edit proactively here though. Remember it's an encyclopedia we are editing here, not sOME K@2213 blog. You have been provided with all the relevant links. If you think they are racist (or whatever) then perhaps Wikipedia isn't the place for you to edit in? Shot info 09:56, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia is run by racists who censor according to Orwellian doctrine of fabricating truths?? try here http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20070919030059AA50zD2&pa=FYd1D2bwHTHwLbpnHew7R9UL4MXal7p26LxfsWUEtb8x9WW4rngmi94CGLm8DQJ9Z8p7VT8YxFfO3A--&paid=asked&msgr_status=

Chazzj 10:02, 19 September 2007 (UTC)