Postman
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Nov-09-06 03:05 PM
Original message |
Saddam Hussein's Trial was a sham..... |
|
I have no love for him and in fact he will get what he deserves but his trial was a joke.
Why wasn't he tried at The Hague, like Milosevich was, instead of a kangaroo court in Iraq?
The answer is because Saddam Hussein had "the goods" on complicit US administrations in the past who helped him when he carried out his worst crimes.
That information can never be allowed to be inculcated by the American people. Interesting how we were allowed to see O.J. Simpson's trial but not Saddam Hussein.
Ramsey Clark had this to say about it..
"In international law, anyone accused of crime has the right to be tried by a confident, independent and impartial court, and there can be no fair trail without those qualities," he said.
"The special court in Iraq was created by the Iraqi governing council, which is nothing more than a creation of the US military occupation and has no authority in law as a criminal court,"
|
indepat
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Nov-09-06 03:11 PM
Response to Original message |
1. Shams, lies, distortions, fraud: whatever it takes to further the reichous 'puke cause |
John Gauger
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Nov-09-06 03:12 PM
Response to Original message |
2. I find it interesting that he was charged |
|
and convicted of something that was not a crime. I thought for a while that he was being charged with the massacre at Halabja, but in fact he was charged with signing 148 execution orders. All of these victims had been duly convicted in a court of law. Bush has done the same thing 152 times. If one is going to argue that Iraqi courts were illegitimate at that time and that signing those orders was a crime against humanity because of it - well, then, surely Saddam's execution is also a crime against humanity. The court in which he was tried was set up by an occupying power. It was not a court established by the legitimate government of Iraq. Yet an execution order will be signed from his conviction and he will be killed just like his 148 victims.
|
not_a_robot
(115 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Nov-09-06 03:15 PM
Response to Original message |
|
I think he knew too much and a lot would have come out about the war in iraq, his deal with daddy bush and others, and of course, the origin of his weapons. A more public and thorough trial would have uncovered too many accomplices and enablers for the bush administration.
|
lyonn
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Nov-09-06 03:33 PM
Response to Original message |
4. How can you have a real trial without a real country |
|
So far it looks like we are the occupiers.
We had Iran/Contra where we were dealing under the table with Iran to get guns to S. American countries, then we cozy up to Saddam to stab Iran in the back. What a plan they had. Yup, they didn't want exposed U.S. dealing in that area. Keep the oil gushing.
|
Xenotime
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Nov-09-06 03:35 PM
Response to Original message |
5. His trial is one big Abu Grab. Not sure how it's a fair trial, but oh well. |
DU
AdBot (1000+ posts) |
Thu Apr 25th 2024, 02:24 PM
Response to Original message |