Shiite alliance: Saddam should be executed if convicted

[sabra]

<<SNIP>>
http://www.boston.com/dailynews/108/world/Shiite_alliance_Saddam_should_:.shtml

Shiite alliance: Saddam should be executed if convicted
By Jamie Tarabay, Associated Press, 4/18/2005 08:14

BAGHDAD, Iraq (AP) Iraq's most powerful Shiite bloc wants Saddam Hussein put to death if he is convicted of war crimes by a special tribunal, and the interim president should resign if he refuses to sign the execution order, an alliance spokesman told The Associated Press on Monday.

Ali al-Dabagh, a lawmaker from the clergy-led United Iraq Alliance, which received the most votes in Jan. 30 national elections, said everyone in his party believes Saddam should be sentenced to death if convicted of war crimes against Iraqis.

''We feel he is a criminal. He is the No. 1 criminal in the world. He is a murderer,'' al-Dabagh said in an interview with The Associated Press. ''He deserves a trial, and he should be subjected to the law and the court. Whatever the decision, everyone should follow it, even if the president says he cannot sign it.''

The alliance controls 140 seats in Iraq's 275-member National Assembly.

In an interview with the British Broadcasting Corp. on Monday, incoming Iraqi President Jalal Talabani said signing a death warrant for Saddam would go against his beliefs as a human rights advocate and opponent of capital punishment.

<</SNIP>>

[Roland99]

1. He'll die of old age before he goes on trial

[Festivito]

2. When Dems take over, CONs will complain Dems are dragging their feet.

No one will mention the ResmugliCONs dragging their feet when they were in power.

With a Dem president, as our future brightens, the CONs would be busily complaining about something diversiionary.

[Roland99]

3. Just like the failure to catch bin Laden

They keep claiming Clinton had 8 years (which is a falsehood) yet the Propagandist is in his 5th year and bin Laden is still free.

[merwin]

5. And Clinton never said he would catch binLaden 'dead or alive'

[Festivito]

6. Well, yes he did. Not those words. But, yes, dead or alive.

Clinton ordered a 24/7 Osama watch with a missle to be ready to launch and hit Osama should he look like he would remain in a spot for an hour. That is, Clinton wanted Osama DEAD.

Bush made fun of this during his campaign saying it was like trying to hit an empty tent in the desert or hiting a camel in the butt. Further, RepubiCONs spun Clinton's action as a judicial approach, while it was clearly extrajudicial.

President Bush ordered the watch stopped. Ordered the watchers out, making Osama gleeful. Even the making of missles was ended, perhaps because ground wars yield more profit.

Clinton also tried to get Osama alive through Sudan, who had no one in its government who agreed to offer Osama in return for lifting sanctions that would allow Sudan to further its massive killing of its own countrymen, more often Christians. The RepubliCONs point to Ijaz who made the offer, but held no Sudanese position and now ironically works for FOX news.

[merwin]

11. Big difference. Clinton's actions were passive... a sort of 'If we happen

to come across him during some other operations, we'll kill him'. However, Bush pledged to do whatever it takes to hunt and capture Osama dead or alive.

[Festivito]

12. Passive? Bush was passive, even knowing Bush was passive.

When the WTC was bombed, Clinton said he would find and prosecute them. He did. One was TO BE sentenced on 9/11/01 -- that very day.

The watch on Osama was for watching Osama, not something else where they might happen to find Osama.

The Cole bombing was not linked to Osama until W took office. And, then what does Bush do? N O T H I N G . . .

Bush ignored warning after warning after warning ....... .... ... *(#^()#*(&#%_()*

[daleo]

4. I can imagine a kangaroo court type trial

The rules of evidence would have to be skewed incredibly (and illegally) to protect Bush, Reagan, et al. But, I could see it happening - after all, it isn't like public opinion (U.S., Iraqi, or World) ever mattered much in this fiasco.

The fact that it hasn't happened makes me wonder if Saddam doesn't have a dossier somewhere ready to go public on the BFEE if his life is threatened.

[Disturbed]

7. I am still amazed that Saddam..

did not flee Iraq. He has billions in Swiss bank accounts and surely has documents that detail the U.S. Govt. involvement in his dealings. Why he did not flee Iraq is a mystery, isn't it?

[SweetLeftFoot]

10. Because

the traditional home for murderous dictators forced into exile - Saudi Arabia - probably wouldn't have been too welcoming in this case ...

[Charlie Brown]

8. Isn't Saddam like 68 now?

and not in the best of shape, or so I gather. I really think he'll end up dying of natural causes, which will further invalidate this senseless conflict.

[Flagg]

9. Another martyr for the insurgents.

Not smart.