Saddam Hussein was hanged early this morning in Baghdad. (He was hanged, not hung—big difference there.)
President Bush said he was “executed after receiving a fair trial.”
Fair trial, my ass.
Hussein was found guilty of crimes against 148 Iraqis from al-Dujail who were accused of trying to assassinate him in 1982. The people were convicted, sentenced to execution, and then executed. Hussein admitted that he ordering the trial of the 148 individuals, but argued that he was entitled to do so under the laws of Iraq. Apparently, Hussein’s crime was to use his powers as dictator to deny justice to these individuals. The 149 people were convicted by a court that likely failed judicial independence—in short, a kangaroo court.
Don’t get me wrong. I’m not defending Saddam for any of his crimes. Hussein had a well-deserved reputation as a murderous and brutal dictator. It seems likely that he committed numerous crimes that warrant execution.
My problem with Hussein’s conviction and execution is that he was tried in a kangaroo court. The judicial process that Hussein was tried and executed under was highly flawed—essentially, little better than the kangaroo court Hussein used to execute other people.
Let me take a moment here for a preemptive strike against our treasured Wingnut readers. My arguments here involve complex issues of international law and the Iraq legal system. If you are not willing to read this essay carefully, just shut the fuck up and go smoke your little green footballs or whatever it is you do to maintain a postmodern haze over reality. If you read carefully, you will learn that this essay isn’t about Hussein. Rather, it is about flaws in the process used to convict him—a process ill conceived by the arrogance and stupidity of the Bush administration. They fucked up another opportunity to offer Iraq some semblance of legitimacy.
All Americans have common ground in wishing for a peaceful, legitimate Iraq. It would solve our collective needs to get the hell out of Iraq and stop hemorrhaging money and American lives in support of the Bush administration’s past mistakes. Until late 2006, the Neocons wanted to pretend that Iraq was stabilizing, that the government was achieving legitimacy within and outside of Iraq, and that the U.S. had made the right decisions for post invasion Iraq. No more.
Last July when Bush held a joint press conference with Putin, he said (video):
I talked about my desire to promote institutional change in parts of the world, like Iraq where there’s a free press and free religion, and I told him that a lot of people in our country would hope that Russia would do the same.
To which an incredulous Putin sniped back:
We certainly would not want to have the same kind of democracy that they have in Iraq…quite honestly.
Free press and free religion is a joke for a nation under the grip of violence and chaos. (That Bush would even suggest something so idiotic to Putin is beyond belief!)
The Supreme Iraqi Criminal Tribunal (SICT or Tribunal), likewise, has caused harm to any semblance of legitimacy that the Iraqi government may have had. There are many reasons for this. Some reasons result from the execution of the Tribunal itself, but ultimately the problems boil down to (1) uninformed decisions made under the rule of the Coalition Provisional Authority (i.e. while the U.S. occupied Iraq), (2) prior “issues” the Bush administration had with the International Criminal Court (ICC), and (3) rotten decisions made under the fog of wingnuttery.
The realization of the Tribunal was a debacle from the get-go. We all cringed in embarrassment as Hussein managed to make a mockery of the court’s early proceedings. The whole world squirmed as events unfolded. We squirmed as two defense lawyers were killed—not just because the murder of a defense lawyer is unconscionable (although “spraying” one in the face with bird shot can be pretty darned entertaining), but because replacement of a defense lawyer threatens the integrity of the defense. Didn’t we all want to take the high-road by convicting Hussein through an unimpeachable process? We squirmed when one judge was killed. Finally, we flinched in embarrassment as the Iraqi government removed the chief judge in a second Tribunal for making minor statements that appeared sympathetic to Hussein. What integrity remains knowing that the government removed a judge for some minor statements? Can we really believe that judges in the first trial were completely free to weigh the evidence for and against Hussein with judicial disinterest?
In fact, the SICT was established outside the normal Iraqi judicial system. It was enacted on 10 Dec 2003 as the Iraqi Special Tribunal (IST) under Order No. 48 of the Coalition Provisional Authority (CPA). The Iraqi government later abolished the IST and reestablished it, nearly wholesale, as the SICT under Law No. 10 on 9 Oct 2005.
The IST is at the root of the court’s kangarooness. The laws under which Hussein was tried were, largely, a U.S. concoction that fails standards of international law, Iraqi law, and even U.S. law.
You may recall an awkward period following the capture of Hussein when the Coalition had no idea what to do with their prized prisoner. Would there be an international tribunal in The Hague (a la Bosnia)? Would there be an Iraqi tribunal with assistance of the International Criminal Court (a la Rwanda Sierra Leone)?
In fact, neither of these happened. The Coalition (i.e. the U.S.) could not accept oversight by an international court for a number of political reasons, like the fact that the Bush administration had been openly hostile to and attempted to undermine the ICC, and eventually withdrew from the treaty. Perhaps the most important political consideration, though, was that any oversight by the ICC would exclude the death penalty for Saddam Hussein. That was “unacceptable to the Iraqi people,” as the Bush administration told us. But more importantly it was unacceptable to the Bush administration.
Instead of relying on the ICC, BushCo decided to “roll their own” and they established a Tribunal that took an unprecedented, and legally questionable, track: they established an Iraqi national extra-judicial process to prosecute Hussein and others for international crimes. This had never been done before. In fact, such special additions to a national judicial system by an occupying power are explicitly prohibited by article 23 of the Hague Regulations of 1907 and Convention IV of the Fourth Geneva conventions of 1949. The short story is that these binding international conventions prohibit occupying powers (i.e. the U.S. at the time) from changing the legal system, changing the status of judges, changing the penal system, changing any tribunals, or even prosecuting anyone for acts committed prior to occupation. In legal parlance, the construction of the IST effectively made it an instrument of victor’s justice, the very thing that international laws attempt to prohibit.
Finally, the Tribunal violates the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights that requires fairness, openness, and competence in trials, requires independent and impartial justice, that is conducted by established applicable law (i.e. it explicitly prohibits special tribunals). As I explain below, the Tribunal bore no real resemblance to Iraqi law.
The Tribunal’s difficulties began immediately. Salem Chalabi, nephew of the infamous Ahmed Chalabi, was appointed General Director of the IST upon its establishment in May of 2004. He, in turn, created the structure for the IST, and appointed the initial panel of seven judges and prosecutors. Whether or not Salem Chalabi was qualified for the position (he is a U.S. educated lawyer), his appointment by the Executive branch, and the nepotism, certainly gave the appearance that the U.S. was running the show. This was confounded by serious conflicts of interest in his U.S. business and ties to “Neocon Central”—The Project for a New American Century. In August, 2004, an arrest warrant for suspicion murder was issued against Salem Chalabi while he was in London. The charges were later dropped, but Chalabi resigned as the IST General Director. The U.S. took over administration for the duration of the IST, a clear violation of judicial independence that further undermined any sense of legitimacy.
With much fanfare, Paul Bremer announced that the IST would be funded by $75 million from the U.S., a figure that was to double. The U.S. Department of Justice subsequently provided teams of investigators and prosecutors to collect evidence and develop legal strategies. The U.S. trained all the Iraqi judges and prosecutors.
In 2005, the Iraqi government took the IST decree and passed it legislatively as the Iraqi Special Criminal Tribunal, thus lending the Tribunal some legitimacy. The damage was done, however. A Tribunal initiated in violation of international and domestic law is a pariah, and can, at best, achieve bastard status in the eyes of Iraqis and the international community after being patched. Unfortunately, the ISCT was not changed to be consistent with the Iraqi system of laws. Nor did it correct other legal problems as they existed in the IST. As the courtroom drama played out, there was nothing to dispel the perception that the victor’s justice was being served.
An immediate concern with the Tribunal law was that Iraqi law had no prior provisions for crimes against humanity, war crimes, or some other crimes that the Tribunal was charged with investigating. Thus, the Tribunal violates the nullum crimen principle that is fundamental to every modern legal system. This principle prevents retroactive application of criminal laws against a defendant. If the laws were not on the books prior to 2003, Hussein and his henchmen cannot be prosecuted for violations of a law decreed (by the occupying power) in 2003 and passed legislatively in 2005. Note that if the ICC had prosecuted the case, this would not be an issue, since these laws were established internationally. But, international prosecution would have excluded a capital sentence. Here is a clear example where a Bush administration political requirement undermined the integrity of the process.
A huge difficulty with the Tribunal is that its procedures bear no resemblance to the Iraqi legal system. Rather, it is based on the U.S. legal system. Iraq’s laws are based on the Egyptian legal system which, in turn, is modeled after the French legal system. Under the French inquisitorial system, the judge acts as an investigator, using evidence provided by prosecutors prior to trial. The U.S. legal system is an adversary-accusatorial system complete with introduction of new evidence and cross-examination occurring during the trial. The roles of judge, prosecutor, and defense lawyer differ significantly under the two systems.
It can hardly be surprising then that the Tribunal started off with an air of incompetence. None of the participants had any experience with the American-style legal system. And it showed. As one scholar described it:
The proceedings were choreographed as an American hearing where an investigative judge read an indictment and asked the defendant to plead guilty or not guilty, and was thus more American than Iraqi. There is no such procedure in the Iraqi criminal justice system. The investigative judge, sitting behind a table facing Saddam, was obviously uncomfortable. On the table where he sat facing Saddam Hussein was a copy of the 1971 Iraqi Code of Criminal Procedure, which does not provide for such an American-style arraignment procedure. The investigative judge asked Saddam to enter a plea, something unknown in the Iraqi system, and Saddam, who has a law degree, realized this.
As a result, Hussein not only succeeded in disrupting the proceedings, but he succeeded in undermining the court’s credibility. Imposing a system so foreign enforced the idea that this was a kangaroo court. When the arraignment took place on 1 Jul 2004, both supporters and detractors saw an illegal concoction, created by an occupying power, and designed simply to convict and execute Hussein and other Ba’ath party officials.
This view was reinforced by numerous anomalies in this case. For example, the indictment against Hussein was apparently not handed down until 15 May 2006, almost two years after the arraignment and seven months into the trial. This violates all legal principles (including International and Iraq domestic law). Due process demands that a defendant be promptly notified of the charges brought against him prior to the start of trail.
It is easy to say that Saddam Hussein got what he had coming to him. However, the Tribunal, to be successful, had to administer real justice in a way that lent credibility to the fledgling (but now failing) Iraqi government. Instead, Saddam Hussein was convicted and executed under a cloud of illegitimacy not unlike that he used to execute 147 residents of al-Dujail in 1982. Sadly, his execution will make him a martyr to some and will deepen the civil war.
What bothers me about this is that it could have been done correctly. An international court exists and has the experience and mandate to prosecute crimes against humanity and war crimes. A conviction in that court (with the likely outcome of permanent incarceration) would have avoided making Hussein a martyr and likely would have been far less disruptive of the Iraqi government. Now it’s too late.
Chalk it up to another massive fuck-up by a Bush administration driven by incompetence and ideological extremism.
Well said. Bush had way too much eqo, along with no brains to send Suddam to the ICC. Didn’t Eisenhower help to establish the ICC? I’m sure Bush considers himself so much more cleaver than the General turned President.
Goldy – Thanks for showing whose side you’re on.
Enjoy your two years before The People shove it up your ass.
Skagit invited me to call him at his place of work when he posted the following:
skagit says:
“…You truly need my help. Call me . . . 253-850-3371
12/24/2006 at 3:30 pm
I googled the phone number and found it was for the Education Station on Kent’s East Hill. http://www.edukstation.com/home.html The owner of the schools is someone named Emilie Bonney. Skagit may be Ms. Bonney or perhaps is an employee.
From the Education Station website,they have this mission statement:
Emilie Bonney’s mission with Education Station is to bring success, ease, and joy to her students. Students of all ages learn effective skills and strategies to apply to their work, school, recreation, and lives. By realizing their gifts and (for some) dissolving their learning and doing blocks, they become increasingly confident and happy.
In response to a post I made, skagit responded:
Ah, Mark, your testosterone is showing again. I can only hope you get a really big case of cancer, your kidneys go, and and it metastizes to the brain . . . you use us all your health account, you can’t work and you lose you income, and your kids and wife (as if anyone would even consider becoming your spouse) become homeless.
Yes, I find it very easy to wish that upon a misanthrope like you. You deserve it.
How many of you think skagit has “effective skills and strategies to apply to his work and life”? Is wishing sickness, death, poverty, and homelessness on others one of those skills?
How many of you think that skagit has a “doing block”?
I need you moonbats to weigh in on this: How many of you would send your kids to the Education Station on Kent’s East hill when one of the staff members there is so narrow minded that he can’t even discuss viewpoints that disagree with his. How many of you would want your kids to be taught be someone who wishes sickness, death, and poverty on those with whom he disagrees.
Are people like skagit who we want teaching our kids?
Skagit – Your “testosterone” comments suggests to me that you’re a stoopid fucking woman. No guy would EVER say that.
Is your name Emilie Bonney? Do you “run” the Education Station in Kent’s East Hill ghetto?
Skagit – Id be interested to know what the fuck set you off on the post where you went off on me.
What was it exactly that you didn’t like? Was it the part about indiscriminate breeding sluts trying to hand The Producers the bill for their bad choices????
Well, of course, you wouldn’t expect the Bushies to get something as complicated as the trial of a genocidal dictator right, when they can’t even deliver bottled water to a disaster zone.
Truth is, Goldy, very few people in this country or Iraq paid much attention to the details of the trial. Most Americans and Iraqis will bottom line this: The evil dictator is dead, and good riddance.
There is a certain pollyannish quality to efforts to infuse victor’s justice with a patina of legal procedure and legitimacy, a la Nuremberg. Fact is, we were going to kill the German and Japanese leaders if we won the war. Fact is, the Bush administration was going to kill Saddam. At this point in time, no nation on earth recognizes any international tribunal as having authority superior to its own sovereignty. These international tribunals, well-meaning as they may be, depend for their existence and authority on the political will of the coalitions of victors who create them.
Skagit – Howya coming on making that list of “transferrable skills”???
@2 – Definitely not law school material. Probably not engineering school material either. I’d say about sixth grade, seventh grade tops.
@3-5 How many times are you gonna kick this dog, Redneck?
Hey Rabbit – I need a good laugh. Tell us all the story again how you sacrificed big bucks as a real lawyer so you could serve humanity.
Tell us again how you spend 1/3 of your income on medical. I saw some shit that said you had some kind of procedure done. Is your share up to 50% yet?
To quote Skagit… “I can only hope you get a really big case of cancer, your kidneys go, and and it metastizes to the brain . . . you use us all your health account, you can’t work and you lose you income, and your kids and wife (as if anyone would even consider becoming your spouse) become homeless.
Yes, I find it very easy to wish that upon a misanthrope like you. You deserve it.
DARRYL, I LIKE THE WAY YOU KICK WINGNUT ASS!
WINGNUTS: YOU WOULD HAVE GOTTEN THE SAME CHARGE IF THE IRAQIS DRAGGED SADDAM IN THE STREET AND BEAT HIM TO DEATH. MAYBE A BIGGER CHARGE. IT WOULD HAVE BEEN A LOT CHEAPER THAN 150 MILLION DOLLARS. WHY GO THROUGH THE CHARADE OF A TRIAL?
BUT NO! THE NEOCON CRAZIES HAVE TO SET UP A KANGAROO COURT WITH CHANGING JUDGES WHERE THE DEFENSE IS BLOCKED FROM CALLING WITNESSES, I.E. A SHAM, A JOKE, AN EMBARRASSMENT! A LOT OF IRAQIS ARE DANCING IN THE STREETS OVER THE DEATH OF THAT BASTARD BUT NOT ONE HAS ANY ILLUSIONS ABOUT THAT PHONY TRIAL.
UNLIKE YOU BRAINDEAD WINGNUTS, SO-CALLED LOVERS OF DEMOCRACY AND JUSTICE.
DOWN IN GITMO THEY WANT TO BUILD ANOTHER 100 MILLION DOLLAR PLUS PALACE OF “JUSTICE” SO THE DETAINEES CAN HAVE A FAIR MILITARY TRIBUNAL! IT’S ALWAYS OVER 100 MILLION DOLLARS WITH THESE PEOPLE.
“JUSTICE” DOESN’T COME CHEAP ESPECIALLY NOT WHEN THERE’S WAR PROFITS TO BE MADE.
@10 Hey Redneck, here’s something that bears repeating: PAY YOUR FUCKING GAMBLING DEBT, WELSHER!!!
Goldy – Thanks for showing whose side you’re on.
REDNECK – DARRYL WROTE THE POST.
WHAT ARE YOU? STOOPID OR SOMETHING? OF COURSE YOU ARE. GOES WITHOUT SAYING.
JUST PAY YOUR FUCKING GAMBLING DEBT AND GTFO, WELSHER.
@6 My bad. Should of said, “Truth is, Darryl …”
Mark The Redneck KENNEDY says:
what’s your fucking point bill. Do you have one?
I NEVER said I owned a small bidness. Never even implied it. You got me confused with somebody else.
Dumfuckinass…
12/26/2006 at 11:42 pm
Redneck, you mean last December in “Open thread 12-23-05″ when you said: “people from around the world contact me personally for consulation and advice on a variety of complex technical topics. “, you weren’t implying that?
At the Nuremberg trials, Allied prosecutors and judges consistently rejected the “I was following orders” defense. And through the years, many Americans (including rightwing self-described “patriots”) criticized the German people for not questioning or opposing their Nazi leaders. So what do wingnuts want US to do?
They want us to be good little Nazis like them, and not question or oppose our leaders; and if we do, they accuse us of being “unpatriotic.”
Bill – OK.. ya got me…
Employees from MNCs are NEVER contacted by people from around the world.
Shit, you’re too smart for me…
Permanent Incarceration?
Hanging was too good for that powermad freak and permanent incarceration would only work if he was blinded, castrated, hobbled, detongued and limbed!
As for him being a martyr to some – nothing would prevent that!
The ghosts of thousands upon thousands of innocent dead Iraqi’s demanded vengence! They’re screaming it from their mass graves, their tortured raped corpses are yelling it and it’s echoing across the sands of Iraq. They were raped by Saddam, raped by his sons, they were gased with poison, they were thrown into vats of acid to burn alive, they were put into shredders, they had holes drilled in their bones with power drills. They were hung up for days on end and beaten, starved, raped and mutilated. They deserve full vengence.
Old school vengence, not soft-hearted American sorrowful attempts at justice by treating prisoners as if they are the damn victims.
I’m gonna “kick this dog” until Skagit apologizes to me. Or until I get word that (s)he’s out on his/her ass.
DGAF either way…
Would YOU want your kid taught by someone who is so hateful, narrow minded, and intolerant of opposing views?
2.)
Looking at the results from November, seems the people shoved it up yours. The history books will not be kind!
I’ve been called? Sounds like you’re losing sleep over my comments, Mark. Better be careful. Sleep is necessary for a healthy life. You just might contract cancer which might affect your kidneys and then metastize to the brain and you will die. You’d use up your health care and your widow and kids would be penniless. What’s plan B Mark?
Choo Choo. . . choo choo. . . time to go down into the basement and play with your Lionel. Brush off your engineer’s cap . . . choo choo.
Mark the Redneck @ 2
“Goldy – Thanks for showing whose side you’re on.”
Oh…man, beautiful example of Wingnut illiteracy.
(*snicker*)
Your right Goldy. We need to investigate Bush. The “serious of the charge” warrants it regardless of the “nature of the evidence”.
No comment of the Sadam trial.
Smeg, there is nothing anyone can respond to such stupidity. I think that was Darryl’s caution in his commentary. This post was for thoughtful, intelligent and educated Americans. You fit the Bush category: the bully sheriff who will have his way not matter who or what is in his way. You and Mark are two peas in the same pod.
Justice? What is that?
And for what is Bush taking revenge? That’s what I don’t get. Or is he simply a sadist?
Goldy hasn’t a clue as to the legality of Saddam’s trial or whether the due process standards applicable to such trial were satisfied or not. As a practicing attorney with a background in international law and criminal procedures I have been involved in trial procedures in SE Asia and Eastern Europe. Saddam’s trial was perhaps imperfect – no trial is ever satisfactory to everyone. But it was run by the Iragis themselves – not pretty but its theirs. It was good enough and his crimes self-evident. Good defense of Saddam – Goldy.
25.)
The problem with the entire mess is that the United States Military captured him and should have handed him over to the ICC. Your point would be valid if we had not been involved.
John P . . . you’re an effin’ liar.
Darryl, you laid it out well. Impressive.
Hey when is the funeral for Sadam? Funerals = free PR to us dems. It is a world wide audience. I betch Jim McDermott might have some things to say. A tear jerker speech would be golden.
Good Little Nazis (continued)
That’s what “Federal Way Conservative” demands from us: Be good little Nazis, and don’t think impure thoughts (eg.g., our leader is a bungling idiot) or speak against anything he does (no matter h ow illegal or immoral) or says (even if it’s a baldfaced lie). What else could this scribbling mean?
“What shall we do with people, Americans, who … insult our national leaders, talk of surrendering to our enemies, or desire to negotiate with terrorists? … Gallagher pointed out that those who insult our president, thus harming our efforts to destroy terrorists, should be rounded up and placed in an internment camp. Let me connect the dots. … When the president is insulted … that inspires the terrorists. Every time a democrat gets on national TV and says the president has failed … that inspires them. … Therefore, criticizing our president is not only unpatriotic, but anti-patriotic. … What shall we do about this kind of behavior? I believe Gallagher is right, but his prescription is wrong. It is already apparent what the president can do in times of war with citizens who try to subvert that war effort. He puts them on trial for treason, convicts them of ‘aiding and comforting’ our enemies by jury, and executes them. It’s really that simple. Let it be a fair trial, but let the punishment for guilt be death.”
Okay, so this idiot named Jonathan who calls himself “Federal Way Conservative” is upfront: He wants to kill us liberals. Under U.S. law, that means we have the right to defend ourselves against him. Based on his remarks above, any liberal he lays his hands on is reasonably entitled to believe that Jonathan intends to do him to death, and has the right to kill Jonathan in self-defense. I’m not advocating that, of course. This is only Ann Coulter humor, folks! But I’m just sayin’ … if Jonathan wants to kill every American who criticizes Bush, he’s gonna hafta do an awful lot of killing, and will need one of these: http://tinyurl.com/yxybnw
I say if we catch Jonathan and his wingnutty pals building concentration camps and gas chambers, we tear those things down and kick their wingnut butts back to Nazi Germany where fucks like him belong.
Yeah John your a fing liar. Fair trial my ass!!!! Where was the glove that was to small? Was Sadam’s house guest called up to the stand? I think not. This trial was a sham and a innocent evil dictator was executed. This is truely a sad day.
John P @ 25
“Goldy hasn’t a clue as to the legality of Saddam’s trial or whether the due process standards applicable to such trial were satisfied or not. […] Good defense of Saddam – Goldy”
Man…for a supposed lawyer, you sure have reading comprehension problems, since (1) Goldy didn’t write the post, and (2) there was no defense of Saddam Hussein in the post whatsoever. Maybe you should consider, you know…reading the post before commenting. Just a thought.
I’m pretty sure Jonathan has never heard of the WHITE ROSE SOCIETY:
“White Rose (German: die Weiße Rose) was a World War II non-violent resistance group in Germany famous for a leaflet campaign in which they called for active opposition to the Nazi regime.”
And what did the Nazis do? Exactly what Jonathan says our government should do to lbierals who criticize Bush: They killed them.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_Rose
I have no doubt that the ICC would have found him guilty and so much better for the young Iraq government as well as our place in history. Hell, the trial for his worst crimes had not even started.
Jonathan (aka Federal Way Conservative) was born a half century too late. He would have fit right in to the Third Reich. He would have made a perfect little Nazi.
17 Mark The Redneck KENNEDY says: Shit, you’re too smart for me… 12/30/2006 at 6:43 pm
Bad news, Redneck — everybody is smarter than you. I’m only a fucking rabbit, and even I’m smarter than you.
18 So why didn’t they just shoot the bastard in his hole, instead of going through this charade of a trial? That would’ve saved the lives of 3 defense attorneys, millions of dollars, and 3 years of justice delayed.
If they’da just shot that rat in his hole, nobody woulda said nuttin.
19 “Would YOU want your kid taught by someone who is so hateful, narrow minded, and intolerant of opposing views?”
Thank God you know your limitations, Redneck. God help our kids if YOU ever become a teacher!! For one thing, you’re a piss-poor example. Do we want a whole generation of children growing up as bet welshers?
Roger Rabbit,
“At this point in time, no nation on earth recognizes any international tribunal as having authority superior to its own sovereignty. These international tribunals, well-meaning as they may be, depend for their existence and authority on the political will of the coalitions of victors who create them.”
If so, the U.S. should have just executed him upon capture and skip the facade.
In fact, the U.S. offered the pretense that Saddam would be tried by and for the Iraqi people, something that almost nobody could disagree with. But then the U.S. proceeded to create a “novel” tribunal system that was wholy incompatible with the Iraqi legal system. What was the point, except to maintain control?
If Saddam had violated U.S. laws he should have been tried in a U.S. court (like Manuel Noriega, #38699-079, who is slated for release next November). If he had violated international law, he should have been handed over to the ICC for prosecution without interference from the U.S. If he had committed crimes against Iraqis, he should have been tried under the Iraqi judicial system.
Instead, he was tried by an extra-judicial (and probably illegal) Iraqi domestic tribunal, developed, funded and largely implemented by the U.S., and tried by that system for international crimes!
Talk about Rube Goldberg systems!
21 You just might contract cancer which might affect your kidneys and then metastize to the brain and you will die. You’d use up your health care and your widow and kids would be penniless. What’s plan B Mark?
Plan B is an aneurysm — it’s quicker.
21 Note, Redneck already left his dead crack-whore wife and kid penniless. He didn’t pay his child support.
I guess we’ve seen a textbook perfect example of librul “compassion”.
Hey Skagit – Tell me what I said that you don’t like. Are you (wo)man enough to tell me?
Yeah Rabbit – You would know how OCSE gives slack to white guys with a paycheck…
I have news for you moonbats…
The Smartest Woman In The World.. Her Thighness is NOT going to be the next president.
I came to this conclusion after one of the editor moonbats her called Edwards “inspiring” because he wants to end poverty.
Respond if you want to know MTR’s prescription for ending poverty.
25 You may be a damn smart attorney with a boatload of experience in international and criminal law, but you haven’t a clue who wrote this thread.
Try this on for size:
“Victor’s justice
by Darryl, 12/30/2006, 5:43 PM”
Reminds me of what happened a few years ago to Prof. Harry Cross’s amicus argument to a panel of Washington Court Appeals judges who were all his former students …
MTR @ 19
Can you really post this:
Would YOU want your kid taught by someone who is so hateful, narrow minded, and intolerant of opposing views?
with your history of comments?
You are really unbelievably self centered and amazingly idiotic.
MTR @ 10
I’ll tell you a story. 20+ years ago I took my engineering degree and compared offers. One paid about 15% more and would have sent me traveling to work with clients. The other was with the government and got me home every night to be home with my soon to be born child. I choose the latter, and never regretted it.
And I’m sure you cannot comprehend making a decision like that.
@39 I could go with just plugging him in his rat hole and getting it over with in 5 seconds. Would’ve saved a lot of folks undue trouble.
Murderous dictators who put themselves above the law and beyond the reach of law shouldn’t expect the protection of the law after their power comes to an end and they fall into the hands of their enemies.
47 Maybe that’s why he ended up paying vagimony and child support … to the tune of
F I V E H U N D R E D T H O U S A N D D O L L A R S
$500,000.000
HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR
Mark the Redneck wrote, Goldy – Thanks for showing whose side you’re on.
Wow. You didn’t even read past the third word to realize Darryl wrote this superb analysis. But then you wouldn’t know that it was superb because you never even read it, did you.
Typical.
Darryl,
One minor correction…the court in Rwanda is a International Criminal Tribunal like the one in The Hague for the Former Yugoslavia http://www.un.org/rights/
Maybe you had Rwanda confused with Sierra Leone, where there isn’t an International Criminal Tribunal, but a Special Court http://www.sc-sl.org/ which was jointly established up by the UN and Sierra Leone.
Hey Rabbit – Let me remind you…. even with 500k missing …. I’m still better off than you will EVER BE !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHHAH !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Hey… tell us again how you gave up the big bucks that a REAL attorney gets so you could serve humanity??? LMAO !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Tell us again how you spend 1/3 of your income on medical. Shit… doncha kinda wish you worked for private sector? Bucep the fact that you don’t have what it takes.
That you don’t have what it takes to be a “rainmaker”.
Loser… fucking loser !!!!!!!!!!!!
You made yer bed… lay in it and die fucking loser…. !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Shit…sorry moonbats… a little bit of Skagit The “Educator” came through there.
I take it all back…
Nah… I don’t.
That was bullshit… NEVER MIND !!!!!!!!!!
K 47 – YOU make your choices. YOU live with the consequences. IDGAF which one you pick. The slut who made yer chil’ gonna hit YOU up for the bills. Have it yer way.
Jus’ don’t hand me the bill later for the choices YOU made.
Loser…
Cherisse,
“Maybe you had Rwanda confused with Sierra Leone, where there isn’t an International Criminal Tribunal, but a Special Court http://www.sc-sl.org/ which was jointly established up by the UN and Sierra Leone.”
Yes, indeed, I was refering to the mixed national/international tribunal established for Sierra Leone.
Many thanks for catching that and bringing it to my attention!
Mark, afraid I’ve cast a spell? Could happen, you know. It is compassion that compels me to force you to face the prospect of complete annihilation . . . We liberals are always on the side of justice, compassion and common sense.
So, you’re dead, your wife and kids are penniless . . . what’s plan B?
What a sad, sorry little person MTR is. Seeks self-validation by attacking others. If you had a soul, I’d pity you.
Mark the Worm @ 56- I’m well into my third decade of marrige, and have no fear of being hit up with “the bills”. We share costs and joys. You would never understand as a hollow soulless worm like yourself could not have such an experience.
And I do have my retirement and my children’s educations covered, so you’ll see no bills from me.
Worthless pig.
MTW(orm)’s problem is he believes everyone else in the world is like him, hollow, hateful, soulless. What a silly fool.
Mark The Redneck KENNEDY[sic]
Has clearly gotten his tit in a ringer over this fixation on skagit/Ms. Bonney and Education Station.
Mark, your testosterone is showing again. Why don’t you call the damned number and talk to her yourself?
Jesus Christ.
I telephoned 253-850-3371 and spoke to Ms. Bonney at the Education Station in Kent. She is the owner/proprietor/ sole employee; has been in business for 15 years, and doesn’t know what the hell you’re talking about. She certainly explained to me that she knew what a blog was – when asked – but doesn’t use, read, or compose on them.
Further, Ms. Booney assured me she has no plans to fire herself in the next week, month or year.
Substitute Darryl for Goldy – otherwise I’m correct.
Skagit – want to argue the point with the celebrating exiled Iraqis in Everett?
No more than I want to celebrate with Southern Whites after a lynching . . .
Mark, tough looking into a mirror isn’t it . . . on the other hand, is Former Voter right? Shall we meet? Are you interested? Hmm?
First you have to pay your debt, Welsher.
auntie-liberal @ more than any of us care to remember:
You have quite the mouth on you. I would like to take this opportunity to invite you display that mouth and back it up with your ass.
I am tired of the antisemitic flow of your posts. I am Jewish, I am proud of it, and I am just tired of reading your hate filled posts.
All you need to do is choose the time and place. I will be happpy to take a ferry ride from the other side of the water over to meet you. I’ll even buy you a beer.
Have a good evening.
PS It is well past Sundown.
John P @ 63
“Substitute Darryl for Goldy – otherwise I’m correct.”
What…that you are a lawyer? Other than that, all you’ve done is asserted that I am wrong, while demonstrating that you didn’t read the post.
Tell you what, asshole, rather than relying on “argument from authority,” how about providing a coherent argument or two? You know…construct an argument using facts, citing references, etc.
Otherwise, I’ll have to treat your “authoritative” assertion with all the dignity it deserves—a one way trip to the wingnut circular file.
43 You’ve had the pleasure of meeting OCSE, I see. The pleasure was all theirs, I’m sure.
@43 Hey MTR, why should your dead crack-whore wife support your kid by herself? Why should the taxpayers support your kid? Can you tell us one good reason why you shouldn’t be required to support your own kid?
Smeg: “The ghosts of thousands upon thousands of innocent dead Iraqi’s demanded vengence! They’re screaming it from their mass graves, their tortured raped corpses are yelling it and it’s echoing across the sands of Iraq.”
I couldn’t let this go by without a response. (I’m laughing here!) If Saddam was busy raping thousands upon thousands of Iraqi women, when did he have time for torture and murder?
On a more serious note, Bush has certainly avenged the deaths of those “thousands and thousands” by killing and maiming another hundred thousand or more on their behalf.
Sorry, I’ve never read so much hyperbole (look it up, Mark) in my life!
The left has an unnatural fondness for unelected, unaccountable political bodies. One of them is the ICC. The other is the UN. The UN is a corrupt organization run by appointees from unknown contries, mostly with no democratic history. Kofi Annan was on the take from Saddam Hussein, his son made a good living off the Oil for Food program. The “peace keepers” have been shown to be rapists and human traffickers.
And who does the left want to accuse of war crimes? Of course, the elected president of the US. If he is there illegally, then why don’t the Dems in the House and Senate make a case for it? They seem to be just playing along and acting as if Bush is the legitmate head of the great nation in the free world. They are all dupes, I say!
SGMMAC and MARK THE REDNECK are going to HELL!
sgmmac said about our President CHOSEN BY GOD
“Hanging is too good for that powermad freak and permanent incarceration would only work if he was blinded, castrated, hobbled, detongued and limbed!”
How dare you SATAN for staining GOD’s chosen DECIDER with such unGODly a SMEAR!!!
MARK THE REDNECK said
“Respond if you want to know MTR’s prescription for ending poverty.”
There is NO POVERTY in G W B’s (chosen by god) AMERICA!!!
You slanderous heathen’s will be CRUSHED by the weight of your sins against GOD’s chosen Leader George W. Bush!
Greatest.President.Ever
71, you are so smart! And I bet the lefties on this site are just swooning over your cleverness! The more vapid an argument, the more convinced they are!
What is funny is that those who try to be satirical hide behind monikers they think are cute. The right-wing commenters here tend to identify themselves.
And, no, I’m not Pam Roach. That has become quite tiresome. She can speak for herself.
Janet @72:
You say the rightwingwhackjobs that comment here tend to identify themselves. What the fuck are you smoking? I want some. I want to live my life in clouds of fairy dust.
JCH, proudofherfatlyingass, mikewebsucks, auntiliberal, markthewelchingredneck, cyniclown (blast from the past),shall I continue?
I will give you Richard Pope and Jim King.
Now you dumb bitch, want to recant your statement? Or do I actually go back and get more wingnut monikers that IDENTIFY who is writing?
Do you know my name? If you don’t you are a dumb as they come.
I dont buy all your complaints about the court. But assume every point you make is right. So what?
I think that if any one was indefensible, it was Saddam. No serious person can argue he did not deserve far worse then hanging for his years of brutality.
I personally think there would be more then enough justification for him to have just been summarily executed, or just plugged up into his rat hole and left to die, as Roger said.
If anything it was too humane. He should have been ground up and fed to the pigs. He should have been gassed. Maybe made to stand in a pit, and be shot. Or maybe raped and then brutalized and finally killed, all of which were real posibilities of happening to average Iraqis under his reign.
Regardless, the trial resulted in the desired and proper end result, so frankly I don’t much care. He was sentenced by the people whom he abused. Justice was served.
If you want to latch on to this as yet another of the litany of complaints about Bush, feel free, but honestly, that dance is really getting old.
Who gives a shit if the trial was fair or not? An evil douche-bag got what he deserved; that’s all that matters. What goes around comes around, and Saddam got his. Good riddance.
@6,36,37
I do say that I agree with yoiu
Janet Stupid @72
“What is funny is that those who try to be satirical hide behind monikers they think are cute. The right-wing commenters here tend to identify themselves.”
Really?
“And, no, I’m not Pam Roach. … She can speak for herself.”
Really?
re2: Are you sAying: “Power to the People”?
“…it could have been done correctly.”
(Sigh.) The phrase which describes the past six years, starting with our own Supreme Court’s aberrant decision to stop the Floridian vote counting in 2000, and which has applied, does apply, and will apply to everything the resulting Administration has done, does, and will ever do, until reitrement or removal.
Poor PaddyMac: Still dwelling on 2000.
HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR
Poor MWS, continually bring up the Clinton Presidency as the only defense for the Bush Administration.
What a fucking hypocrite.