Saddam Hussein charged, trial to begin in days

[Judi Lynn]

Saddam Hussein charged, trial to begin in days
Sun Jul 17, 2005 6:43 AM ET

BAGHDAD (Reuters) - Iraq's special tribunal has laid the first charges against Saddam Hussein for crimes committed during the former president's rule.

The tribunal's chief investigating judge said on Sunday that Saddam had been charged along with three other defendants in connection with the killing of Shi'ite Muslims in the village of Dujail, north of Baghdad, in 1982.

The judge, Raed Jouhi, said court proceedings against Saddam and the others could begin "within days."
(snip/)

http://today.reuters.com/news/newsArticle.aspx?type=topNews&storyID=2005-07-17T104340Z_01_N17416432_RTRIDST_0_NEWS-IRAQ-TRIBUNAL-DC.XML

[truthisfreedom]

1. *yawn*

so why am i so tired and disinterested?

because he taught bushjr. how to be bushjr.?

[Oversea Visitor]

2. What

grabage
The way this being handle is so distasteful. Does not matter what he has done, whole world will look at this as US trying to justify the illegal invasion of Iraq. Go ahead screw yourself and the US name for all to see you moron of a chimp.

[Peace Patriot]

3. Can you imagine the pressure the Bushites must have put on this

tribunal, to get this three-ring circus going to push TreasonGate out of the headlines? Sheesh.

[Spinzonner]

12. Not to mention the possible reaction of the ex-Baathist insurgents

Might provoke an incredible series of attacks in Iraq with calls by repubs not to be attacking the administration - and the Commander In Chief - during such perilous times for our soldiers.

[lumpy]

27. The negative reaction of the Baathists

is apparent. In past history , foreign invasions(i.e.Britain, France, 1914-1917)in the mideast has always involved the use of tribal 'tension' to support the ambitions of the foreign invaders. Pitting one side against the other (religious or political) weakens national stability allowing for ultimate power to be held by the invader.

[watrwefitinfor]

4. Oh, and look over there -

DEAD POPE.

Wat

[CJCRANE]

5. They got two rabbits

one named Osama and the other Saddam, that they gotta keep pulling out of the hat to keep us distracted.

[Judi Lynn]

6. Iraq's tribunal lays first charges against Saddam

Iraq's tribunal lays first charges against Saddam

Jul 17, 2005 — BAGHDAD (Reuters) - Iraq's special tribunal has laid the first charges against Saddam Hussein for crimes committed under the former president's rule.
(snip)

The Dujail case was expected to be the first for which Saddam would be tried. It relates to the killing of villagers following an assassination attempt against Saddam as his convoy passed through the village, 60 km (35 miles) north of Baghdad.

Investigators have said that around 140 men were rounded up and killed by Saddam's security forces following the failed attack. Dujail is one of up to a dozen cases prosecutors are working on bringing against Saddam.

Investigators have said Dujail is the best case to start with as they say the evidence is clear-cut, making the case more straightforward and increasing the possibility of a conviction.
(snip/)

http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory?id=946809

[lumpy]

29. Saddams trial will appear to

support Bushco's reasons for invading Iraq, WMDs or not, and perhaps give a boost to Bush's ratings. "Saddam is a killer, evil, genicidal, threat to the world and should be deposed". Reason enough to invade? The trial will take up a lot of focus news time.

[leftchick]

7. September at the earliest

That is what I just heard the CNNI reporter saying.

[NNN0LHI]

8. Won't this interfere with the release of the new Harry Potter book? n/t

[Judi Lynn]

10. Can't afford to overlook summer shark bites, either. n/t

[ET Awful]

9. To repeat what I said in another thread . . .

I'm not defending Saddam in any way, but I have to ask this question. . .

according to http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,5744,15961188%255E1702,00.html the charge they refer to is as follows:

"Investigators have said that around 140 men were rounded up and killed by Saddam's security forces following the failed attack."

How is that different from what the US did to Fallujah following the killing of so-called security contractors (aka mercenaries)?

[leftchick]

11. the difference...

The US killed a hell of a lot more people.

[ET Awful]

13. Okay, thanks for clearing that up.

I'm happy I'm not the only one that reached that conclusion.

[NeoConsSuck]

14. Saddam didn't use napalm.

[geek tragedy]

16. The US didn't take hundreds of unarmed people out of their homes

line them up, and execute them.

Were they too brutal in their application of force in Fallujah? Yes. But it is most certainly not the same thing, especially in legal terms.

[Kathy in Cambridge]

19. So, do you think Iraqi detainees in the Abu Ghraib are all guilty?

How do you know the troops haven't rounded up unarmed civilians? Have you served or been to Iraq?

[geek tragedy]

20. Three points:

1) We were talking about Fallujah, not Abu Ghraib.

2) The US didn't summarily execute hundreds of people at Abu Ghraib. That doesn't make what went on there any less odious, of course.

3) Saddam's guilt and Bush's guilt are two entirely separate issues.

[Kathy in Cambridge]

22. I was curious about your opinion

just trying to understand where you're coming from.

[geek tragedy]

23. Oh, I know that there have been repeated human rights abuses

in Iraq. That's the nature of war and occupation.

I just feel compelled to point out that those violations are not relevant to determining Saddam's guilt.

[maxrandb]

39. The New American Slogan!

Now, instead of chanting; "USA, USA, USA, USA"..

We can chant; "WE'RE NOT WORSE, WE'RE NOT WORSE, WE'RE NOT WORSE, WE'RE NOT WORSE"

At some time in America, saying "Yeah, we made naked pyramids out of prisoners and killed 100,000 civilians, but at least we 'suck less than Saddam'" would not have been something to be proud of.

[geek tragedy]

40. Please don't misrepresent and distort what I write.

Someone asked how the two situations were different, which they are. I explained how they are different.

I stated "

2. The US didn't summarily execute hundreds of people at Abu Ghraib. That doesn't make what went on there any less odious, of course.

3. Saddam's guilt and Bush's guilt are two entirely separate issues."

[lumpy]

30. No, they just dragged them out of their

homes, put them in trucks and let them smother to death. No, they just rounded up the ones that weren't killed in Falluhga, barred them from the city to live without food, water and shelter.

[daleo]

35. They got to stay in their homes and get bombed.

Not really an improvement.

[klyon]

15. just any old charge to get him out of the way

I think the Bush family wants him kept quiet. I think the reason we are in Iraq is to cover up the crimes of G. H. W. Bush, that Saddam had the information on. That material would have been confirmed and destroyed in the first days of the invasion.

I see no other logical reason to invade Iraq. Oil could be bought, that just doesn't seem enough. Hedging the dollar well maybe except that it seems to be falling with no concern from the administration. But covering for old Dad makes the most sense. Otherwise this war is senseless, foolish and costly with no benefit to the US.

Just my thoughts.

KL

[Toots]

17. Seems most of Saddam's "Crimes" occurred when he was our "Friend"

And we stayed his friend for some time after those events. We did not consider what he had done to be any big deal at the time. By we I mean the US Government of the time Reagan/Bush. In fact Reagan/Bush was supplying both Iran and Iraq with weapons to kill their own people with. Supplying Iran with weapons after they had attacked American soil was another bit of Treason by this same group of criminals.

[geek tragedy]

21. Exactly! The Rethugs were huge boosters of Saddam. Which makes

all of this talk about concern for the Iraqi people nothing more than a sick joke when coming out of their lying mouths.

[O.M.B.inOhio]

18. DISTURBING PHOTO-- Get Saddam and Bush both!

If Saddam Hussein is on trial for atrocities carried out for him (and he is, the bastard!), our Commander in Chief should be held culpable, too. It's not Saddam who got this child splattered with her parents' brains!
Maybe we can rent out a public space for a trial of Bush/Rove/ Cheney/ Rumbsfeld for their crimes. Of course, you say we shouldn't be killing this kid's parents, you get attacked: "You don't support our troops!"



edit: photo wasn't showing

[lumpy]

24. US interference in Iraqi courts:

"The Americans privately have urged caution about rushing into a trial, saying Iraq must develop a judicial system first.

U.S. officials say there also are concerns that a trial could interfere with the process of writing a constitution and inflame sectarian tension. The Iraqi government must finish a draft by mid-August so it can hold a referendum on the charter ahead of December elections for a full-term government". (from article)

Excuses for delaying the trial indicates to some that US officials might be trying to get a softer landing for Saddam. He was our dictator if you recall. Could inflame sectarian tension? That 'sectarian tension' is what has propelled warring between religious factions in Iraq for a long time. You might say it's the struggle between the fundies and the more moderate religious factions. Are we seeing any of that sort of religious division in the US?

[lovuian]

25. Well since America spent money fixing elections in Iraq

I'm sure this court is not fixed too!!! Right!!!

Saddam trial is hope for news to get off of Rove!!!

[leesa]

26. Who is his new lawyer? Or don't we need no stinkin' lawyers...

This may be the BEST time for this to start. With Bush being attacked from all sides, real info about US involvement and support of Saddam may come out.

[bunny planet]

28. He deserves to be on trial that's for sure. Our news media will be

reporting on this non-stop this week however, and practically no coverage of Treasongate as a result.

[54anickel]

31. On Friday they were saying "as soon as August". Now it's "in days"?

WTF? Last month they were saying it may begin this year. Google Saddam trial.

Here's an interesting one from June 22

US accused as Iraqis push for Saddam trial
http://www.thestandard.com.hk/stdn/std/World/GF22Wd02.html

Iraq's justice minister said Saddam Hussein's trial on war crimes charges will be over by the end of the year, but he accused Washington of trying to delay interrogations of the fallen dictator.

Abdel Hussein Shandal's comments underlined the Iraqi government's determination to bring the ousted leader to trial swiftly. They also reflected behind-the-scenes tension between Iraq and the United States, as American officials worry about the prospect of Iraq ``rushing'' into a trial.

``It seems there are lots of secrets they want to hide,'' Shandal claimed about the US posture.

Shandal, in Brussels along with about 80 other Iraqi leaders for an international conference on his country, said no date has been set for Saddam's trial, but he was confident it would conclude by year's end.

more...

[VegasWolf]

32. Jay Leno has been called as a witness. nt

[Judi Lynn]

33. First criminal case brought against Saddam; ousted dictator could face dea

July 17, 2005

First criminal case brought against Saddam; ousted dictator could face death penalty

(Baghdad, Iraq-AP, July 17, 2005 12:00 PM) _ The first criminal case has been filed against Saddam Hussein, stemming from the 1982 massacre of dozens of Shiite villagers in retaliation for a failed assassination attempt against the former leader, the head of an Iraqi tribunal said Sunday.

The date for the trial of Saddam and three others will be determined in a few days. If convicted, they could face the death penalty.

Raid Juhi, chief judge of the Iraq Special Tribunal, said the preliminary investigation into the July 8, 1982, massacre in Dujail, 50 miles north of Baghdad, has been completed, and the case was referred to the courts for trial.

"The date for the trial will be determined within the few coming days by the gentlemen in the criminal court," Juhi said.

The announcement roughly corresponds to an indictment in the U.S. legal system, legal officials said. However, Saddam and the others will be considered "charged" when they appear in court.
(snip/...)

http://www.wtnh.com/Global/story.asp?S=3604125

[daleo]

34. Bush is hoping for a distraction from Rove.

Who knows whether this report is true, though? I doubt it.

[bloom]

36. It does seem awfully weird

to be having Saddam on trial while we are over there committing war crimes.

It seems very inflammatory.

[Emendator]

37. If this trial is anywhere honest

I suspect we'll find out that a lot of these charges are gross exagerrations if not outright lies.

[geek tragedy]

38. I suspect they'll rightfully convict him of his crimes.

Saddam is a murderer and a sadist and a pig. String him up.

[gatorboy]

41. I guess they can start bringing the Bush Co. in as collaborators?

http://www.laweekly.com/ink/03/23/news-crogan.php

A glance at his datebook would provide some of the answers. In 1983, Rumsfeld, then a private citizen, traveled to Baghdad to meet with the Iraqi dictator. Rumsfeld delivered President Ronald Reagan’s personal message of support to Hussein, who was already three years into his eventual eight-year war with Iran. The American envoy also discussed a proposed joint-venture oil pipeline with the Iraqi leader. That project, also championed by the San Francisco–based Bechtel Group, never materialized, but Rumsfeld’s mission underscored the reality that for more than 30 years the economic interests of American industry were firmly embedded into the geopolitical goals of U.S. policymakers.

Over and over again, the deals were encouraged and even abetted by the U.S. government, even after American officials had proof that Iraq was using chemical weapons to kill Iranian troops and subdue Kurdish uprisings. In fact, the Reagan administration and the first Bush administration even provided Hussein’s regime with military intelligence during his bloody eight-year war with Iran.

American officials tolerated Hussein’s despotism because they viewed his regime as a secular bulwark against the Islamic fundamentalist revolution spawned by the Iranian revolution. That is, until Iraq invaded oil-rich Kuwait in 1990. Most, though not all, of Iraq’s commerce with American companies ended after the first Gulf War in 1991.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Not to mention the list of American companies that were also accomplices in Saddam's heyday.

DOW CHEMICAL

(Midland, Michigan)

1988 — Sold Iraq $1.5 million worth of pesticides. Iraq also received loans for $11,497,000 from BNL (an Italian bank) to buy chemicals and plastics from Dow. Critics have claimed these pesticides could have been used in Iraq’s chemical-weapons program. But Dow spokesman Scott Wheeler told the Weekly that none of the pesticides sold to Iraq could be "weaponized." Wheeler also said that Dow Chemical continued to sell "herbicides, fungicides and insecticides" to Iraq until February 2003. All recent sales were evaluated and approved by the U.N. Security Council, and in line with the U.N. trade embargo and sanctions in place since 1991, he added.

CATERPILLAR, INC.

(Peoria, Illinois)

Date uncertain — Sold $9,902,605 worth of tractors to Iraq. They were used in construction projects involving Iraq’s nuclear and Condor II ballistic-missile programs. Purchase was funded by BNL (an Italian bank), according to records compiled for a 1992 Senate Banking Committee report on U.S. export policies prior to Iraq’s invasion of Kuwait. Caterpillar currently has a number of contracts with the U.S. Department of Defense to supply the military with heavy equipment.


AL HADDAD ENTERPRISES, INC.

(Formerly based in Nashville, Tennessee — defunct)

1984 to 1985 — Company sold 60 tons of DMMP, a material used to make sarin gas, to Iraq. Also provided chemical-production equipment to Iraq. In 1984, customs officials at Kennedy International Airport seized another Al Haddad shipment of 1,100 pounds of potassium fluoride, a chemical used in nerve-gas production. Al Haddad was not charged in this attempted transfer of chemicals, which were destined for Iraq’s Ministry of Pesticides. This firm also received letters of credit from BNL (an Italian bank) totaling $134,988 to sell knives and rubber blankets to Technical Corp. for Special Projects, an Iraqi front company. (Note: See Banca Nazionale del Lavoro entry for information about BNL’s Iraqi loans and letters of credit.)

The firm was owned by Sahib Abd al-Amir al-Haddad, an Iraqi-born, naturalized American citizen. According to corporate records from Tennessee’s Department of State, Al Haddad operated a number of registered firms, which are all inactive, dissolved or merged out. These firms included Al Haddad Enterprises, Inc.; A. Saleh & S. Al-Haddad, Inc.; and Al-Haddad Bros. Enterprises, Inc. Recent stories in The New York Times and The Tennessean reported that al-Haddad was arrested in Bulgaria in November 2002 while trying to arrange an arms sale to Iraq. At last report, Al-Haddad, 59, was awaiting extradition to Germany, where he is charged with conspiring in the late 1990s to purchase equipment for the manufacture of a giant Iraqi cannon.

[WhiteTara]

42. chimpy is desperate for a diversion

if one won't happen, he is determined to make one happen. But still the justice department (Fitzgerald and the grand jury) just keeps on doing the job. I don't think they will be successful in making this go away.