Saddam verdict will be the November 6 surprise

[Adenoid_Hynkel]

Published on Wednesday, October 18, 2006 by The Nation

November Surprise?
Why Hasn't Mainstream Media Connected the Dots Between Saddam's Judgment Day and the Midterm Elections?


these people have no shame
---
fromt he nation:
by Tom Engelhardt

 
The US-backed special tribunal in Baghdad signalled Monday that it will likely delay a verdict in the first trial of Saddam Hussein to November 5. Why hasn't the mainstream media connected the dots between the Saddam's judgment day and the midterm elections?

Here's how the story was reported pretty much everywhere: "An Iraqi court trying Saddam Hussein for the killing of Shi'ite villagers in the 1980s could deliver a verdict on November 5, officials said, a ruling which could send the ousted leader to the gallows…"

A possible death-sentence for Saddam and his top lieutenants on November 5? Now, shouldn't that raise a few eyebrows somewhere? If you happen to have a calendar close at hand, pull it over and take a quick look. That verdict would then come, curiously enough, just two days before the midterm elections. It's the sort of thing that--you would think--that any reporter with knowledge of the US election cycle (no less of how Karl Rove has worked these last years) would at least note in an article. But no, you can search high and low without finding a reference to this in the mainstream media.

I must admit I hadn't thought about this myself until a friend forwarded me "No Comment," the e-mail newsletter that Scott Horton sends out from time to time. ("It's intended as ironic. All I do is comment.") Horton, who likes to identify himself in his newsletter as an "obscure New York lawyer," is actually an adjunct professor at the Columbia University Law School, as well as chairman of the International Law Committee at the New York City Bar Association. He makes frequent trips to Iraq, working as an attorney "representing arrested local-hire reporters of US media."
more:
http://www.commondreams.org/views06/1018-23.htm

[onenote]

1. maybe because it won't help the repubs

[Jack from Charlotte]

6. The surprise would be if he's acquitted. But maybe THAT'S the surprise....

The Repugs can go batsh*t and accuse the ICLU (Iraqnamese Civil Liberties Union) for providing Saddam a good defense. The Iraqnamese jury might do an OJ and turn him loose. Then, since under The AWOL/moron occupation, Iraq has less electricity, less clean water, less oil pumped and sold, they re-elect Saddam as HMFIC.

We declare victory and bust out.

Bush says..... Mission accomplished. Orders a parade.

[BlooInBloo]

2. Where'd you get the 6th from?

[Flabbergasted]

3. If this is all they have, we have it made.

[KansDem]

4. Saddam who? (eom)

[AndyA]

5. Where's the surprise? Most Americans know who Saddam

is. Most know what he's allegedly done. He's a bad guy. Everyone knows that. So, he's guilty. Where is the surprise?

The surprise would be if he were found innocent. THAT no one sees coming. Guilty? Pretty much expected.

If the Dems were smart, they'd be asking, "OK, so WHERE is Osama, and why is he still loose over 5 years later? You guys caught the wrong guy."

THAT might be a NOVEMBER surprise for the GOP.