That decision was soon redacted:
And even better news…..some more tyrants and scum are hung:
Saddam Hussein’s half brother and the former head of Iraq’s Revolutionary Court were hanged before dawn Monday, Prosecutor Munqith al-Faroon said, two weeks and two days after the former Iraqi dictator was executed in a chaotic scene that has drawn worldwide criticism.
Barzan Ibrahim, Saddam’s half brother and former intelligence chief, and Awad Hamed al-Bandar, head of Iraq’s Revolutionary Court, had been found guilty along with Saddam of in the killing of 148 Shiite Muslims after a 1982 assassination attempt on the former leader in the town of Dujail north of Baghdad.
The few words I wasted on these two are enough, now back to 24.
What a show, and Drudge is promising even better tomorrow.
Few outside of the 24 set know the exact details of the new season unfolding, but studio sources claim producers are pushing hard to take it radioactive this time — and keep it there.
"Time to wake the country up!" a top FOX source told the DRUDGE REPORT over the weekend. "I do not think there has ever been TV done like this, the viewer is going to be completely riveted.
Recall two seasons ago when 24 had to put up a disclaimer before every show where they said that just because the terrorists are Muslim (terrorists are Muslim….get outta here!) doesn’t mean all Muslims are bad. This time the producers may have figured out that it isn’t 9 year olds watching the show but adults because I see no disclaimers. More good news.
Even better….the show hasn’t lost a beat. Keeps you on the edge throughout.
When you look at this image what do you see? Why is it that the MSM is always in a perpetual state of pessimism?
An interesting article at New Media Journal about the Russian help given to Iraq to hide the WMD’s:
In December 2002, Russia?s Middle East envoy, Yevgeny Primakov (former Russian Intelligence Chief), flew to Baghdad under the front of making one last chance for peace with the dictator.? As soon as his plane landed, it was allegedly loaded with ?sensitive materials? and flown directly to Belarus.? People speculate as to whether or not it was WMD, WMD equipment, documents, people, or things the Russians didn?t want the US to get their hands on, but in any event?the plane was loaded with things the US wanted. There is no doubt that the Russians did send GPS jammers to confuse American satellite-guided bombs, night vision goggles, special anti-tank missiles, and Russian advisors.
[...]Renowned reporter Joe Galloway reported that two Russian Generals, Gen. Vladimir Achalov, a former commander of airborne and rapid-reaction forces, and Gen. Igor Maltsev, a leading expert in air defense systems were in Baghdad up until 6 days before the war. During their ?visit? they were photographed being given medals by Iraqi Defence Minister Sultan Hashim Akhmed.? Other smiley photographs include the two Russian Generals standing with head of the General Staff of the Iraqi Army Izzat Ibragim between them.? Upon their return to Russia, the generals were asked why they went on a ?last-chance? diplomatic mission.? They replied, ?We didn’t fly to Baghdad to drink coffee.?? One wonders if all the elements of the story were proven true, could the claim of ?special weapons? being moved out be less true than the other elements.
Immediately after the arrival of the Russians in Baghdad, retired USAF Lt Gen. James R Clapper Jr-then head of the National Imagery and Mapping Agency-monitored an increasing flow of traffic and communication from Iraq to Syria.? Former head of the UN?s WMD inspection group, UNSCOM, Richard Butler, was asked to review the imagery.? He agreed that Iraq appeared to be moving weapons out of Iraq, but did not think that ?the Iraqis wanted to give them to Syria, but?just wanted to get them out of the territory, out of range of our inspections.?? Syria was prepared to be the custodian of them. The entire idea was nearly identical to when Saddam sent his entire air force to Iran for safe-keeping during Desert Storm.
Israeli intelligence (flush with human intelligence sources in the region-particularly in Syria, and Lebanon) reported that the increased traffic was Saddam?s repositioning of WMD to Syria.? On December 23, 2002, Ariel Sharon stated on Israeli channel 2 television, “Chemical and biological weapons which Saddam is endeavoring to conceal have been moved from Iraq to Syria.?? About three weeks later, Israel’s foreign minister repeated the accusation.? The U.S., British, and Australian governments issued similar statements.
Opponents to the war like to point to the 1000+ pages of the Duelfer Report and summarize it as ?NO WMD,? but there?s a lot more to Moby Dick than 5 letters.? Not even an elementary school student would dare turn in a 5-letter book report on Melville?s epic.? Similarly the ISG?s report contains a lot more than just ?NO WMD.?? It is a resounding verification that, yes, there was a great deal of ?something? secreted out of Saddam?s Iraq into Syria.? While the ISG doesn?t claim that it was in fact WMD in those trucks, it specifically says that the investigations should remain open on the issue because the clandestine nature and the assembly areas for the convoys that left Iraq for Syria would be consistent with WMD, WMD equipment, documentation, and even personnel.
Given that there is so much evidence that Saddam?s illegal weapons, programs, documents, and equipment existed and were moved rather than did not exist and were destroyed, it seems that logic has turned.? There?s simply more evidence it was moved than there is any evidence of WMD destruction.? Yet, the debate from those who oppose prefers to ignore evidence and pretend that fictional evidence of destruction exists.?? That door to reality is creaking open for the opposition, and as such it?s no wonder that the anti-war movement is shattering, the Democratic Party is spinning, and opponents to the war are confused.
Of course this article will be quickly ignored by the MSM elite.
As the author notes, it is getting harder and harder for the left to ignore all the evidence being accumulated that points to the fact that not only did Saddam have WMD’s but also that he had help moving them out of country.
Meanwhile new charges have been filed against Saddam:
BAGHDAD, April 4 — A special criminal court said in a news conference Tuesday it had completed gathering evidence on a massacre of tens of thousands of ethnic Kurds in the late 1980s, paving the way for a second trial of former dictator Saddam Hussein.
Investigative Judge Raed Juhi said he had referred the case against Hussein and six co-defendants to the Iraqi High Tribunal, the rough equivalent of submitting formal charges.
Hussein and Ali Hassan al-Majeed, nicknamed “Chemical Ali” for his alleged role in a gas attack that killed more than 5,000 Kurds at Halabja in 1988, will be prosecuted for genocide, the court said. All of the defendants will be charged with crimes against humanity.
Hussein’s operation against the Kurds is commonly known as al-Anfal, which refers to a verse in the Koran describing the spoils gained by Muslims in a battle against infidels. International human rights groups have estimated that more than 100,000 people were killed.
But wait a damn second.? How could he be charged with this if he never had any WMD’s?? Or is it the lefts argument that he became a good boy and saw the light after those tough sanctions from the UN?
Other’s Blogging:
All the speculation has ended and now the Judge in the Saddam trial has indeed stepped down:
The chief judge in the trial of former Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein has tendered his resignation, reports say.
Judge Rizgar Mohammed Amin is angry at complaints from the Iraqi government that he has been too lenient on Saddam Hussein, Reuters news agency reports.
However, Judge Rizgar’s resignation is reported to have not yet been accepted.
Tribunal officials are said to be trying to persuade him to remain as the judge overseeing Saddam’s trial, for an alleged massacre in Dujail in 1982.
But wait a minute….the AP is reporting that he has no plans to withdraw.? So while these MSM reporters can’t tell a story without adding their own personal bias you can also add in the fact that they can’t get their facts straight either.
BAGHDAD, Iraq ? The chief judge overseeing the Saddam Hussein trial has no plans to step down, and media reports suggesting that he will are “baseless,” another judge on the Saddam tribunal said Saturday.
Rizgar Mohammed Amin, the presiding judge of a five-judge tribunal overseeing the Saddam case, has no plans to step down before the completion of the trial, two judges told The Associated Press Saturday.
The news reports cited an anonymous source close to the judge as saying he would hear one more session of the trial and then resign.
One of the judges who spoke to AP sits with Amin on the five-judge panel hearing the Saddam trial. The former leader is being tried on mass murder charges for killings in Dujail in 1982 in retaliation for an assassination attempt.
The second judge is on the committee that will likely hear the next case against Saddam concerning the Anfal Offensive that killed some 180,000 Kurds. Both judges spoke on condition of anonymity for security reasons.
The judge on the committee studying the Anfal case told AP that Amin wasn’t likely to serve for that trial because a five-judge panel has already been selected and is studying the case.
The trial against Saddam for the Dujail killings began in October and is scheduled to resume Jan. 24.
Amin is a Kurd who before the Saddam trial was virtually unknown outside his home region. He heads the panel of five judges who are both hearing the Saddam case and will render a verdict in the trial.
The names of the other four judges have not been released, and only three have allowed their faces to be shown by courtroom television cameras.
Amin has been criticized for allowing Saddam to grandstand at the trial. U.S. Senate Judiciary Chairman Arlen Specter, a Republican from Pennsylvania, met with Amin in late December and told him to take stronger control of the proceeding.
Saddam has often grabbed the spotlight during his trial. He has railed at the judge, refused to show up at one session, claimed he was tortured and openly prayed in court when the judge would not allow a recess.
This is rich. Christopher Dickey has written an opinion piece for Newsweek online in which he states that Saddam’s trial is just a show, comparable to the one he gave in 1979 where he executed many a member of his government, and then in the same breath states that Clinton’s impeachment was a farce and Bush has committed crimes against decency. Decency! Yes, you heard that right. Clinton should not have been impeached for committing perjury about his act of oral sex in the White House, with someone who was not his wife. BUT….Bush should be impeached for his crimes against decency.
I do believe these people are from another planet all together:
Jan. 5, 2006 - We ended 2005 in a time of trials–show trials, in fact. Saddam Hussein was in the dock for allegedly ordering massacres in an Iraqi Shiite village.
[...]Show trials are about raw power, of course, not blind justice. They?re spectacles put on by winners to humiliate losers, cover up other crimes and intimidate the opposition. Nobody understands that fact better than Saddam. In 1979 he conducted one of the most horrifying bits of political puppetry ever recorded on videotape. After years as the power behind the throne in Baghdad, he had seized the top slot for himself. Then he convened a congress of the Baath Party to reveal what he said was a plot against the regime. A terrified aide to the former president stood for hours in front of the Baathist delegates recounting details of his own supposed crimes. Occasionally, plaintively, he turned to Saddam, who sat behind a table onstage, handsome as Dracula in a bespoke business suit, smoking a Churchill cigar and sipping from a glass of water. ?Was that right?? the accused would ask. Saddam would nod, or correct him. The recitation continued.
Every time the confessor named someone in the audience as a fellow conspirator, that man was forced to stand up and leave the hall, to be shot outside. More than a dozen were named, and no one knew who might be next.
[...]Flash forward to the trial of Saddam in Baghdad, which will resume later this month. Even as a defendant he?s running the show–because he knows perfectly well that?s what it is. The Americans and the Iraqi judiciary they helped put in place are applying a hodgepodge of local and international law in a spectacle designed to prove that the Shiites and Kurds rule the country now, and they will punish Saddam for killing their people.
Better than show trials are the ?truth and reconciliation commissions? we saw in several Latin American countries and post-apartheid South Africa. There, as eras of tyranny and insurgency came to an end, the past was relived in public hearings. Horrific crimes and savage repression were described by the victims, confessed to by the torturers. Those who came clean could be amnestied; those who did not were liable to be tried. The idea was that fear could be purged, life could go on and, with luck, a unified nation could begin to emerge. But none of those countries had been invaded. Their armies and their economic elites may have reformed, but they stayed in place. Saddam?s legacy of horror and the Americans? legacy of chaos have created a situation in post-invasion Iraq where truth and reconciliation are beyond the power of any court or commission to deliver.
And in the United States? Our most exalted form of show trial is impeachment. Like the farce imposed on President Bill Clinton by many of the people ruling the country today, it?s a purely political exercise. Sure, if by some miracle the Democrats manage to take control of the House and Senate later this year, they might try to hold the Bush team accountable for numerous crimes against common sense and decency as well as the Constitution. The National Security Agency program to eavesdrop on Americans? phones without warrants, which President Bush continues to defend, might be exhibit A. But frankly, I think we need something better in America these days than another Senate show trial. People are embittered, divided, numbed by the litany of tragedies and lies. After five years of deception and intimidation, I?m afraid we Americans are now the ones who need truth and reconciliation. The process couldn?t start too soon.
Funny how he can say “five years of deception” with a straight face while at the same time saying Clinton should not have been impeached for lying.
Just another example of the loony left attempting to smear Bush, and while he is at it smear the new Iraqi government for putting Saddam on trial.
The One Minute Pundit had this to say:
Jimson Dickey wants a “truth commission” to act as judge, jury and exeuctioner for the EEEEEEEEEEEEEEVIL Dubya and his administration.
I’ve got a better idea, Jimson! Let’s have a permanent truth commission — or may be can call it a Ministry of Truth….
I love it. I’m sure Christopher Dickey wants a “truth commission” appointed with Kerry, Dean, Pelosi, Kennedy, Reid, Schumer and the rest of the gang to act as the all mighty Arbitrators of Truth.
(h/t Newsbusters)
So the Saddam trial resumed today, and Saddam was in a bit better mood…in the beginning at least:
A noticeably calmer Saddam Hussein sat quietly in his defendant’s chair at the resumption of his trial Wednesday, two weeks after he called the court “unjust” and boycotted a session. When the judge refused to let him take a break to pray, the former leader closed his eyes and appeared to pray from his seat. …
The deposed president had refused to attend the previous session on Dec. 7. “I will not come to an unjust court! Go to hell!” he said in an outburst in court the day before.
But on Wednesday, his behavior was calmer, and he appeared clean-shaven and in fresh clothes, wearing a dark suit but no tie. Previously during the trial, Saddam has appeared disheveled and has complained about being held in unsanitary conditions.
After greeting the court with a traditional “Peace be upon you,” he sat quietly in the defendants’ area and appeared to pay close attention to the proceedings, at times taking notes.
We then heard about some of Saddam’s deeds:
A witness testified Wednesday at Saddam Hussein’s trial that the deposed leader’s regime killed and tortured people by administering electric shocks and ripping off their skin after pouring molten plastic on it.
[...]The prosecution’s first witness Wednesday was a man who testified about killings and torture in Dujail after the attempt to assassinate Saddam. Ali Hassan Mohammed al-Haidari, who was 14 in 1982, started off by quoting from the Quran, the Islamic holy book, about how evil would be defeated.
[...]Al-Haidari said that he and other residents from Dujail ? including family members ? were taken to Baghdad and thrown into a security services prison, where people from “9 to 90″ were held.
Blood poured from head wounds and skin was pale from electric shocks, he testified. Security officials would drip melted plastic hoses on detainees, only to pull it off after it cooled, tearing skin off with it, he said.
“I cannot express all that suffering and pain we faced in the 70 days inside,” he said.
After a recess, another witness took the stand ? the first of four the judge said would testify from behind a curtain Wednesday.
[...]At another point when al-Haidari referred to Saddam by name, the former leader interrupted, saying “Saddam who?” implying the proper respect hadn’t been shown. The judge asked the witness whom he meant, and the witness restated: “I mean the former Iraqi president.”
The trial was marked by one unruly outburst ? from Saddam’s half brother. In an exchange that was largely edited out of the televised feed, Ibrahim called al-Haidari “a dog” and his dead brothers “rotten dogs.” Guards entered the court and threatened to take him out, but Ibrahim wagged his finger at them, saying he could only be ordered to leave by the judge, who allowed him to stay.
After listening to the evidence against him Saddam couldn’t help himself. He stood up and acted like the childish spoiled little brat we have all come to know and despise:
Saddam Hussein launched into an extended outburst at his trial Wednesday, alleging he had been “beaten and tortured by Americans” while in detention after a witness testified that his agents had tortured people by ripping off their skin.
The trial’s chief prosecutor said that if American-led multinational forces were abusing the former Iraqi leader, he would be transferred to the custody of Iraqi troops.
“Yes, I have been beaten, everywhere on my body. The marks are still there,” Saddam told the court after sitting quietly listening to testimony. “And I’m not complaining about the Americans because I can poke their eyes with my own hands.”
Those Marines better watch their eye’s, Saddam is coming for them :thumbup_tb:
[...]Standing in the fenced-in defendant’s area, Saddam complained at length about the conditions of his detention, engaging in a debate with the chief prosecutor, Jaafar al-Mousawi.
Saddam also told the court that he knew the name of the person who betrayed his hiding place when U.S. forces found him in December 2003.
Can you believe this guy? Initially he was calm and subdued, probably an after effect of the election since he now realizes no one is going to rise up and put him back into power, but after hearing the claims of torture he couldn’t take it anymore. He rose up and acted once again like a power hungry man who’s power has been taken away from him. Beaten? Let some of the family members of those he tortured and raped get their hands on him….now that would be justice.
Next he’s going to complain that the NSA has been listening to his phone call’s…them bastards!
Vahal at The Iraqi Vote had some great comments about the trial:
If I haven’t said this before, then here it is. I really like judge Rizgar, the presiding judge for the Dujail case. He is criticized by many for being too soft, but when all is said and done, we will remember that Saddam was treated with everything he denied us for so many years: respect, decency, goodwill, clarity, noble intentions etc…
This judge is such a powerful example for what the new Iraqi judges should be like, just not vindictive, kind not ruthless, calm not angry, respectful not feared.
I hate the defense team not because they are defending Saddam and his partners as they are entitled to that, but because they simply don’t get it.
Khalil al-Dulaimi, the chief lawyer acts as though the judges and the prosecution owe him and his team something. At almost every session, he tries to bring up the issue of the legitimacy of the court. This is what I mean by they don’t get it, the court is not going to let them discuss its legitimacy because their job is to defend a group of people charged with killing innocent people and demolishing a town, not to provide an opinion on the legitimacy of the court.
[...]The defendants must have initially thought that they would be killed upon capture because that’s how they dealt with human beings, but now that they know they won’t be killed before a process, they sure take advantage.
[...]Yes, Saddam gets away with a lot inside the court and it is painful for so many of us to see Saddam speak not as a prisoner but as a lawyer or a judge, however, it is all worth it and while some Iraqis may be vindictive, those who believe in fair trials for ruthless dictators should be happy that the court is ruled by such a professional judge, Mr. Rizgar Muhammad Amin.
Other’s Blogging:
Captain’s Quarters
A Knights Blog
Joe’s Dartblog
Ace of Trump
Neo-Con Tastic
A Blog For All
Conservababes
The circus continued today with Saddam vowing:
that he will not return “to an unjust court” when it convenes for a fifth session the following day. As the end of the session, when the judges decided to resume the trial Wednesday, Saddam suddenly shouted: “I will not return. I will not come to an unjust court! Go to hell!”
And the court telling him that he will be brought back by force if need be. Looks like the ongoing testimony is starting to get to him.
Saddam sat stone-faced, silently taking notes as the woman, known only as “Witness A,” told the court how she and dozens of other families from the town of Dujail were arrested in a crackdown after a 1982 assassination attempt against him.
Two other witnesses ? a man and a woman ? also testified Tuesday, all with their identities concealed.
“I was forced to take off my clothes, and he raised my legs up and tied up my hands. He continued administering electric shocks and whipping me and telling me to speak,” Witness A said of Wadah al-Sheik, an Iraqi intelligence officer who died of cancer last month.
[...]“They made me put my legs up. There were more than one of them, as if I were their banquet, maybe more than five people, all of them officers,” she said.
“Is that what happens to the virtuous woman that Saddam speaks about?” she wept, prompting the judge to advise her to stick to the facts.
She also said al-Sheik fired a gun at the wall to scare her.
When asked by the judge which of the defendants she wanted to accuse, “Witness A” identified Saddam. “When so many people are jailed and tortured, who takes such a decision?” she said.
She later quoted a security officer as telling her, “You should thank your God because you are here in the Intelligence Center. If you were in the directorate of security, no woman would remain virgin.” Nevertheless, she also said that many fellow female detainees lost their virginity to security guards.
[...]At Abu Ghraib, the guards stripped one of her male relatives, a deaf mute, and tied a rope to his genitals, pulling him into the cells where the women were kept, she said. Insects were everywhere ? in cells and on their clothes, she said, adding that inmates used prison blankets to make underwear and fashioned shoes out of cardboard and strings.
She said one woman gave birth in the prison. “The baby got stuck between her legs. Another woman tried to help her, but the guards told her it was none of her business. The baby suffocated between her legs,” she said. She said her sister and sister-in-law also gave birth while in detention.
This trial is showing the world how ashamed they should be. Ashamed for allowing this man to rule this country for 12 years in defiance of the world community while he tortured (real torture now, no panties put on the heads of these folks) and killed his people.
Previous:
The Saddam Trial, Part II
The Saddam Trial
Tariq Aziz Making A Deal
Other’s Blogging:
Mike’s America
Captain’s Quarters
Ace of Trump
Hennessy’s View
California Conservative
Scylla & Charybdis
Donkey Stomp
More in-depth reporting of the testimony today at Saddam’s trial:
BAGHDAD (Reuters) - Men and women were tortured for days and babies left to die in an interrogation facility which featured a meat grinder for human flesh, the first prosecution witness to face Saddam Hussein told the court on Monday.
After weeks of delay and legal arguments over security and the legitimacy of the court, the trial of Saddam and seven co- defendants on charges of crimes against humanity heard confusing but graphic witness evidence of torture and summary execution.
“I swear by God I walked by a room and on my left I saw a grinder with blood coming out of it and human hair underneath,” said 38-year-old Ahmed Hassan, who said he had been kept in room 63 at the Hakmiya intelligence headquarters in Baghdad.
Hassan, the first witness to face Saddam in court, said he was 15 when Saddam visited the village in July 1982 and Shi’ite militants tried to assassinate him.
Speaking technically as an individual plaintiff alongside the state, which is pressing charges of crimes against humanity, Hassan said he and his family were among hundreds of people rounded up in a security operation run by Barzan Ibrahim al-Tikriti after an attempt on Saddam’s life in the village.
Barzan, one of Saddam’s three younger half-brothers and the former head of the feared Mukhabarat intelligence service, is one of Saddam’s seven co-accused in the case relating to the killings of 148 mostly Shi’ite Muslim men from Dujail.
“Barzan was present. He had red cowboy boots and blue jeans and a sniper rifle,” Hassan, a stockily built worker with a round face and a graying beard, told the heavily fortified court in central Baghdad.
He said Saddam, from the Sunni Arab minority, asked a 15-year-old boy if he knew who he was. “He said ‘Saddam’. Then Saddam hit him in the head with an ash tray,” Hassan said.
[...]He said it was while he was climbing the stairs there that he saw the meat grinder. “No one escaped torture,” he said.
“They would put a mask on my eyes and because I was young it would fall down. I saw women being tortured,” he said.
“My brother was given electric shocks while my 77-year-old father watched,” Hassan said. “They told us, ‘why don’t you confess, you will be executed anyway’,” he said.
“One man was shot in the leg with two bullets? Some people were crippled because they had their arms and legs broken.”
He said they were held in Hakmiya for 70 days. While they were there a woman told a guard that her infant baby needed milk or he would die.
“He died and the guard threw him from the window,” Hassan told the court. “Pregnant women gave birth in the prison. Their babies died.”
But at least these prisoners were not forced to wear panties on their heads…then the Left would be crying. Throwing babies out a window, no big deal…but panties, watch out.
Havn’t we heard from some on the left that Iraq would have been better off with Saddam in power? Even Clinton said recently that Saddam was bad, but his staff were good folks:
Former president Bill Clinton praised Saddam Hussein’s lieutenants and their underlings on Tuesday, saying they were mostly “good” and “decent” people.”
“When [the U.S.] kicked out Saddam, they decided to dismantle the whole authority structure,” Clinton told an audience at American University in Dubai. “Most of the people who were part of that structure were good, decent people who were making the best out of a very bad situation,” he added.
While Clinton didn’t name, names, Saddam’s authority structure was dominated by his two murderous sons, Uday and Qusay, as well as notorious characters like Ali Hassan al-Majid, [aka Chemical Ali], Barzan al-Takriti, who ran the Iraq’s brutal intelligence service, Izzat Ibrahim al-Douri, who governed northern Iraq during chemical weapon attacks in the Kurds, and Huda Salih Mahdi Ammash [aka Mrs. Anthrax], who was a member of Saddam’s Baathist National Command.
Clinton offered praise for Saddam’s lieutenants during the same speech where he criticized the U.S. invasion of Iraq as “a big mistake.”
This would be his staff:
Ali Hasan al-Majid: member of the Revolutionary Command Council, 1988-present; Minister of Interior, 1991 (March thru November); Minister of Defense, 1991-1995.
Abid Hamid Mahmud: Presidential Secretary, 1992-present.
Izzat Ibrahim al-Duri: Vice Chairman of the Revolutionary Command Council, 1979-present.
Tariq Aziz: Deputy Prime Minister, 1979-present.
Taha Ramadan: Vice President; First Deputy Prime Minister, 1979.
Barzan Ibrahim al-Tikriti (half-brother of Saddam Hussein): presidential adviser; regime official, 1979-present.
Watban Ibrahim al-Tikriti (half-brother of Saddam Hussein): presidential adviser; regime official, 1980-present.
Qusay Hussein (Saddam Hussein’s younger son): oversees all Iraqi intelligence and security services, the Republican Guard, and the Special Republican Guard. In 2001, was named Deputy of Ba’ath Party’s Military Bureau and elected member Ba’ath Regional Command.
Uday Hussein (Saddam Hussein’s older son): editor of Babil newspaper and in control of all Iraqi media; National Assembly member; chairman of Iraq’s Olympic Committee; known for his violent and unstable behavior.
Previous:
Ever wondered what a trial of Hitler would have been like? I believe if you watch the Saddam trial you would get a feel for it.
BAGHDAD, Iraq (AP) — Saddam Hussein’s defense team staged a brief walkout Monday, the former president railed at the judge, and the first witness took the stand to testify that Saddam’s agents carried out random arrests, torture and killings in an Iraqi village as the unruly trial resumed.
Former U.S. Attorney General Ramsey Clark, who is helping represent Saddam, spoke on behalf of the deposed president, saying he needed only two minutes to present his argument.
But Chief Judge Rizgar Mohammed Amin at first said only Saddam’s chief lawyer could speak. Amin said the defense should submit its motion in writing and warned that if the defense walked out then the court would appoint replacement lawyers.
After the defense lawyers left, Saddam, shaking his right hand, told the judge: “You are imposing lawyers on us. They are imposed lawyers. The court is imposed by itself. We reject that.”
Saddam and his half brother Barazan Ibrahim then chanted “Long live Iraq, long live the Arab state.”
Ibrahim stood up and shouted: “Why don’t you just execute us and get rid of all of this!”
When the judge explained that he was ruling in accordance with the law, Saddam replied: “This is a law made by America and does not reflect Iraqi sovereignty.”
It was the third court session in the trial of Saddam and seven co-defendants - accused in the 1982 killing of more than 140 Shiites after an assassination attempt against the president in Dujail - where Saddam at times appeared to be in control of the court as much as the presiding judge.
After the lawyers spoke, the first witness to take the stand, Ahmed Hassan Mohammed, began his emotional but often rambling testimony. He said that after an assassination attempt on Saddam, security agencies took people of all ages from age 14 to over age 70. They were tortured for 70 days at the intelligence headquarters in Baghdad before being moved to Abu Ghraib prison where the abuse continued, he said.
“There were mass arrests. Women and men. Even if a child was 1-day-old they used to tell his parents, ‘Bring him with you,”‘ Mohammed said. He said he was taken to a security center where “I saw bodies of people from Dujail.”
“They were martyrs I knew,” Mohammed said, giving the name of the nine whose bodies were there.
After the walkout and a 90-minute recess to resolve the issue, the court reconvened and Amin allowed Clark and ex-Qatari Justice Minister Najib al-Nueimi to speak on the questions of the legitimacy of the tribunal and safety of the lawyers.
“Reconciliation is essential,” Clark told the court. “This trial can divide or heal. Unless it is seen as absolutely fair, and fair in fact, it will divide rather than reconcile Iraq.”
At that point, the judge reminded Clark that he was to speak only about the security guarantees for the defense lawyers - two of whom have been assassinated since the trial began Oct. 19.
Clark then said all parties were entitled to protection, and the measures offered to protect the defense and their families were “absurd.” Clark said that without such protection, the judicial system would collapse.
Al-Nueimi then spoke about the legitimacy issue, arguing that court is not independent and was in fact set up under the U.S.-led occupation rather than by a legal Iraqi government. He said the language of the statute was unchanged from that promulgated by the former top U.S. administrator in Iraq, L. Paul Bremer, and was therefore “illegitimate.”
The first witness earlier exchanged insults with Saddam’s half brother, telling him “you killed a 14-year-old boy.”
“To hell,” the half brother, Ibrahim, replied.
“You and your children go to hell,” the witness replied.
The judge then asked them to avoid such exchanges.
As the testimony continued, Saddam’s lawyers objected that someone in the visitors’ gallery was making threatening gestures and should be removed. Saddam’s half brother leapt to his feet and shouted, “These are criminals.”
The judge ordered the person removed from the visitors’ gallery and questioned.
“There was random arrests in the streets, all the forces of the (Baath) party, and Thursday became `Judgment Day’ and Dujail has become a battle front,” the witness said, sometime fighting back tears. “Shootings started and nobody could leave or enter Dujail. At night, intelligence agents arrived headed by Barazan” Ibrahim.
Ibrahim interrupted him at one point, saying: “I am a patriot and I was the head of the intelligence service of Iraq.”
Ibrahim yells “why don’t you just execute us and be done with it” and I think to myself, not a bad idea.
The AP has up a partial transcript of the trial:
Here is a partial transcript of the exchange when Chief Judge Rizgar Mohammed Amin told Saddam’s chief lawyer, Khalil al-Dulaimi, to submit Clark’s argument in writing:
Judge Amin: “We do not have enough time because the witness has arrived, (Clark) can tell us through a written letter through you (al-Dulaimi) and we will reply to it.”
Ramsey: “I need only two minutes to submit and we will leave the courtroom if you do not accept it.”
Judge Amin: “Mr. Khalil, if you are going to leave the room, it will harm your client. The court will be obliged to appoint lawyers from the defense bureau.”
Saddam: “The court is allowing the witness to speak, but it does not allow the defense lawyers to defend. Is this the justice?”
Judge Amin: “You will be heard.”
Al-Dulaimi: “We will not stop until we receive the full answer to the question we are concerned with.”
Judge Amin: “We will give you enough time, regarding the refutation of the legitimacy of this court. This court is legitimate, legal and formed according to a law issued by the National Assembly.”
Saddam: “Under the American occupation!”
Judge Amin: “No, and you are not allowed to speak.”
Saddam: “How is it legitimate while it is the Americans who formed it?”
Al-Dulaimi: “We will make presentations to you and refute the legitimacy of this court ? that was based on the unjust U.S. aggression ? verbally and then in writing.”
But I think my favorite part was this one:
Judge to Ramsey Clark - “Your time is over. Thank you so much. Now go back to your seat.”
What I find curious is that for the first time EVER, a witness was talking about Saddam’s atrocities in a court of law and the MSM doesn’t seem to enthused to cover it. They talk about the delaying tactics but not about the wood chipper. Typical.
One rat ratting out another rat:
Tariq Aziz, once Saddam Hussein’s most trusted lieutenant, has agreed to testify against the ousted dictator during his forthcoming trial for war crimes, according to his lawyer and American officials.
In return for his co-operation, Aziz, 69, Iraq’s foreign minister during the Gulf war and deputy prime minister throughout Saddam’s 24-year rule, will have the most serious charges against him dropped and be allowed to spend his dotage in exile.
The outline plea agreement, under which he will plead guilty to minor charges, was reached after more than two years of delicate negotiations during which Aziz also revealed important intelligence information. It could mean him walking free almost as soon as the trials of Saddam and his cohorts are over.
The man regarded as the Ba’athist regime’s chief mouthpiece to the outside world will not, however, be called to give evidence against his former master this week. The deposed Iraqi leader is due in court in Baghdad on Wednesday accused of murdering 143 Shias in the town of Dujail, north of the capital, after a failed assassination attempt in 1982.
Saddam, 68, who is in American custody in Baghdad, has been linked to hundreds of thousands of killings but the Dujail case is being heard first because prosecutors believe it will be simple to link him directly to acts of murder.
He will eventually be tried on further charges of crimes against humanity, for which he will be sentenced to death if found guilty. It is in these more complex cases - involving the sanctioning of mass executions - that Aziz’s evidence could prove crucial.
Badie Izzat Arief, Aziz’s lawyer, said in an interview with The Sunday Telegraph that his client had “given them facts, well known facts” during more than 300 interviews with United States officials, including, he suggested, members of the CIA and FBI.
During the interviews, Aziz was questioned repeatedly about whether Saddam had signed execution orders. “They asked him whether the executions were decided by Saddam Hussein or the court,” said Mr Arief. “He said that Saddam had the right to ratify or not. It depended on him.” His client, he confirmed, would be prepared to state “facts” in his own trial and those of other senior regime figures.
He said that Aziz, who was “tired” and suffering from high blood pressure and diabetes, was kept in a 12ft by 12ft cell and now wore a tracksuit. He had expressed a desire to move to Europe and to write an autobiography. Mr Arief expected the former Iraqi foreign minister to be sentenced to “time served” - about three years - and freed.
“He told me, ‘If I am released, please take me straight to the airport’ and, ‘When I’m free I will write a book about the whole matter’. For humanitarian reasons he should be granted a visa in Europe because he has been attacked many times by the Iraqis now ruling this country.”
Aziz, a Chaldean Catholic, changed his name from Michael Yuhanna to Tariq Aziz, which means “Venerable Path” in Arabic, at the outset of his political career. He has been viewed with suspicion by Sunni rejectionists since he surrendered to US forces following the invasion and formally identified Saddam after his capture in December 2003.
“Saddam should never have put a Christian in his government,” said Saddoun Hail al-Aani, a former Iraqi army colonel who remains loyal to the former dictator. “He made a dirty deal with the Americans because he is a crusader like them. He is a spy, a traitor and a servant of the occupiers.”
Maybe he can become a CNN correspondent.
You are currently browsing the archives for the The Saddam Trial category.
There are currently 35,689 comments.
Craig (207)
Mike's America (140)
Aye Chihuahua (110)
MataHarley (109)
Missy (74)
Fit fit (70)
doug1 (57)
Leah (56)
Rocky_B (51)
luva the scissors (50)
