It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

NEWS: Saddam Refuses To Attend Trial

page: 1
7

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 7 2005 @ 07:21 AM
link   
Former Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein is refusing to attend his trial over the killing of 148 Shias in 1982. He is refusing to attend in protest of the conditions in which he is being held and how the trial against him is being conducted by the court.
 



news.bbc.co.uk

The resumption of the trial was delayed as the deposed Iraqi leader refused to be present in court for Wednesday's session.

Negotiations were under way on how the trial can proceed, with the defence team holding talks with the chief judge.

Under Iraqi law the trial can continue without the defendant present in the courtroom.

Arrangements may be made for the former president to watch the trial on a closed circuit TV link, with the right to intervene at certain points, possibly via a microphone, BBC foreign editor John Simpson says.

However, our correspondent, one of the few international journalists attending the trial, says he finds it unlikely that Saddam Hussein would eschew the media attention he receives at each court appearance in favour of sitting in the wings.

Until now, many observers have felt that Saddam has used his appearances in court to great effect, calling on his followers to continue their fight against the American presence in Iraq and condemning the 2003 invasion again and again.




Please visit the link provided for the complete story.


Who on Earth does this man think he is???
And why are they even considering letting him watch the trial from a TV?

Saddam is now a prisoner, and should be treat like any other prisoner would.

If a British man refused to turn up to a murder trial he would be forced to go, why will they not with Saddam?
If a British man told the judge to 'Go To Hell' he would be severly reprimanded, why is Saddam not?

He is making a joke of the Iraqi justice system.
The quicker he can be found guilty and either sentenced to death or imprisoned for a long time, the better it will be for the Iraqi people!




posted on Dec, 7 2005 @ 08:02 AM
link   
He does make some valid points though. He is getting very "dodgy" treatment from the Iraqi Authorities (perhaps understandably). The defence team are being harrassed, threatened and killed for starters.

This trial should have been held at the Hague, like every other. The only reason it is held in Iraq is that they want the death penalty as a political statement.

The comments about "UK suspects" and there treatment if they were in his place is mute. Different laws, different processes. Tis the way it is.

What Saddam should do is use this time in the spotlight to highlight all the western movers and shakers who supported, funded, armed and assisted him in his madness.

That would be worth all the effort of the invasion alone.



posted on Dec, 7 2005 @ 08:07 AM
link   

Who on Earth does this man think he is???

God. Simply put ... God.

And as far as his claim of not getting fair treatment from the Iraqis -
That's not true. He's getting VERY GOOD treatment. Far better
than he ever gave the tens of thousands of innocent people
he had tortured. If his team is getting death threats, that's
also his own fault. Considering the vast number of enemies
he has made ... death threats are going to happen no matter
where he is.

If he has dirty underwear that doesn't count as torture or
being treated unfairly. That's his complaint.

This guy is a wimp. He thinks he's God ... and yet he's a wimp.

He's just dragging his feet because he is afraid of death.
He sent soooo many people to their deaths and he knows
they are all waiting for him 'on the other side'.

[edit on 12/7/2005 by FlyersFan]



posted on Dec, 7 2005 @ 08:32 AM
link   


He's just dragging his feet because he is afraid of death.
He sent soooo many people to their deaths and he knows
they are all waiting for him 'on the other side'.


if you believe in that sort of thing, I hope they're not.

I hope, if there is an afterlife, that he is going to a far worse place than where the innocents are.

I hope my first post doesn't set people off on the wrong track.

Yes, he dealt out very nasty poo in his time, but should we not (and the Iraqi's) prove themselves better by having a fair, just and incontrovertable trial, rather than having it mired in all this horribleness (oooh, there's some big words
).

As I said, he should have gone to the Haig and has a war crimes trial like the rest of them. There, he would have no complaints about anything and he would receive a fair trial without doubt, thereby closing this sorry chapter in Iraqi history.

Also, on the other hand, I hope he does "out" all the western interests that propped him up and supported him so he could kill all those people. Might wake a few people up......



posted on Dec, 7 2005 @ 08:36 AM
link   
Stumason said -


if you believe in that sort of thing, I hope they're not.
I hope, if there is an afterlife, that he is going to a far worse
place than where the innocents are.


Stumason - Oh sure. I am sure they won't be going to the same place.
When Saddam dies I believe he will be going to his judgement. When
he is there, I do believe his victims will all be standing there to watch
him be judged and thrown into the everlasting fires. They will be there.
He can't escape them. He will have to face them all ... and he will
be powerless to escape truth. Honestly, THAT is what he should fear.
Not dirty underwear ... but what happens after he is put to death.


[edit on 12/7/2005 by FlyersFan]



posted on Dec, 7 2005 @ 10:24 AM
link   
it would appear that Saddam is trying the same tactics as Slobodan Milosevic did.

At first, Milosevic appeared determined to sabotage his trial. He too called the United Nations war crimes tribunal unlawful and his indictment "phony" and he refused to enter a plea.

I believe Saddam also has refused to enter a pea, but I am not positive.

Seems like birds of a feather flock together



posted on Dec, 7 2005 @ 10:50 AM
link   

Originally posted by MickeyDee


If a British man refused to turn up to a murder trial he would be forced to go, why will they not with Saddam?
If a British man told the judge to 'Go To Hell' he would be severly reprimanded, why is Saddam not?


the way I think of this is we our implementing our (American) way.
If a politician gets in a scandal and rips the American tax payers off 2.2 mil.
what happens to him? sometimes not all the time they pay the money back and they lose there job. if i rip off the co. that i work for 250,000$ i pay that back plus more, plus goto jail. kinda works the same way.



posted on Dec, 7 2005 @ 07:31 PM
link   
He's complaining about his current conditions???
I say they shove a broom stick up his butt, then let him complain all he wants.
The arrogance of this man, mass murder found hideing in a hole in the ground, and he still thinks he's god???

The Iraqies are truely good people to even put on this show trial.
Everyone already knows he will be condemned to death, but for the sake of democracy they put on a trial to set the pace for the future of the country, a free iraq, where everyone is treated fairly.



posted on Dec, 7 2005 @ 08:35 PM
link   
The trial is a joke, they might aswell just kill him because all of this is just a circus for the media until they get to that point.

The trail, as stumason said, should of been at the Hague and not in Iraq where it can attract all the problems it has faced.

The idea of putting Saddam on trial and not just killing him was to go through the years he was in power and find out why, how and who else was involved. This includes the western nations which supported him during those years.

That's clearly not the purpose of this trial thou, the purpose of this is to put the last 20 years of Iraq squarly on Saddams shoulders alone to wipe out the history that exists when he's put to death.

The trial is monitored by the US and has a 30-minute delay so they can censor anything that comes through, there's your first clue as to why an international court that deals with these types of things should of been used and why this trial is nothing more than a show for the media.

Saddam knows this, he's not a stupid person but to keep the legend alive, he can't have the chance to a fair trial that devulges the truth of his collaborations over the years.

If we rejoice at Saddam being killed when no real information about him and his actions comes forward that exposes why he was who he was and how he was able to keep that position for so long, then we've achieved absolutely nothing but making history tainted with lies and legend.



posted on Dec, 7 2005 @ 09:25 PM
link   
Saddam will be tried whether he attends court or not. He's a megalomaniacal tyrant. What kind of behavior does one expect. There will be plenty of evidence presented to convict him. He just doesn't want to hear it. He knows he's toast.



posted on Dec, 7 2005 @ 09:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by TheShroudOfMemphis
The trial is a joke, they might aswell just kill him because all of this is just a circus for the media until they get to that point.


I am almost sure that if you had been alive when the Nuremberg trials were going on, you would have thought that those trials were a joke.
Simply ask Goering, Doenitz, Frank, Frick, Hess, Jodl, etc, etc. if they thought the Nuremberg Trails were a joke. I am sure that the rope that many were hung with thought it was all a joke....






seekerof



posted on Dec, 7 2005 @ 09:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by stumason
This trial should have been held at the Hague, like every other. The only reason it is held in Iraq is that they want the death penalty as a political statement.


The post-WWII trials held in Germany were among the most effective war crimes trials ever held.

The Hague has completely lost control of the Court and allowed Milosevic to turn his trial into a complete circus.

I have much more faith in an in-country trial than I do in the Hague, what is so logical about turning an Iraqi over to the Netherlands for trial when he can be tried in the locale of his crimes?



posted on Dec, 7 2005 @ 09:44 PM
link   
I am enjoying the fact that he is making a World-Wide fool of himself.
I will enjoy this even more, when he recieves his last meal:
Humble Pie



posted on Dec, 7 2005 @ 11:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by Seekerof

Originally posted by TheShroudOfMemphis
The trial is a joke, they might aswell just kill him because all of this is just a circus for the media until they get to that point.


I am almost sure that if you had been alive when the Nuremberg trials were going on, you would have thought that those trials were a joke.
Simply ask Goering, Doenitz, Frank, Frick, Hess, Jodl, etc, etc. if they thought the Nuremberg Trails were a joke. I am sure that the rope that many were hung with thought it was all a joke....

seekerof




Comparing this trail to the Nuremberg trials is an even bigger joke.
You can rest easily at night knowing that Saddam will be dead, i hope it makes you personally warm and fuzzy inside but having a sham of a trial that bleeds no truth to Saddams crimes is a complete waste of time.

This trial isn't about making Saddam pay with his life for the things he did, it's about sifting through all the crap to find out HOW and WHY he was able to do the things he did. Until there's a decent court that can host a proper trial, Saddams connections and sponsers are going to get away with their crimes also.

So, yeah, we'll all do our little munchkin dance and sing the "witch is dead" when Saddam is put to death but the history books and all the people and organisations that are just as guilty as Saddam will go untouched as usual and nothing will change.

Maybe when the US install Saddam version 2.0 and then in 20 years when it's time to dismount him, they'll put on a real trial for that guy?





[edit on 7-12-2005 by TheShroudOfMemphis]



posted on Dec, 8 2005 @ 01:42 AM
link   

TheShroudOfMemphis

… That's clearly not the purpose of this trial thou, the purpose of this is to put the last 20 years of Iraq squarly on Saddams shoulders alone to wipe out the history that exists when he's put to death …

… The trial is monitored by the US and has a 30-minute delay so they can censor anything that comes through, there's your first clue as to why an international court that deals with these types of things should of been used and why this trial is nothing more than a show for the media ….

… If we rejoice at Saddam being killed when no real information about him and his actions comes forward that exposes why he was who he was and how he was able to keep that position for so long, then we've achieved absolutely nothing but making history tainted with lies and legend.


IMHO, TheShroudOfMemphis has shown the clearest , most objective view of all so far. In a “fair” and “impartial” trial, I doubt anyone here would qualify to serve on the jury. I really doubt that a “fair” and “impartial” trial is even possible in this case. You see, Leaders of State simply don’t play by the same rulebook as the rest of us. That’s just a fact of life. If they did, George Dubya and his gang of thugs, as well as most of the Presidents who came before him, would be on trial right now facing the same fate as Saddam.

Unlike the common citizenry, Leaders of State are given a license to kill; kind of like 007 in the movies. It goes with the territory. They are allowed to commit the wholesale slaughter of scores of innocent people as long as “they” deem it necessary to maintain order in the State, or they “justify” it under a similar umbrella.

It’s odd to me how the 140 murders Saddam is now being tried for as “Crimes Against Humanity” occurred prior to the time we (the US) gave him our full support and backing, including WMD’s and money to further his agenda. I even have a picture of Donald Rumsfeld shaking Saddam’s hand and grinning from ear to ear. It’s funny how, and why, things change over time. The facts of the matter are the same; only our perception of it has changed.

Our shallow and ever changing perception of past events permits us to, on the one hand, condone and support the dispensing of vigilante justice in the case of 140 murders, while on the other, condone and support the mass murder of 100,000+ innocent Iraqi’s (we chalk it up to casualties of war) as the result of an illegal occupation and aggression against a sovereign nation. What’s wrong with this picture?

Don’t get me wrong, I don’t condone what Saddam Hussein has done if, in fact, he has done what the US media and US government has claimed, and if there was no “justification” for it that, perhaps, we may not have been made aware of. By the same token, I also do not condone what George Dubya & Co. has done regarding the immoral occupation of Iraq and the slaughter of countless innocent civilian men, women and children. And the fact that the occupation was orchestrated and “justified” through a series of deliberate lies and deceptions makes it all the worse.

From a totally legal standpoint, despite any crimes allegedly committed, Saddam Hussein may have a legitimate argument in that he is being judged by an illegal court, formed as the result of an illegal occupation by a foreign aggressor.

IMHO, the murder of innocent people is always a crime, and most of our countries are equally guilty as sin. From time to time a head is taken and put on display to demonstrate to the masses that “justice is being served”, when in fact it amounts to nothing more than a mere token. Meanwhile, the guiltiest of the guilty go free to continue their reign of terror, as countless innocent people continue to die each day at their hands.

In closing, and IMHO, Iraq was better off before we meddled in their affairs. I have to agree with Don Imos, on the Imos in the Morning radio/TV show. His opinion is that we should turn Saddam lose, tell him, “Sorry about the kids”, and give him his country back, since he knows how to run it, and we obviously don’t …



[edit on 12/8/2005 by netbound]

[edit on 12/8/2005 by netbound]



posted on Dec, 8 2005 @ 07:24 AM
link   
The purpose of this trial is to obtain a conviction and put Saddam to death before he has a chance to implicate all of his partners in crime.

That is why he is being charged with this particular crime first.

Never forget that he was trained by the CIA along with Allawi and Chalabi and can be correctly categorised as a rogue agent (although Chalabi now also fits that description due to his recent Iranian allegiances).

I do not accept that he has the choice of not attending the trial. I find it much more likely that TPTB do not want him there shooting his mouth off before they have the chance to silence him permanently.

Apart from the above, the US was never going to allow the trial to take place in an international court since the US does not accept international law when it does not suit their interests. A trial of Saddam in an international court runs the risk of further arrests and charges being laid against his accomplices in that same international court as a result of evidence revealed during the case. It would be too publicly hypocritical to accept a conviction of Saddam on the one hand from the Hague and then refuse to hand over subsequent criminals to the same court.

This all assumes of course that the man is question is in fact the real Saddam..........something I'm not entirely convinced of..........

[edit on 8-12-2005 by News Junkie]



posted on Dec, 8 2005 @ 07:55 AM
link   
he's a criminal, what happens when criminals refuse to go trial? do they normally get treated like kings? No, so why the hell is this criminal given what he wants?

Jeez man its not rocket science. put him in a bloody cell n get it over with



posted on Dec, 8 2005 @ 07:58 AM
link   
I agree - this Trial is a Joke.

A Stunt, pulled out to Cover up the Real MESS in Iraq, and to make it look like, the "Justice and Democracy" are Working. But the are not. Saddam's Lawyers were killed and threatened. That is not Justice - that is a petty crime, that belongs to those "Terrorists". And the only two groups, capable of doing that are the majority Sunni and Kurds, which Saddam abused in his days of Power. So the US decided to leave Saddam in their Hands and leave him to "Justice"? Or was it REVENGE? That is a MAJOR Difference. That is like, Slobodan Miloshevic would be Trialed in Sarajevo, Bosnia, where his Troops slaughtered Thousands on Innocent Civilans. But he is not - because frankly, I do not think he would be alive today. Why isn't this Trial being held in Haag - where all the other War Criminals should be? There would be no problems with Safety and a little bit LESS Biased Judge then a Kurd would also be "Nice".

It's a Stage Play - a Farse, a Theatre, performed for the Media, so that the People of the World would see, how Democracy "WORKS" in Iraq.

And I think that's not Saddam anyway...



posted on Dec, 8 2005 @ 09:19 AM
link   
Whatever, this trial is a total farce.

Without SOME kind of international backing, the court really has little relevance.

He is being tried by the United States and Britain, when in fact they should have him at the Hague or try him within the ICC (International Criminal Court).

But, the US didn't sign on to the ICC so they can't participate.

And it's clearly a joke. 20 minute time delay? What the heck is that about? I have never heard of that before.

It's because the US and the UK want to have control over the reporting. Time delay and EDITING are there to ensure that if Saddam or one of his attorneys brings up something pointing to US/UK complicity in his war crimes, the US and British media can delete it.

Because they ARE both complicit in many of Saddam's crimes. Because they sold him the weapons or because they continued to support his government even when they knew what he was doing.



posted on Dec, 8 2005 @ 04:28 PM
link   
Things arent always as they appear.

I do recall hearing a while back that Saddams sons had plotted on killing him because he went soft. Now you have to think with the agreements made with the UN he was immune from past war crims unless he broke the cease fire.


I nneither support him nor do I hate him at this point. All I can say is this isnt a fair trial and hes technically still the president of Iraq.




top topics



 
7

log in

join