It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.


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


Saddam Husseins Trial

page: 2
<< 1   >>

log in


posted on Jul, 1 2004 @ 06:42 PM
Unbelievable, we all know that Sadam is guilty we have been feed on his evilness for the last 3 years, we went into war because his evilness was so horrible that we needed to liberate a country from his evil hand.

Now he is in trial, how convenient, for this administration, only 4 months away from elections, we are going again to be reminded of this evil doer and we are going to see his face too.

I see this entire trial circus as an attempt of this administration to gain some sympathy toward the elections.

Wake up America we are been used.

posted on Jul, 2 2004 @ 07:18 AM
Anybody know of a copy of the entire 3 minute court procedings floating around anywere?


posted on Jul, 2 2004 @ 08:01 AM
I find myself unable to come to any other conclusion than that Saddam Husseins trail is just a showcase designed for American purposes.

I fail to see how he can be subjected to a fair trial in the present location and surrounding circumstances.

I am not shouting for the release of this murderous despot, neither though I am singing the praises of George Bush.

The US has decided to stage this trial now despite being advised that for various reasons the trial would be best left to a later date, one being that an elected Iraqi government would be better placed legally to instigate any such action.

Why would this be? We are being presented here with the US taking a moral standpoint, just as was claimed after no WMD's were found in Iraq - 'surely everyone can see that this dictator deserved be toppled'. A justification that could not morally be argued against, but it seems this standpoint is only envoked when the legality of certain actions are brought into question.

It may be worth noting when trying to refute any such accusation, that Guantanamo Bay detainees have still not had access to the legal representation afforded Saddam in such a short timescale. Why is that? Here again the US is claiming the moral high ground, not a difficult position to take against such a man, yet the swiftness with which this trial is proceeding could be taken as suggesting there is an ulterior motive - many mentioning in the same breath the next US elections.

An assertation repeated on the BBC News website:

"The timing of it all meant the pictures aired on American breakfast television, and that spread suspicions here that it was really all about helping US President George W Bush in the opinion polls. So did the fact that the only reporters in court were from American organisations.

Arab media outlets have been united in their call for the trial of Saddam Hussein and his aides to be carried out according to the strictest legal procedures.Several newspaper editorials have warned against any indication that the trial is motivated by vengeance."

This trial HAS to be seen as fair and just by the Arab states themselves. Otherwise this man may be seen as a martyr by extremists, surely then if this can be seen by others the US must recognise such a fact. I do not doubt that it does, I am in agreement that this trial has only been brought so hastily for the benefit of George Bush political career.


'The only journalist working for an Iraqi publication, Sadiq Rahman of the newspaper Azzaman, was ordered out of the courtroom by the judge 10 minutes before the hearing began.

"Unfortunately, they are already being unfair to Iraqi journalists," Rahman said afterward, noting that U.S. television reporters were allowed inside in addition to the pool.'

Why take such actions as this? It is obvious that they can, and will, be easily interpreted and used as propangada by anyone who wishes to do so, therefore why present such ammunition? Could it be because the US is not at all interested in how it's justice is percieved abroad? Because, as many have suggested, this is merely a show trial with the desired effect of getting the US president another term in office, and so the only opinion that matters to the US is that of its own electorate? I believe so.

There have been made suggestions that a Nuremberg style prosecution be set up, with the Judges being weighted toward the Arab states against which Saddam Hussein acted. This is one course of action that I feel would lead to easier acceptance by the Arab world of any sentence, and thus benefit the western world through the view of many Arabs.

Amongst those advocating such a trial is Stephen Jakobi, the director of Fair Trials Abroad, who has himself said the Iraqis are ill-prepared to hold a war crimes trial on the scale now being proposed.

In a recent TV interview I with him, he then went on to state that he believed that such a trial would never be reality because of the organisation and agreement required to bring such an action. Again though, if the West is to gain itself any much needed good publicity in the Arab world I believe such an action is a necessity.

I believe that such a man should be brought to justice. I believe that the cimes he has commited are of such magnitude that they should be rightfully classed as crimes against humanity itself.

I therefore also believe that it is essential the circumstances of his trial should be above reproach, that no-one be able to question the sentencing he recieves.

A far cry from the trial as it stands - perceived by many as a hastily convened publicity stunt.


posted on Jul, 2 2004 @ 08:21 AM

you are the only one in this forum that has brought up the circurs of Sadam trial by this administration brilliantly, hurra!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!For you.
You most be in the legal busisness.

posted on Jul, 2 2004 @ 06:15 PM

Originally posted by ThePrankMonkey
yeah well he had his day in court, still claiming to be the "president" of Iraq, trying to justify invading kuwait (turning women into prostitutes constitutes a declaration of war and invasion? jeez and some people thought bush's lies about WMD was bad??? talk about a bull# exuse, at least bush had a better cover story.)

They had Joe Wilson on Hardball just now and he says that during negotiations between Iraq and Kuwait prior to the invasion of Kuwait, Saddam was explaining to them that Iraq needed money.

The official from Kuwait responded 'If Iraq needs money, they should get it the way they have done for years, by putting their women back on the streets'.

Pretty strong statement to make, even if you don't like the man.

posted on Jul, 2 2004 @ 06:39 PM
This is my first post so please bear with me. I've been doing research into the iraqi/iranian war. Commonly known as the 10 year war. The Reagan administration was giving weapons to both sides through israeli and saudi channels. We gave Saddam intel and also asked him to fly more sorties into iran. Meanwhile the kurdish people who lived on the northern boarder of iraq we're being supported by Iran. That is the main reason why Saddam attacked the Kurds. The Kurds were in the middle and paid the price. Now we are charging Saddam with war crimes that we funded!

[edit on 2-7-2004 by SoaringFalcon]

posted on Jul, 2 2004 @ 06:52 PM
Welcome SF to Above top Secret

posted on Jul, 2 2004 @ 07:23 PM
Lets not be under any false illusions here. This trial will take years. All you have to do is look at the EX serbian leader who is currently undergoing trial for genicide and the likes.

Saddam has already started saying the same old rubbish that milosovic has been quoted as saying. You know the stuff about how this is not a real court, and how he dosnt recognise the courts juristictions blah blah blah.

If you ask me he is being used to quell the iraqi peoples thoughts. and untill such time that the iraqi people are sick to the back teeth of the saddam trial, he will then be taken out the back door and more than likley be granted asylm in the UK. Because theyll take anyone these days. you only have to see how they paid abull hansa job seekers allowance for a year or two even though he was slagging the country off.

It will be a case of keep your enemies closer than your friends. but dont make a martyr out of him. Well just sentence one of the other eleven guys to death instead because neither the iraqi's or us westerns give a hoot about them.

Mind you saying that i dont give a **** about saddam or milosovic either.
anyone agree with my rantings?


posted on Jul, 2 2004 @ 08:29 PM

Originally posted by marg6043
I see this entire trial circus as an attempt of this administration to gain some sympathy toward the elections.
Wake up America we are been used.

You are only being used if you allow yourself to be used. You are responsible only for yourself.

I hope that everyone that is so worried that the trial publicity could have some positive effect for Bush in the upcoming electon, remember that Bush has to endure tons of negative publicity every day. Remember Abu Ghraib? Or going back even earlier, there are those who still cry foul about the last election.

Wake up. This is politics. To quote the late colonel, "Love don't live here". (except, marg, we all love YOU

posted on Jul, 2 2004 @ 09:48 PM
They need to make sure this trial winds up fast. But they are saying it won't even START till 2005. That's as bad as over here! Whoever is in charge of this travesty should have been smart enough not to let the lunatic talk! Now all the Iraqis feel if he talked to the "judge" that way that he may get off. They need to wrap it up within 30 days and then give him his just dessert. But I am still waiting to see that terrific French team of lawyers that his wife got for him. HA!HA!

posted on Jul, 3 2004 @ 12:03 AM

Wake up. This is politics. To quote the late colonel, "Love don't live here". (except, marg, we all love YOU)

Are you being sarcastic or you truly mean that. I am so happy I can dance all night.

posted on Jul, 3 2004 @ 12:22 AM
SoaringFalcon, you haven't done a very good job at studying the Iran-Iraq war.

Iraq and Iran were helped just as much by the Soviet Union as by the US. Correction, much more.

The US mainly supplied intel only, as well as a few air-craft and when the Iranians really started to win, positioned Naval vessles in the Gulf to prevent an over-running of Iraq.

The Soviets on the other hand, fully equipped both sides, that is why both nations even today use AK-47s, T-72s, and Migs.

All that you can say about the US's involvement with that war, is that Iraq and Iran got caught in the middle of the Cold War. They became pawns of a balance of power that neither the Soviet Union or the USA wanted to go to the other side.

posted on Jul, 3 2004 @ 12:32 AM
Put on your dancin' shoes and I'll turn up the jukebox! And tell daddy not to wait up for you.


posted on Jul, 3 2004 @ 11:53 AM
Nukz - "Anybody know of a copy of the entire 3 minute court procedings floating around anywere?"

Hey Nukz - here is the most in depth transcript I have been able to find so far, (please excuse the source

posted on Jul, 3 2004 @ 12:44 PM
smart guy saddam for not signing anything until his lawyers have read it.
*remind myself-not to ever get pressured into signing anything

couple of off-the-mike conversations, wonder what all that was calling? profanities?


posted on Jul, 4 2004 @ 06:13 AM
As this case is delved into deeper it is obvious all kinds of muckraking will occur and evidence surface.

A trial that many have suggested the timing of which was purposefully chosen to increase the chances for another term in office for President George Bush, could have a more interesting outcome than many have thought - perhaps even for the President himself.

Undoubtedly as this trial proceeds more secrets will out, after all, what has Saddam to lose? It is surprising though that even at such an early stage such an explosive story rear it's head.

Saddam Could Call CIA in His Defence

"Evidence offered by a top CIA man could confirm the testimony given by Saddam Hussein at the opening of his trial in Baghdad Thursday that he knew of the Halabja massacre only from the newspapers."

"A report prepared by the top CIA official handling the matter says Saddam Hussein was not responsible for the massacre, and indicates that it was the work of Iranians."

The CIA officer in question is Stephen C. Pelletiere, the CIA's "senior political analyst on Iraq during the Iran-Iraq war." and so surely cannot be dismissed as one accused of hating America.

His original article entitled "A War Crime or an Act of War?" is available here:

and includes statements such as, "That study asserted that it was Iranian gas that killed the Kurds, not Iraqi gas."

I would like to include another quote of his and state that in all posts I have made/may make relating to this subject I am especially in agreement with the first two sentences below:

"I am not trying to rehabilitate the character of Saddam Hussein. He has much to answer for in the area of human rights abuses. But accusing him of gassing his own people at Halabja as an act of genocide is not correct, because as far as the information we have goes, all of the cases where gas was used involved battles. These were tragedies of war. There may be justifications for invading Iraq, but Halabja is not one of them."

So if not recognisable as justification of war then the same facts must preclude Saddam from prosecution based on such charges.

I sincerely hope that not all charges brought against this man, in the stampede for breakfast time election winning news, are as flimsy. If this man escapes justice due to the desperation of another to remain in office as President of the United States of America it will be a great crime indeed.


new topics

top topics

<< 1   >>

log in