Saddam Will Face Only 12 Charges at Trial

[cal04]

Saddam Hussein could face up to 500 charges at a tribunal, but he will be tried on only 12 well documented counts because prosecuting him on all would be a "waste of time," the prime minister's spokesman said Sunday.

Laith Kuba also said Saddam was likely to be tried within the next two months on a range of charges, including alleged crimes committed in Iraqi Kurdistan. "There should be no objection that a trial should take place within that time," Kuba said during a press conference. "It is the government's view that the trial of Saddam should take place as soon as possible."

No date has been set for the trial of Saddam, who has been held in a U.S.-run detention facility in Baghdad since being captured in December 2003. "The number of charges on which he will be tried are 12 and the judges are confidant that he will be convicted of these charges," Kuba said. Saddam has been accused of ordering the killing of tens of thousands of Shiites and Kurds who rose up against him in 1991 following the Gulf Warthat liberated Kuwait from Iraqi occupation.

He was arraigned July 1 in Baghdad on broad charges including killing rival politicians over 30 years, gassing Kurds in the northern town of Halabja in 1988, invading Kuwait in 1990 and suppressing the Kurdish and Shiite uprising.

http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20050605/ap_on_re_mi_ea/iraq_saddam_trial

[symbolman]

1. But he will have to attend

the trial in his underwear of course.

Nothing says inflame the muslims and create a civil war so you can divvy up the country and keep the oil like a deposed villan in his underoos..

[LostInAnomie]

2. I think we should all be prepared for the horrible legislation...

... that will be passed while this smoke screen is in the news. Keep your eyes on the prize. This is a distraction.

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

12. "The Mother of All Distractions."

To be precise.

[muchacho]

3. hmmm

I wonder if one will be conspiring with known terrorists...by that I mean the U.S.

[LynnTheDem]

4. "judges are confidant that he will be convicted of these charges"

Now this is going to be a JUST AND FAIR trial! You can tell already.

See, world? America has too spread DEMOCRACY and FREEDOM and JUSTICE in Iraq!

If there ever would have been a just & fair trial, then I wouldn't be so sure of conviction.

1. Suppressing the Kurd & Shia uprising;

-The Kurds & Shia started it; they were armed and slaughtering thousands of Iraqi citizens in the streets.

-What government WOULDN'T suppres an armed uprising of thousands of their citizens slaughtering thousands of citizens in the streets?

-What's the US doing in Iraq right now?

Hmmmm.

2. Invading Kuwait;

-That's interesting; no double-jeopardy anymore. Wonder how the UN will feel about someone they already found guilty and punished being charged again for the same crime.

-That could be very good news for us re bushCartel & Iraq invasion; and Nicaragua will LOVE to hear they can again go after the US for those 30,000 deaths America was found guilty of & ordered to pay restitution but didn't.

3. Gassing Kurds in Halabja.

There is general agreement that several hundred people died by gassing at Halabja, a Kurdish town of 30,000 or so inside Iraq near the Iranian border, five months before the end of the eight-year Iran/Iraq war.

-But there's problems with this one too, because the majority of evidence says Iraq didn't gas the Kurds to death. Iraq used mustard gas, which Iraq has always admitted to (so did Iran and they admit that too).

-The rate of deaths with mustard is 2%. There are a whole lot of chemical weapons experts to testify that there is no way mustard killed "hundreds" let alone "thousands", and certainly not in the terrrain of Halabja.

-It usually takes days to die from mustard gas, for that 2%, or to even show symptoms; the dead Kurds were shown off to reporters by Kurds within hours. It wasn't mustard gas that killed them.

-There are doctors who were sent by the UN and the Red Cross to examine and verify Kurds who said they fled to Turkey after being gassed; the doctors said the symptoms appeared to be "powerful, non-lethal tear gas".

-All those US Marine Corps, US Army War College, DIA, Pentagon, State Dept, CIA, etc reports, and the several very highly qualified experts that concluded Iran was more likely the culprit, not Iraq, aren't going to be much help for the prosecutor.

-Why would the Iraqis have used poison gas on a town smack in the path of the direction they were heading?

-Iraq was fighting a war against Iran, with the goal of bringing Iran to its knees. So why didn't Iraq use chemical weapons on the Iranian troops? Iran never reported any troops being gassed by Iraqi forces.

Why, in the middle of a war Iraq was in very big danger of losing, would Iraqi forces have gassed a few Kurds in Halabja, and not the Iranian forces?

4. Killing rival politicians

-Like the assassination attempts bush made on the president of Iraq?

-Like the assassination attempts the Kurds made, some of which were successful, against Iraq government officials?

Doesn't let Hussein off the hook, which is a good thing...but it sure will add a few people to the hook and demonstrate the hypocrisy.

[aion]

5. "No, no!" said the Queen. "Sentence first - verdict afterwards."

"No, no!" said the Queen. "Sentence first - verdict afterwards."
- Lewis Carrol, Alice in Wonderland

[MasonJar]

8. Sounds like a Bushista plan.

[Solly Mack]

6. He's being charged with invading Kuwait? But Bush will get a pass

for invading Iraq?

What Saddam did (Kuwait invasion) was no more illegal than what Bush did.

[aion]

7. Saddam had a claim on Kuwait

Especially when you consider:

1) That he got the nod from the USA to go ahead with his attack.

2) Kuwait was once a part of Iraq -- broken off by the British

3) Kuwait was/is not a democracy


Hussein certainly could argue that he was attempting to do the same sort of thing that Lincoln did -- making his country whole again. Why should he be less believable than Bush?

And while the elections for Hussein were likely dishonest, can one really suggest that dishonest elections are worse than a monarchy?

Ex post facto law is about the only way they can try this guy in Iraq. Of course the judges aren't exactly randomly chosen, are they...

[Solly Mack]

13. Yeah, I thought about the history of Iraq and Kuwait

when I first read the article...that's why the charge of the invasion of Kuwait brought me a "huh?" moment.

too many parallels to not catch the whiff of hypocrisy.

It will be a miscarriage of justice because those often spouted words of the right, "rule of law", will not be followed. I see no due process involved and I believe in due process. To go after Saddam with anything less than true justice is a mockery of everything America is supposed to be about. And I do include the illegal invasion by Bush in that...(making this whole thing a sham of justice)

Not that I expected anything different from Bush.

....but I do believe in the law....not "laws"....but the law :)

[oblivious]

10. It would be interesting to establish a recent precedent wouldn't it.

All the top government people of a country involved in an illegal invasion of another country hanged for breaking international law.

[old blue]

11. I guess there really weren't that many charges left they eliminated

all the ones that Bush could be tried for as well.

[daleo]

9. I suspect they have selected these 12 on the basis of U.S. involvment

These probably relate to incidents that have the least direct involvement (at least in terms of documentary evidence or surviving witnesses) by the Reagan or Bush administrations, and they were carefully selected for that very reason. Even at that, I don't doubt Reagan and Bush aren't far behind the scenes.

[jazzjunkysue]

14. (Defence attorney): "Tell us, Mr. Hussein, where you got the weapons? Wal

lmart?" The french?

How dare you insinuate that George Bush sold you those weapons!

[Jack Rabbit]

15. Guardian Utd (Tuesday): Saddam trial to open with village massacre

From the Guardian Unlimited (UK)
Dated Tuesday June 7

Saddam trial to open with village massacre
By Rory Carroll in Baghdad

A little-known massacre at a village where residents tried to assassinate Saddam Hussein in 1982 will be the focus of the first case in the trial of the former Iraqi president, it emerged yesterday.

Dozens of people were killed in reprisal after the president's convoy was fired on as it drove through Dujail, a predominantly Shia farming village 40 miles north of Baghdad.

Though the incident happened almost 25 years ago, the availability of documents and witnesses willing to testify has emboldened prosecutors to make it the opening case in the trial.

The special tribunal set up to try Saddam, 68, and his top aides will start hearings within two months, and Dujail will be the first of up to 14 cases against the former dictator, a government spokesman said yesterday.

Read more.

[Jacobin]

16. In other news, Pentagon denies roundup of kangaroos in Australia

connected to preparations of court for trial.