Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: Skilless on December 05, 2005, 12:05:58 PM
-
The way this trial is being allowed to be conducted, it will never be taken seriously. Why do they allow Saddam to control the courtroom? This judge either needs to grow a set or they need to find someone with a set. Maybe the idea of having the trial somewhere else is not such a bad idea.
http://news.yahoo.com/fc/world/iraq
By HAMZA HENDAWI, Associated Press Writer
41 minutes ago
BAGHDAD, Iraq - Saddam Hussein told the judge at his trial Monday that "I am not afraid of execution" during an unruly court session in which the first witness took the stand and testified that the former president's agents carried out random arrests, torture and killings.
ADVERTISEMENT
The outburst was one of several by Saddam or his co-defendants at the trial that also saw a brief walkout by his defense lawyers.
At one point, Saddam appeared to threaten the judge, saying: "When the revolution of the heroic Iraq arrives, you will be held accountable."
Chief Judge Rizgar Mohammed Amin replied: "This is an insult to the court. We are searching for the truth."
Earlier, however, Saddam told the court he understood the pressures upon the judges and defended his actions. He and his seven co-defendants could be executed if convicted on the charges stemming from the deaths of more than 140 *****es in 1982.
Before the trial adjourned until Tuesday, Saddam repeatedly interrupted testimony and appeared to try to rally Iraqis against the U.S. occupation.
"This game must not continue, if you want Saddam Hussein's neck, you can have it!" Saddam said. "I have exercised my constitutional prerogatives after I had been the target of an armed attack.
"I am not afraid of execution," said Saddam, who then addressed the judge, saying, "I realize there is pressure on you and I regret that I have to confront one of my sons. But I'm not doing it for myself. I'm doing it for Iraq. I'm not defending myself. But I am defending you."
When the first witness Ahmed Hassan Mohammed spoke, Saddam told him: "Do not interrupt me, son."
"If it's ever established that Saddam Hussein laid a hand on any Iraqi, then everything that witness said is correct," he said.
He also told the court that he "would like (the witness) to be examined by an independent medical institution."
Amin had a difficult time keeping order during several clashes between the witnesses and the accused, with Saddam and his co-defendant and half brother, Barazan Ibrahim, gesturing and shouting together. In one instance, Saddam pointed to the sky with his right hand while he held Islam's holy book, the Quran, in his left.
"Everyone must remain calm and be civil," he said repeatedly.
At one point, Saddam and Ibrahim became so angry while Saddam sparred verbally with the judge and a second witness, Jawad Abdul-Azziz Jawad, that guards tried to calm them. Ibrahim smacked them on the hands with a notebook.
Saddam himself became so angry that he threw some papers he was holding, and they eventually landed on the floor.
Earlier, former U.S. Attorney General Ramsey Clark, who is helping represent Saddam, sought to address the court, touching off an argument that led to the walkout by the defense team.
Amin at first said only Saddam's chief lawyer, Khalil al-Dulaimi, 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 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 killings 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, 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 either divide or heal. And unless it is seen as absolutely fair, and as absolutely fair in fact, it will irreconcilably divide the people of 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. Ibrahim leapt to his feet, spat in the direction of the gallery, and shouted, "These are criminals."
The judge ordered the person removed from the 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."
At the start of Monday's session, Saddam walked into the court with a smile, carrying a copy of the Quran and greeted everyone there.
Most of the defendants and several of the defense lawyers, including Clark, al-Dulaimi and al-Nueimi, stood up out of respect when Saddam walked in.
-
"This game must not continue, if you want Saddam Hussein's neck, you can have it!" Saddam said
Sort of spooky from a psychological point of view in how he speaks of himself from the perspective of a 3rd party.
-
Originally posted by Ripsnort
Sort of spooky from a psychological point of view in how he speaks of himself from the perspective of a 3rd party.
I think we have a breakthrough! Wofat is Saddam!
-
Just another view of Goering at Nuremburg... they better reign in the out of turn outbursts before the process gets even more laughable.
-
The pragmatic side of me wishes that one of the soldiers that captured Sadam had simply tossed a grenade down his rabbit hole. Then again, if Sadam gave a crap about Iraq he would have blown his own brains out.
-
Originally posted by Thrawn
The pragmatic side of me wishes that one of the soldiers that captured Sadam had simply tossed a grenade down his rabbit hole. Then again, if Sadam gave a crap about Iraq he would have blown his own brains out.
You don't understnad. He still thinks that he'll be allowed to speak, while so-called "justice" is 100% sure they'll not let anything that will doubt official reasons for aggression get out of court room.
I see all this stories as a planned attempt to make him look like a clown. They don't need him to be taken seriously.
Just try to remember, did _anything_ about Miloshevich's trial get into Western press? His speaches were availible in Russian, he have beaten the so-called "justice" completely.
-
do you really think Saddam is running the court? I'm no fan of the guy but it sure doesn't look like he's getting much of a fair trial.
did you read why the defense team walked out? the judge had refused to let the defense speak on questions of the legitimacy of the trial and the safety of the defense team (2 had already been assassinated).
if you are charged with defending someones life in a court of law and you feel he's not getting a fair trial, the judge won't even let you address the issues, if you do too well of a job you will likely be killed(as you other 2 colleges had been) what would you do?
just do a half-assed job of defense? make your defense effort as much a joke as you feel the trial is?
or do you just update your will and do your best until they kill you, knowing it won't likely matter anyway.
or do you protest by leaving, making some public noise so at least your complaints will be heard on some level.
I'd probably do the same thing as his defense team did were I in their shoes.
even guilty people deserve a fair trial. let them present the strongest defense they can muster. if they are truly guilty you should have no problem getting a conviction anyway, and when you do you'll have left no doubt as to his guilt.
kangaroo courts that hamper defense while giving prosecution free reign don't bring justice, they create martyrs out of sleazy tyrants.
-
Honestly, If I was in the judge's position...
I'd put a .45 in each one of those mother****er's foreheads within the first 4 minutes the trial started.
-
Why not have it in Switzerland? They've played all sides since WW2 - plus you have skiing nearby.
-
Screw having a trial someplace else.
I think it was a mistake to have a trial to begin with.
-
Who'll be the first hollywood star to call for clemency in this case?
-
Susan Surrandon or that fellow that's a granny banger that hangs around with her.
You'll see.
-
I love how the AP reports this though:
Saddam's Outbursts Well-Received by Some (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20051205/ap_on_re_mi_ea/iraq_saddam_trial_reaction)
-
Just try to remember, did _anything_ about Miloshevich's trial get into Western press? His speaches were availible in Russian, he have beaten the so-called "justice" completely.
Umm.. the first few days were broadcasted live on TV.
-
Originally posted by MrRiplEy[H]
Umm.. the first few days were broadcasted live on TV.
You mean - until Miloshevich started to speak?
I am not a big fan of Miloshevich and Saddam, both ****ed up the countries their ruled, but I am very much interested in listening to them, partially because I always try to find information from different sides. Miloshevich was litrally shut down after his first speach, and some Euro politicians (Portugese?) said that it had to be done because he wins in "ideological warfare" by a huge margin. It wasn't a surprise for anyone but silly crowds of Western politicians with "human rights" instead of brains, and it was very unpleasant for nations who got trapped into "human rights", "ethnic cleansings" and all that newspeak (*), having to act like aggressors and mass-murderers because of propaganda brainwashing.
In 1930s George Dimitrov made his a trial in nazi Germany a tribune for his views and got support from all over the world. Current masters of "neue ordnung" don't make such mistakes.
(*) - every several months someone here tells me to read Orwell's "1984". I have read it before many of them went to school.
-
I'd put a .45 in each one of those mother****er's foreheads within the first 4 minutes the trial started.
Of course you would.