Saddam Could Be Executed After First Trial

[sintax]

Saddam Could Be Executed After First Trial


Thursday August 11, 2005 8:16 PM

By BASSEM MROUE

Associated Press Writer

BAGHDAD, Iraq (AP) - Saddam Hussein could be executed after his first trial if he is convicted and sentenced to death for his alleged role in a 1982 Shiite massacre, even though he faces other charges, an official close to the proceedings said Thursday.

The first trial, which involves the deposed Iraqi ruler's alleged role in the 1982 massacre of an estimated 150 Shiites in Dujail, north of Baghdad, is expected to begin by the fall, said the official. He briefed reporters on condition that his name would not be used for reasons of security and the sensitivity of the case.

Iraqi authorities also are building about a dozen other cases against Saddam that they intend to try separately. Those cases include the killing of rival politicians over 30 years, the 1987-88 Anfal campaign that left tens of thousands of Kurds dead or displaced and the crushing of a 1991 uprising by Shiites following the Gulf War.

If Saddam is sentenced to death in the Dujail case, authorities could ``theoretically'' carry out the sentence without waiting for the other trials to begin, the official said.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/worldlatest/story/0,1280,-5204183,00.html

[Journeyman]

1. But what will they do with him after the second trial?. . .

(I admit: I didn't read the article. The headline seemed quite stupid, however.)

[TahitiNut]

6. In Iraq? Probably feed his corpse to the dogs.

:shrug:

[Jeff In Milwaukee]

16. It will take away some of the suspense...

I'm with you - that was a pretty dumb headline.

[Igel]

24. If you must know, this could easily be a model for

the second trial:

http://www.karenlyster.com/trial.html

[Old and In the Way]

2. So if Saddam is guilty of war crimes........does that make Rumsfield,

Cheney, Poppy, etc. accessories before the fact?

I wonder if Saddam will get his day in court....or does his testimony not count?

If I were Dimson, I'd pay close attention to how leaders can be held accountable for thier decisions.

[ChairmanAgnostic]

3. Hmm.

How to prevent him from talking about his CIA ties all the way b ack to the late 50s? or his ties with Don Rumsfeld in the 80s? Or the OK he got to invade Kuwat from our ambassadress? or the OK he got to invade Iran? or the OK he got to pursue the Kurds, because the Iranians were arming them to interfere with both Turkey and Iraq?

Hey, EASY. Just shoot him.

[Webster Green]

4. Just in time for the '06 elections, no doubt. (n/t)

[Kipling]

5. I don't care what happens to him.

He was a bastard. He'll end up dead or tortured and nobody should care. But let's move on to the bigger bastards: his sugar daddies.

[Oerdin]

7. Exactly.

There is no need to cry for Saddam. He deserves to be executed.

[FlemingsGhost]

9. God is posting as "Oerdin," today.

Tell me, Lord, does George W. Bush "deserve to die," too?

And what's up with the platypus. Not your best work, in my opinion.

[Oerdin]

31. I can appriciate that you don't support the death penalty.

But it is legal in both Iraq and most US states so I'm not going to get baited into a death penalty debate. Suffice it to say that Saddam most certainly is guilty of several thousand counts which would bring him the death penalty.

[wuushew]

15. No, such an event would be viewed as an Easter egg for Bush

In their increasingly desperate attempt to find anything at all to justify their illegal invasion the Busco would say "we brought Saddam to justice". The idiots here would still believe such a lie.

Everything that hurts Bush is good. Putting Saddam on trial serves no purpose since it will never bring back the dead and capital punishment has never been shown to deter future crime.

I would welcome Saddam dying a peaceful natural death shortly since it would illustrate to authoritarian interventionists the folly of their rush to war in the name of regime change and further undermine their credibility with the voting public.

[leesa]

19. Wow! I guess guilty until proved innocent works for you, huh?

You do realize there was a huge amount of propaganda attached to charges against Saddam. You seem to know which are true and which are not. It's GOOD to be omniscient!

[geek tragedy]

22. Serious people don't dispute that Saddam and his regime committed

horrible crimes.

[sintax]

8. No

He should be allowed, MUST be allowed to testify fully and in detail about his time as dictator of Iraq. Who supported, who had business dealings with, who supplied armaments etc. This should be put out in front of the world.

[Kipling]

10. Who'd believe him?

[sintax]

11. The entire world

outside the US. And a fair size, say 30-50%, of the US populace.

The world is watching and they already know.

[Kipling]

12. People who "already know" will believe him.

But those who don't want to know will hardly find it hard to blot out. This is the man who maintained his was winning the war when tanks were rolling along the Tigris. Lying is second nature to Saddam and that's not much of a secret. And it's not as if he hasn't got a grudge to bear.

[sintax]

13. True

but the rest of the world, particularly the brown skinned world, already know who the sugar daddies are and have no need for reports as they've lived through it with only slight variations on theme.

[VegasWolf]

14. Boy, Bush is really in a hurry to get Saddam's blood on his hands!

I guess Bush doesn't want to take any chances where Saddam
might live.

[HeeBGBz]

17. Or before

Depending on who gets to him first.

[leesa]

18. Do you think we should find him guilty of something first?

What a joke this trial is!

[Pachamama]

20. Like other "guilty" people (think Timothy McVeigh) he'll be executed quick

and swift....

Dead men don't talk, ya know? :eyes:

[geek tragedy]

23. WTF? You think McVeigh was innocent? WTF????? eom

[Blackthorn]

25. No, McVeigh was guilty...

but he was also just the patsy. There's a whole lot more to Oklahoma than what was reported.

[Pachamama]

34. Thank you Blackthorn - That is exactly what I believe....

McVeigh wasn't just some Army specialist that was disgruntled...this man, in mine opinion was a "patsy"....he knew far far more about the operations of the OK City bombings of the federal building, the people behind it and the "reasons" why he did it.

They sure put him to death awfully fast, don't ya think? :eyes:

They will do precisely the same with Saddam Hussein....they will make it look like he got a fair and swift trial and they will put him to death in a "justifiable manner" of state backed and authorized death and that will be that.

Can you for a minute imagine what kind of interesting things Mr. Hussein could tell us about his meetings with Rummy and others in the 1980's etc.? :shrug:

Same with McVeigh...I've always, always believed McVeigh had a much much more extensive background and knowledge of certain military (think special forces, undercover special ops) operations, was much much more trained than they led the public to believe and that he was either "disgruntled" for a reason (not justifiable to murder innoncent people mind you regardless of what it was) or that they just wanted us to believe he was meant to "look disgruntled"....

I have also always wondered what the "records" that were destroyed in that bombing were....anyone else? :shrug:

[Pachamama]

33. WTF? WTF? Did I say that I thought that McVeigh was innocent?

NO...I did not...And I didn't put the "sarcasm" note in my previous message either....

I made the simple statement that "just like someone like McVeigh" who is guilty, "they will put him to death quickly".

Why? Because "Dead Men Don't talk"....guilty or not....I, like many others in this country, believe that Tim McVeigh knew more than just what the gov't said he had done and knew...Same with Saddam....they didn't want McVeigh singing names, and they don't want Saddam singing names of the Bush Crime Family.....

WTF....Don't recall in my statement saying McVeigh was Innocent....

EOM

[geek tragedy]

38. You had guilty in scare quotes. Like, talking about Bush's fight

to spread "freedom" in Iraq.

[Champion Jack]

28. They don't want him to tell

What he knows about the bush crime family

[Pachamama]

35. Exactly!

Can you imagine, seriously, what Saddam Hussein might know about these people and could tell us all about his meetings with Rumsfeld and other cronies of the Bush Family?

They will execute Saddam quickly, swiftly and like I said, Dead Men can't talk....

[damntexdem]

21. Well, if he IS executed after his first trial, ...

there very likely may not be a second one.

It's a pity -- we need enough trials until Saddam's co-conspirator is finally charged as well: Rummy.

[geckosfeet]

26. Holy Moses. Like executing him is going to help anything. It just

might start multi-generational hate and distrust for the west that goes beyond anything that we can imagine.

[geek tragedy]

27. If the invasion didn't make them hate us, icing a beast like Saddam

won't make the difference.

[geckosfeet]

37. For an Iraqi who lost people to his regime, they may find some

solace in his execution.

For the trained killers and military followers of Saddam that may still be fighting, it may be more fuel for their fires.

[LiberalFighter]

29. Good strategy?

How will terrorists and insurgents react with his death?

[IndianaGreen]

30. Those guilty of crimes against humanity should be executed

and that includes the likes of Saddam and American government officials responsible for the criminal invasion of Iraq.

Of course, a humane person would want to see justice being carried out by the International Crimes Court because it will provide a fair trial for the accuser and there is no death penalty. Bush does not recognize the ICC so I guess he will have to be tried in the US.

[WillyT]

32. Great... And Take Who Knows What Secrets To His Grave !!!

What's the fuckin hurry. Is he gonna spoil or something?

:wtf:

[The_Casual_Observer]

36. They going to take rumsfeld and poppy with him?