Good News for Saddam Hussein

[moghrabi]

Good News for Saddam Hussein

Memo To: Website Fans & Browsers
From: Jude Wanniski
Re: He Didn't Gas the Kurds!!

The neo-cons who propagated the story that Saddam "gassed his own people," i.e., the Iraqi Kurds, will still insist he did gas the Kurds, back in 1988 when he gave the order to Chemical Ali, who told the Iraqi army to commit genocide at the town of Halabja. But the news from Mohammed al-Obaidi is that the team prosecuting Saddam for crimes against humanity has dropped the genocide charge “due to insufficient evidence.”

Al-Obaidi assures me the news is true, and if it is, we should be learning about it sooner or later from our news media. It will further complicate the Bush administration’s problems in Iraq, as it had been relying on the genocide charge to justify “regime change” in Baghdad when the other rationales – WMD and Al Qaida connections – failed. I may be wrong, but if this turns out to be true, it would be a positive development in resolving the conflict in Iraq sooner, rather than later. Once the U.S. press corps focuses on the issue, it would force President Bush to re-examine his own assumptions about the
rationale for unilateral action and make it easier for him to shift gears toward greater international involvement in resolving the several conflated issues in the Middle East.

.....

http://www.wanniski.com/

 

[Rick van Opbergen]

I think the other massgraves are sufficient enough to give Saddam Hussein the punishment he deserves, to say it in a neo-con style. But what I don't get is the following: not so long ago, I reported about Van Anraat, a Dutchman who has been accused of delivering the chemicals for mustard gas to Iraq. Intelligence services, as well as the Dutch media, report that there is a direct link between the deliverance of these chemicals and the gassing of the Kurds in Halabja. Have to go after that one I guess.

What I also find odd is that both Human Rights Watch (LINK) and Amnesty International (LINK) have directly or indirectly, blamed the Iraqi regime for the attacks. Than again, I should take in consideration that the HRW article is from 1991, and the Amnesty International article from 2002. What is their current opinion?

 

[moghrabi]

I learned that Hussein was not responsible for the chemical attack awhile back for the simple reason that when they done the study on the gas used, Only Iran had it at the time. Iraq had a different chemical altogether.

This posting is not to defend a beast but to rebutt the americans who are failing every step of the way. Everything they accused him so far is wrong. I haven't seen any mass graves yet and the last time I heard about them was that they were destroyed. Go figure.

 

[Rick van Opbergen]

I know you're not here to defend Saddam Hussein, and my comment is not directed at you, but what I am trying to say is that it should not make a difference for anyone who is ignorant about this and reading this article to understand that Saddam and his regime still have a long list of war crimes which they are accused of. And I have to disapprove about you about the mass graves: I recall the first mass graves in Iraq which were already found just days after the invasion. Not so long ago I read an old BBC article about it, I can search it up for you if you want to.

 

[moghrabi]

This is the same mass grave I was talking about. Recently there was news that it was vadanlized.

Let me make it simple. These trials that are happening now are for election purposes only so they could put their puppet (Allawi) in place.

Saddam Hussien and his gang will be dead before they go on trial for fear that they will expose the behind-the-scene-american-involvement. I bet you one day we will hear that saddam died of natural causes. Same when Arafat died. The best of the best can't put a finger about the cause of death. Do they think we (the people) are so stupid, or are we really stupid?

 

[Reverend Blair]

RE: Good News for Saddam

The confusion over who gassed the Kurds is Droolin' Ronnie Raygun's fault. Reagan was cozy with Hussein back then and the international community was pushing for sanctions over the gassing. Reagan, to avoid sanctions being placed on Iraq and to keep anybody from peeking to closely at US involvement, blamed Iran.

Now Georgie has a problem. The Republicans look at Droolin' Ronnie as a patron saint, so Georgie can't say that Ronnie was lying. At the same time they've been pounding their chests over the Kurds getting gassed for a couple of years now and they sure can't back away from that without answering some tough questions. The result is, "Oops, not enough evidence. Guess we'll just have to let this one slide."

There's going to be similar problems with a lot of those mass graves. Some of them were dug when the US was still Saddam's friend. Others appeared after George Sr. encouraged a revolt, then stood by while people were slaughtered. There may also be some mass graves that were the result of US bombing campaigns and the use of depleted uranium.

If Bush and his pals keep saying that there's insufficient evidence every time the evidence starts showing that the US was at least nominally involved, there is a chance that Saddam could walk away.

 

[Rick van Opbergen]

I can't say anything about it moghrabi; I'm not a clairvoyant, nor am I in the possession of secret documents which state otherwise We can only guess.

 

[moghrabi]

Re: RE: Good News for Saddam

The confusion over who gassed the Kurds is Droolin' Ronnie Raygun's fault. Reagan was cozy with Hussein back then and the international community was pushing for sanctions over the gassing. Reagan, to avoid sanctions being placed on Iraq and to keep anybody from peeking to closely at US involvement, blamed Iran.

Now Georgie has a problem. The Republicans look at Droolin' Ronnie as a patron saint, so Georgie can't say that Ronnie was lying. At the same time they've been pounding their chests over the Kurds getting gassed for a couple of years now and they sure can't back away from that without answering some tough questions. The result is, "Oops, not enough evidence. Guess we'll just have to let this one slide."

There's going to be similar problems with a lot of those mass graves. Some of them were dug when the US was still Saddam's friend. Others appeared after George Sr. encouraged a revolt, then stood by while people were slaughtered. There may also be some mass graves that were the result of US bombing campaigns and the use of depleted uranium.

If Bush and his pals keep saying that there's insufficient evidence every time the evidence starts showing that the US was at least nominally involved, there is a chance that Saddam could walk away.

That is exactly my point, Rev. If the US keep walking away for lack of evidence and to worship Ronnie more, Saddam can walk away. But he can be killed in a jail cell as easily too so he can't go out and say something contrary to what the US is willing to expose.

 

[no1important]

:jest: I am suprised the US Army never court martialed the soldiers for bringing him in alive, instead of killing him there on the spot. :/jest:

Seriously I do not think he will live to trial. Too many dirty secrets will be let out that will embarass the American government . He will die by "suicide" or "so called natural causes" long before he gets to trial.

I think that is the real reason he won't be going to the Hague, the American government does not want the public to hear or read anything Saddam says, for fear of embarrassing them.

 

[Reverend Blair]

RE: Good News for Saddam

I don't think they can kill him now, no1important. Even if he died of natural causes in front of the TV cameras and the autopsy was done by a team of French pathologists, at this point all fingers would point to the US.

I think it's more likely that he will found guilty of a single murder or two by the "Iraqi" government and either officially executed or locked up in a cell someplace.

They can't unofficially kill him, but they sure as hell can't let him start testifying in open court either. Maybe they can put him in a cell with Manny Noriega?

 

[Twila]

Maybe they can put him in a cell with Manny Noriega?

Or maybe a guard will place him in a excercise room by "accident" and he'll be killed an "iraqi with a vendetta" wink wink wink.

Happens all the time in North American Jails. PC inmates left with GP inmates and low and behold.....death sentence carried out without the cost of legalities.

 

[moghrabi]

Twila. Are you up to something again? We can send someone from Surrey, he will take care of him. They do that all the time. :wink: :wink: :wink: :idea: :idea: :idea:

 

[Twila]

I don't know those kind of people in Surrey. :wink:

But in jails are segmented into 2 groups. PC's- Protected Custody (Pedophiles, rats, rapists) and GP-General Population.

Those in GP hate PC, which is why inmates are in PC. Jeffrey Dahmer was killed by an inmate. A supposed accident.

Often guards are people too and they often don't like some of the "people" they're guarding. Accidents happen. Like mayhap a gp inmate is in the excercise room and a guard brings in a PC inmate who might like to rape little girls. The guard turns his back a couple of moments and guess what? Justice.

Federal prisons (at least here in Canada) allow PC type inmates and GP type inmates to co-mingle. Nobody talks about who's done what. That isn't too say a guard doesn't slip a lifer info on a rapist. :wink:

 

[moghrabi]

Holy Macro. I am learning new things everyday. I have to sit with you oneday Twila and show me the ropes.
I always though a GP is my doctor. and PC is a political party.