Guest MikeSC Report post Posted June 8, 2004 LONDON (AFP) - Prosecutors are struggling to build a case against Saddam Hussein (news - web sites) because they lack both witnesses and evidence to prove the ousted Iraqi dictator is guilty of atrocities. Although the US-led coalition has caught 40 of the 55 people on its list of "most-wanted" Iraqis linked to Saddam's former regime, none of them will testify for the prosecution, according to a British official quoted by The Times on Monday. "It's the fear factor," he explained. "Saddam may be in custody but the other detainees know from past experience that if they turned 'Queen's evidence', revenge would be taken against members of their families". The newspaper's source also said the Iraqi dictator, ousted by the US and British invasion in March 2003, had hidden any written proof of his direct responsibility for war crimes and crimes against humanity. "Saddam was very clever at power-laundering, which meant that decisions were filtered down to junior levels, making it difficult to prove a direct line of responsibility", the source said. Saddam has been in US custody in an undisclosed location since his capture on December 13, and is due to be tried along other members of his ousted regime by a special Iraqi tribunal. He is likely to be tried for the persecution of the Shiite Marsh Arabs in southern Iraq (news - web sites) in the 1980s and 1990s, as well as for alleged war crimes against Kuwait. Iran is also believed to be preparing a formal complaint against him for the torture of Iranian prisoners captured during the 1980-1988 war. A 20-member defense team appointed by Saddam's family has complained about not being able to meet its client and accused the US authorities of holding him in breach of the Geneva Conventions. http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=...00035&printer=1 Great. We can't really build a case against him. I think it's time he suffers a "heart attack" while in custody. -=Mike Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kkktookmybabyaway 0 Report post Posted June 8, 2004 This is why non-fiction trumps anything fiction... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest MikeSC Report post Posted June 8, 2004 This is why non-fiction trumps anything fiction... Does this trump "Pulp Fiction"? Because I HATED that movie. -=Mike Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kkktookmybabyaway 0 Report post Posted June 8, 2004 This turns Pulp Fiction into pulp. Will people still be afraid of Saddam when he croaks?... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest MikeSC Report post Posted June 8, 2004 This turns Pulp Fiction into pulp. Will people still be afraid of Saddam when he croaks?... We could always resurrect Friday the 13th, and use Saddam instead of Jason. -=Mike Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Kahran Ramsus 0 Report post Posted June 8, 2004 If he gets off, then I've completely lost faith in that region except for Israel, Turkey and possibly Iran whenever the inevitable revolution takes place there. Even Liberals agree that he was an evil, evil man. They just don't think that he was any threat to us. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Salacious Crumb Report post Posted June 8, 2004 This makes me really hope that they just gun down Bin Laden when they find him. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest MikeSC Report post Posted June 8, 2004 This makes me really hope that they just gun down Bin Laden when they find him. Me too. "Trust the system"? Umm, I'm not seeing a lot of reason to trust it. -=Mike Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kkktookmybabyaway 0 Report post Posted June 8, 2004 The U.N. New World Order court would probably free bin Laden because we entered his cave without a warrant... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest MikeSC Report post Posted June 8, 2004 The U.N. New World Order court would probably free bin Laden because we entered his cave without a warrant... Nah. He doesn't have any oil to sell to France and Germany. He'd be nailed to the wall. -=Mike Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest cobainwasmurdered Report post Posted June 8, 2004 Bin Laden made televisied campeigns to get people to kill Americans, there's enough evidence right there. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest MikeSC Report post Posted June 8, 2004 Bin Laden made televisied campeigns to get people to kill Americans, there's enough evidence right there. If we're going with int'l courts --- I have little hope, actually. -=Mike Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Styles 0 Report post Posted June 8, 2004 Bin Laden made televisied campeigns to get people to kill Americans, there's enough evidence right there. Does the man not have FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION!?! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Krankor 0 Report post Posted June 8, 2004 Remember he has his "Rights" Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
teke184 0 Report post Posted June 8, 2004 Remember he has his "Rights" "You have the right to remain silent. You have the right to have your stomach punched by him. *points to other cop* You have the right to have your balls stomped by me." - Cop "I'll waive my rights" - Irwin M. "Fletch" Fletcher Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Dr. Tyler; Captain America 0 Report post Posted June 9, 2004 He's not going to get off. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Vitamin X Report post Posted June 9, 2004 *sigh* fuck this.. Remember the good ol days when cruel dictators would just kill themselves rather than be captured and tried or when victorious invading countries would just off the motherfucker? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Hogan Made Wrestling 0 Report post Posted June 9, 2004 I think people are worrying too much because they are assuming the level of evidence required would be the same as what they are used to in a US court. The US/British system is FAR more favorable to the criminal than whatever Hussein will be facing, in terms of burden of proof at least. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest BDC Report post Posted June 9, 2004 Just to clarify... don't you LOSE rights after being arrested? After you're a convicted felon, I know you do. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest INXS Report post Posted June 10, 2004 The problem we face is that in building a case against Saddam we also include ourselves; we armed him and aided him, whether knowingly or not, in invading Kuwait and in his genocide. There is no way Saddam can walk free. How much egg on our faces will there be then? Perhaps he should "commit suicide" in his cell one night...put him in Arub Gharib (sp?) for a week, that'll sort him out... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest SP-1 Report post Posted June 10, 2004 The problem we face is that in building a case against Saddam we also include ourselves; we armed him and aided him, whether knowingly or not, in invading Kuwait and in his genocide. There is no way Saddam can walk free. How much egg on our faces will there be then? Perhaps he should "commit suicide" in his cell one night...put him in Arub Gharib (sp?) for a week, that'll sort him out... I can't get around the fact that a different administration of leadership unknowingly did that. The current incarnation of the United States did not. Though we gave resources, he still chose to use them in that fashion. It was beyond our control. I just can't get around that to agree with your particular stance. I feel like we should take some responsibility, but I can't see how we actually can. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest INXS Report post Posted June 10, 2004 I'm not saying that we should currently take responsiblity i'm just pointing out that it's there. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Justice 0 Report post Posted June 10, 2004 I'm not saying that we should currently take responsiblity i'm just pointing out that it's there. But it's so irrelevant that it's not even funny. We gave them a token amount of old chemicals and some funding. Meanwhile we have France building a nuclear reactor for them capable of creating nuclear weapons and sending them modern planes, Germany supplying them with a decent amount of equipment and materials that can be used in creating chemical and biological weapons, and Russia who supplied them with tanks, guns, missiles, and various other weapons. How are we even close to that level of collusion? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest MikeSC Report post Posted June 10, 2004 The problem we face is that in building a case against Saddam we also include ourselves; we armed him and aided him, whether knowingly or not, in invading Kuwait and in his genocide. France actually has more guilt in this regard than we do. -=Mike Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
