As Saddam’s Trial Begins So Do The Water-Muddying Claims From The Defense
By Rob on International Scene
Say Anything
I’ve been waiting for this.
<<<
AMMAN (Reuters) - Lawyers for Saddam Hussein said on Saturday their client was attacked by an unidentified man during a court appearance in Baghdad this week, but U.S. forces guarding him denied any such incident took place.
A statement issued by Saddam’s international legal team, which has an office in Amman, Jordan, said the former president was attacked and exchanged blows with another person in a hearing attended by Saddam’s main Iraqi lawyer Khalil Dulaimi, on Thursday.
“As the president (Saddam) stood to leave the courtroom one of those present attacked him and there was an exchange of blows between the man and the president,” the statement said, adding that the head of the tribunal did nothing to stop the assault.
The statement quoted Dulaimi as saying the American guard who protected Saddam in the courtroom did not intervene and that he lodged a formal complaint against the tribunal.
The defense team did not say if Saddam was hurt.
However, a spokeswoman for detainee operations in Iraq, the U.S. military unit charged with overseeing the custody of prisoners including Saddam, said no such incident took place.
“Nothing like that happened with Saddam whatsoever,” Lieutenant Kristy Miller said.
>>>
This is a defense tactic and nothing else. Saddam’s case is hopeless. There is no doubt in anyone’s mind that he is guilty of the crimes he is charged with. The only thing Saddam can hope to do at this point is do as much damage to his enemies on his way out as possible. The best way for him to do that is to cast aspersions like the one above on his captors and hope that the media, always looking for a juicy story critical of the President or American foreign policy in general, will pick it up and run with it.
Which is probably what will happen. The BBC (along with rabidly-anti war “news” sites) are already running with a headline stating “Saddam Attacked.” Not “Saddam Claims Attack” or “Saddam Allegedly Attacked.” Nope, it's “Saddam Attacked.”
What remains to be seen, I guess, is to what extent Saddam’s claims will be taken seriously. One would like to be they’d be dismissed as the ravings of a madman and his apologists, but given some of the over-the-top rhetoric we’ve seen from the anti-war left and even Democrats in general these days nothing is for sure.
This, from the same article, is also interesting:
<<<
The defense team said it would boycott the tribunal or any committee interrogating Saddam until he was given the right to proper legal representation by a team of international lawyers, including allowing former U.S. attorney general Ramsey Clark, leading Saddam’s team of Western lawyers, to see him in prison.
“Repeated interrogations have taken place without a lawyer of choice present, no informed choice of legal counsel has been allowed, on evidence presented against Mr Saddam Hussein and his due process rights have been irreparably violated,” Clark told Reuters in a statement.
>>>
More water-muddying tactics, but Ramsey Clark is an interesting character. He is the founder of one of America’s largest anti-war groups, International A.N.S.W.E.R. Which shouldn’t imply to you that everyone who is against the war in Iraq is pro-Saddam but should certainly put in your mind questions about where the allegiances for many of the more out-spoken war critics lay.
Another interesting tid-bit is that the “answer” part of International A.N.S.W.E.R. stands for “Act Now to Stop War and End Racism.” Which makes you wonder why the group’s founder is busy in the middle east providing legal defense to a ruthless warlord who habitually engaged in genocide to achieve his goals of domination.
feeds.feedburner.com
us.rd.yahoo.com*http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/nm/20050730/ts_nm/iraq_saddam_dc |
