Replies

Must be a British DUer, he has all the qualifications:
-hates Bush as a person
-compares Saddam to Jesus
-uses the word neocons

For some reason which I doubt that I will ever understand, he is frequently referred to as being a right-winger (albeit centre-right) over here.

My main problem was that this was not an article, it was a set of random unconnected statements hung onto the Christmas tree of pseudo-reason regarding the capture and forthcoming trial of Saddam.

His opposition to President Bush wishing to have Saddam hanged is semi-valid. In that Saddam must be given a fair trial before sentence is passed, and that trial must include the possibility of his being aquited, however, given the evidence, it is fair to assume that the trial will convict. Thus to oppose Bush's desire to see Saddam hang, is merely to oppose judicial killing; Hastings dresses this up in pseudo-decency, but at no point states why he opposes the death penalty.

He states "Yet those of us who reject judicial killing can support no sentence other than life imprisonment." This a patently true, and utterly meaningless at the same time; essentially he is saying 'if your oppose the death penalty, then you oppose the death penalty' fine but WHY, and so what?

His main attack seems to be on Tony Blair (I usually relish such attacks as the Prime Minister is a loony-socialist, but on Iraq, he makes sense so I will defend him). He claims that as the P.M. opposes the death penalty (which it is fair to assume that he does), he should oppose the death penalty being imposed by an Iraqi court, nay more so by a SOVEREIGN Iraqi court. The leftists told us to keep out of Iraq because it was a sovereign country, but now claim that we should interfere once it becomes a sovereign country once again, and reconciles itself with its past, by bringing its former leader to justice. P.M. Blair is merely saying that Iraq (once sovereign again) should try Saddam; it has been made clear that due to the official opposition of the British government to capital punishment, there can be no official British presence as a part of the court; that is taking a principled stance on the death penalty, shouting from the sidelines will do nothing, and would merely be counter-productive. To seek actively to impose a prison sentence would be outright imperialism.

Hastings has every right to oppose capital punishment (though he advances no argument to support his proposition) if he wishes. But his attack on Tony Blair is meaningless, and is held up merely by the animus which the Guardian's readership has for America and for President Bush especially. This is an emotive piece which does not deserve any respect; though that is the style which Hastings has been developing for some time.