SADDAM IN THE DOCK

New York Post ^ | 7/02/04

[kattracks]

[snip]

This week's formal transfer of legal authority means that Saddam no longer is considered a prisoner of war, with full Geneva Conventions protection. He and his ex-aides are now criminal defendants, answerable solely to Iraqi law.

It's a critical moment for Iraq's new government, which must demonstrate that it has a credible justice system if it hopes to establish a true democracy.

Thus, Baghdad's new regime plans to broadcast the trial live, so that the world can see "what Saddam has done to virtually every person, every individual in the country," according to Iraq's National Security Advisor Moufawak al-Rubaie.

Still, that hasn't quieted those who are charging that any trial of Saddam Hussein would be a star-chamber proceeding.

Emmanuel Ludot, a French (what else?) member of Saddam's defense team, complained that "it will be a court of vengeance, a settling of scores." And, indeed, Iraq's new president announced that the death penalty, suspended during the U.S. occupation, is being reinstated.

But then, the Nuremberg trials that took place after World War II might also accurately be described as a settling of scores with Hitler's henchmen.

Making criminals answer for their murderous crimes does not automatically imply an unfair trial.

[snip]

[goldstategop]

Saddam Hussein, as Rush noted in Wednesday's program, was more rational and thoughtful than many of our Democrats. The party could use him as their keynote speaker at the convention. (laughing)

[ambrose]

Better yet, he could be Kerry's running-mate!

I know, it isn't allowed under the Constitution - but since when has a little trifle technicality like that stopped the Democrats from doing what they wanted?