Shot In The Dark: Perfection Sought

October 19, 2005

Perfection Sought

Many of the people who ~~suffered~~ are still suffering form the vapors over the US' toppling a sovereign nation with an unelected, terror-supporting, genocide-committing government that every significant government in the world believed was building WMDs...

...are getting the vapors now that the judiciary of a sovereign, incipient democracy is about to try Saddam Hussein:

In a report issued two days ago, Human Rights Watch raised concerns that the tribunal is not being impartial and independent. "The first trials before the tribunal will be "a litmus test for whether it is up to the task of delivering justice," it stated.

Where was Human Rights Watch, anyway, when Hussein was gassing the Kurds?

Busy!

Hussein has a team of defense attorneys and half of the world waiting to pounce on any irregularities in the trial - which, by the way, occurs in a sovereign nation that has every right to its own judicial process (but by most accounts is trying to build a good one anyway).

Of course, the story is from the WaPo - which doesn't bother with things like judging dictators:

"How can Saddam get a fair trial when there's no government in Iraq? How can they try him?" Ismail Makki, a Shiite Muslim from the southern Iraqi city of Basra, asked as he hawked fruits and vegetables in Amman, in neighboring Jordan.

"There's no water, electricity, or security," he yelled. "If he stayed in power, it would be better for us."

There were Germans that missed Hitler, too...

Posted by Mitch at October 19, 2005 06:43 AM | TrackBack

Comments

I admit I wish our guys had not taken him alive. If he has a chance of gaining freedom we're foolish for not putting a bullet in his brainpan when we caught him. If he has no chance of being aquitted why are we trying him? He should have gone out like his two lovely sons.

Posted by: Terry at October 19, 2005 06:52 AM

Hey, give the guy a break. At least he had the courage of his convictions. When he said "If Saddam is overthrown, I'm moving to Jordan to hawk my fruits and vegetables," he meant it.

Not like some vaporous (vapid?) people I could mention in, say, Hollywood, for instance.
.

Posted by: nathan bissonette at October 19, 2005 10:55 AM

He was too elected. He got 100% of the vote!

Posted by: Kermit at October 19, 2005 12:22 PM

The WHO was complaining then, just as it did now, about Houssien's treatment of the Kurds.. or, did you not know that Mitch... couldn't you have researched it.. you mean you didn't... well then.. by your own standard for the Nation, YOU ARE A LIAR.

But let's go a step further, when Houssien gassed Kurds, he did it with our tacit approval, by our, I mean the US, the government of the people by the people for the people, an administration of conservatives.

Piss all you want about a "changed world" but then Mitch, the change goes for the goose as well as the gander. Meaning, why does the WHO get held to a standard, but your hero's don't? Or is gassing folks something that was situationally ethical, but not compalining loudly, now there is a REAL offense?

Posted by: pb at October 19, 2005 06:06 PM

Ya' know, PB, you dimwit, the fact that FDR formed an alliance with Stalin doesn't mean that FDR tactily approved of Stalin summarily executing political opponents.

Posted by: Will Allen at October 19, 2005 06:15 PM

So where exactly in Mitch’s post does he talk about the World Health Organization?

Posted by: Thorley Winston at October 23, 2005 10:48 PM

On the other hand, Human Rights Watch (the group Mitch actually mentioned) tried to bring a civil suit against Saddam Hussein before the World Court. Problem was that such a suit needed to be filed by a government and no one was available to file suit.

http://www.hrw.org/editorials/2002/iraq_032202.htm

Posted by: Thorley Winston at October 23, 2005 10:56 PM