|
|
COMMENTS:
I'm sure Rumsfeld will be pissed that his old drinking buddy (there are countless videos of the 2 of them shaking hands on youtube) will die. I don't think this is an accident nor do I think it will save the Republicans. You can't fool all of the people all of the time.
Voted : Yes
And, it was proper thing to do.
Voted : Yes
I'm sure Cheney and the Chimp hope that the announcement of the execution of the former Reagan/Bush/Rumsfeld ally will stir the bloodlust of the rightwing faithful: the neocons and Evangelicals. Nothing gets those people turned on like some self-righteous violence.
I'm certainly NOT a bush supporter but I just don't think he had that much control, if any, over Saddam's trial. I also do not think Saddam's conviction will have any bearing what so ever in the elections. The Republicans have done enough damage to themselves and will need no help in their defeat at the polls.
I don't know. What I do know is it will help his party in our elections. Since so many people who'd change their votes over this kind of thing are allowed to vote (or drive) then we all get what we deserve! :D
by Jyl on Sun Nov 05, 06 8:27am
[+]
Two weeks ago on Oct 18th, The US-backed special tribunal in Baghdad announced that it was delaying delay a verdict in the first trial of Saddam Hussein to November 5. I believe it was delayed intentionally to play on the emotions of voters in the mid-term vote in the US.
Considering the possibility that his verdict could result in an even greater upsurge of violence there, probably not.
Definately. Now the Republicans are going to use it for political gain.
Voted : Yes
I suppose it is possible that it's not the case, but it highly probable that it is the case.
I have never been one to believe conspiracy theories or any thing like a conspiracy theory but the timing of this conviction is very suspicious.As Mithrandir points out this conviction was delayed until today,it could have been made weeks ago.
Voted : Yes
Remember, they probably had something to do with the original Judge's removal too...who's surprised by this political timing ? If international law has been compromised and Bush can be held responsible for non-terrorist deaths (which is doubtful will ever happen) should he face the same fate ? What other non-surprises will occur before tuesday ???
Reminds me of the old westerns,..."we'll give him a trial, THEN, we'll hang 'em."
More conspiracies (eyes rolling). Like it makes a difference to the election.
Voted : No
The date was set by the IRAQIS. It had absolutely nothing to do with the US.
The numb-skull comments so far... "US backed tribunal". No. It is an Iraqi tribunal composed of Iraqis. They didn't run by the US who would be the judge, etc. It is nice to know that people on this site are so conspiracy minded that they don't even make the SLIGHTEST effort to check the facts.
All I can say is "cuckoo, cuckoo"   
Come on F.F it doesn't strike you as a little bit odd that this verdict came on the eve of an election?
But the U.S. can set deadlines for action by the so-called sovereign government of Iraq in other areas? Just not this one?
Voted : Yes
Excuse me while I laugh my narrow Black Welsh a$$ off...
Voted : No
I doubt it. I think the anticipated date for a decision was set a long time ago. The one think I did read if I recall was that the US didn't think he should get a death sentence
Besides we all knew he would be found guilty so its hardly a big news story in that way.
Voted : No
No, the courts aren't being run by the US and he's been on trial for a very long time. Wouldn't bush have rushed it to coincide with the 2004 election if he really had that power?
I think this is just more sour grapes from the minority party.
The fact is that like the gas prices, no matter when his verdict was set people would have found a way to blame bush.
Maybe Saddam can get his old buddy to help him get off.
Hmmm. Yay-be; but, I don't think it will make much difference one way or the other. You can spin it either way. Won't effect a change in vote, imo.
^ "Yay-be" = may-be.
No. The trial was finished last July or August.
I suspect they had a hand in delaying tyhe announcement for political gain, though.
'Saddam’s Verdict Announced Four Days Early, Court Won’t Finish Writing Decision Until Thursday
Yesterday, the Supreme Iraqi Criminal Tribunal announced that Saddam Hussein had been found guilty and would be sentenced to death. But it didn’t release the official verdict. NBC News has the story:
The full verdict, a document of several hundred pages, explaining how and why today’s judgment was reached was not released. U.S. officials said it should be ready by Thursday. So why issue the verdict today? U.S. court advisors told reporters today it was delayed mainly for technical reasons.
The court was created by the administration-controlled Coalition Provisional Authority and the administration still exercises considerable control over the court. The New York Times reports, “American influence…has been undeniably pervasive, with about 90 percent of the $145 million in annual costs for the court and associated investigations paid for by the United States Justice Department, and lawyers sent by Washington acting as advisers.”' (ThinkProgress)
* * * * * * * *
There you have it. The verdict was announced several days early, for "technical reasons" by a court that is controlled, and funded. by the Bush controlled occupation administration.
Eat reality, neocons.
Voted : No
Let's see, now. The trial started October 2005 ,,,, hmmm
"Wouldn't bush (sic) have rushed it to coincide with the 2004 election if he really had that power?"
"Let's see, now. The trial started October 2005 ,,,, hmmm"
It's sad when conservative worlds collide. 
^
Open your mind and shut your mouth.
Had Iraq not been invaded by The U.S., do you believe Sadam would be on trial ? If not, what makes you believe there is a no connection to this trial and the overthrow of that Government ? this is not rocket science...
|
|
passiveson from bestandworst.com -
choice : Mom, Grandpa forgot to put his underwear on again ...
