Munqith al-Faroon, the chief prosecutor in the ongoing trial of Saddam Hussein, has called for Judge Abdullah al-Amiri to stand down. Faroon claims that the judge is biased towards Saddam.
Faroon said that the defendants had "gone too far", threatening witnesses and making political statements.
Quote:
"Defendants have gone too far, with unacceptable expressions and words. Defendants have uttered clear threats.
The chief prosecutor's office requests the judge step down from this case."
Judge Abdullah al-Amiri needless to say has rejected the request, saying that his approach was based on fairness and 25 years' experience.
Judge Amiri said:
"The judge should co-ordinate and make peace so nobody takes advantage of his fairness... I have been working in the judicial system for the past 25 years."
Yesterday Saddam Hussein threatened one of the witnesses' lawyers, accusing him of being an agent of "Iranians and Zionists" the saying "we will crush his head".
The trial continues.
Wednesday, September 13, 2006
Tuesday, September 12, 2006
Compensation Demanded
Ghafour Hassan Abdullah, a Kurdish villager, testified yesterday in Saddam Hussein's trial that he left behind his mother and two sisters as he evaded a 1988 attack by Saddam Hussein's forces.
It was only some years later, that he said that he found their identity cards in a mass grave.
Ghafour Hassan Abdullah said:
"At night, I heard the screaming of women and children."
He then went on to exclaim:
"Congratulations! You are in a cage, Saddam."
Saddam claims that the crackdown was directed against Kurdish guerrillas who were allied with Iran.
Abdullah is demanding compensation for the loss of his family.
Saddam accused Kurdish witnesses of creating ethnic divisions, by alleging chemical attacks and mass arrests in their villages during the Anfal crackdown.
The trial continues.
It was only some years later, that he said that he found their identity cards in a mass grave.
Ghafour Hassan Abdullah said:
"At night, I heard the screaming of women and children."
He then went on to exclaim:
"Congratulations! You are in a cage, Saddam."
Saddam claims that the crackdown was directed against Kurdish guerrillas who were allied with Iran.
Abdullah is demanding compensation for the loss of his family.
Saddam accused Kurdish witnesses of creating ethnic divisions, by alleging chemical attacks and mass arrests in their villages during the Anfal crackdown.
The trial continues.
Is The World Safer Without Saddam?
Senator Jay Rockefeller, US Democrat Senator for West Virginia, set the cat amongst the pigeons yesterday in an interview with CBS TV.
Rockefeller said that the world would be better off today if the United States had never invaded Iraq, even if it meant that Saddam Hussein would still be running Iraq.
CBS asked the follow-up: Did Rockefeller stand by that view, even if it meant that Saddam Hussein could still be in power if the United States didn't invade?
Answer from the senator: "Yes."
Rockefeller said that the world would be better off today if the United States had never invaded Iraq, even if it meant that Saddam Hussein would still be running Iraq.
CBS asked the follow-up: Did Rockefeller stand by that view, even if it meant that Saddam Hussein could still be in power if the United States didn't invade?
Answer from the senator: "Yes."
Monday, September 11, 2006
Saddam Hussein's Trial Resumes
Saddam Hussein's second trial, on charges of genocide in connection with a crackdown on Kurds, resumes today.
Saddam and his co-defendants face the death penalty for the killings of thousands of Kurds during the Anfal campaign in the 1980s.
Toady is also the fifth anniversary of the 9/11 terror attacks on the United States, which were used as the causa bella against Saddam by the Bush administration.
Ironically, as Iraq now lurches ever closer to civil war, a U.S. Senate Intelligence report now states that no link has been found between Saddam and al-Qaida.
Saddam and his co-defendants face the death penalty for the killings of thousands of Kurds during the Anfal campaign in the 1980s.
Toady is also the fifth anniversary of the 9/11 terror attacks on the United States, which were used as the causa bella against Saddam by the Bush administration.
Ironically, as Iraq now lurches ever closer to civil war, a U.S. Senate Intelligence report now states that no link has been found between Saddam and al-Qaida.
Wednesday, September 06, 2006
What's In A Name?
One aftermath of the toppling of Saddam Hussein's regime is the "embarrassment", for want of a better word, that those who have been given his name feel.
Saddam Hussein al-Majid, like many others with similar names, is now trying to change his.
He is now trying to avoid paying with his life for holding this name. He wants to change the first name on his birth certificate to Sajad, favored by Shiites. Mr Hussein, a Shiite Arab, is aware that militiamen from his own sect might assume he belonged to the former ruling Sunni Arab minority.
Iraq's current near civil war, so vehemently denied by the UK and US, is forcing many Iraqis to eradicate their names.
With the sectarian violence rising, Iraqis fear that the name on an identification card, passport or other document could become an instant death sentence if seen by the wrong people.
How can anyone claim that this country is not falling apart, when ordinary people have to hide their own names in shame and fear?
So much for "mission accomplished".
Saddam Hussein al-Majid, like many others with similar names, is now trying to change his.
He is now trying to avoid paying with his life for holding this name. He wants to change the first name on his birth certificate to Sajad, favored by Shiites. Mr Hussein, a Shiite Arab, is aware that militiamen from his own sect might assume he belonged to the former ruling Sunni Arab minority.
Iraq's current near civil war, so vehemently denied by the UK and US, is forcing many Iraqis to eradicate their names.
With the sectarian violence rising, Iraqis fear that the name on an identification card, passport or other document could become an instant death sentence if seen by the wrong people.
How can anyone claim that this country is not falling apart, when ordinary people have to hide their own names in shame and fear?
So much for "mission accomplished".
Thursday, August 31, 2006
The Truth Dawns
Address by Mayor Ross C. "Rocky" Anderson, Washington Square Salt Lake City, Utah on August 30 2006.
Extract:
We are here to demand: "Give us the truth!"
Extract:
We are here to demand: "Give us the truth!"
Wednesday, August 30, 2006
South Park The Movie
During the Edinburgh festival, Matt Stone hosting a TV festival's "South Park Masterclass" told the audience that Saddam Hussein has been subjected to "South Park: Bigger, Longer and Uncut" whilst in jail.
This is the animated feature-length film, in which Saddam is portrayed as Satan's selfish and meanspirited gay lover.
Seemingly, Saddam is forced to watch the movie "repeatedly" by the US Marines guarding him.
This is the animated feature-length film, in which Saddam is portrayed as Satan's selfish and meanspirited gay lover.
Seemingly, Saddam is forced to watch the movie "repeatedly" by the US Marines guarding him.
Tuesday, August 29, 2006
Trader Fights Extradition
Dr John Irving, a British oil trader, is fighting extradition to the USA on charges of allegedly paying kickbacks to Saddam Hussein's regime.
Should Dr Irving be extradited, and convicted, he faces up to 62 years in prison; he denies the charges.
Dr Irving's solicitor, Andrew Preston, has asked the Serious Fraud Office and the Crown Prosecution Service to examine charges laid down in a federal indictment.
He wants the charges to be investigated in Britain, rather than face extradition. In the US he may be denied bail, and held in a high security prison.
The extradition request made by the US is under the same controversial law as the NatWest Three, who are awaiting trial in Houston.
The law has been criticised as it was originally drafted to fight terrorism, now it is being used against alleged "white collar" crime.
Dr Irving is accused of assisting in the illegal payment of millions of dollars to Iraqi officials, in exchange for deals to buy discounted oil.
Dr Irving is the only Briton to have been indicted for corrupt behaviour under the UN's Oil-for-Food programme.
It is alleged that Dr Irving was working for Bayoil, a US oil trading company, and sent faxes to Iraq containing market information between 1997 and 2003. He is accused of paying inflated commissions to oil dealers in Iraq, while knowing that some of the money was being paid to the Iraqi regime. The indictment alleges that Dr Irving was one of those responsible for diverting funds from the Oil-for-Food programme.
Should Dr Irving be extradited, and convicted, he faces up to 62 years in prison; he denies the charges.
Dr Irving's solicitor, Andrew Preston, has asked the Serious Fraud Office and the Crown Prosecution Service to examine charges laid down in a federal indictment.
He wants the charges to be investigated in Britain, rather than face extradition. In the US he may be denied bail, and held in a high security prison.
The extradition request made by the US is under the same controversial law as the NatWest Three, who are awaiting trial in Houston.
The law has been criticised as it was originally drafted to fight terrorism, now it is being used against alleged "white collar" crime.
Dr Irving is accused of assisting in the illegal payment of millions of dollars to Iraqi officials, in exchange for deals to buy discounted oil.
Dr Irving is the only Briton to have been indicted for corrupt behaviour under the UN's Oil-for-Food programme.
It is alleged that Dr Irving was working for Bayoil, a US oil trading company, and sent faxes to Iraq containing market information between 1997 and 2003. He is accused of paying inflated commissions to oil dealers in Iraq, while knowing that some of the money was being paid to the Iraqi regime. The indictment alleges that Dr Irving was one of those responsible for diverting funds from the Oil-for-Food programme.
Monday, August 28, 2006
Iraq Had Nothing To Do With 9/11
In case you were wondering, Bush now admits that Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11.
President Bush was last week explaining how the attacks of 9/11 inspired his "freedom agenda" and the attacks on Iraq until a reporter, Ken Herman of Cox News, interrupted to ask what Iraq had to do with 9/11.
"Nothing", Bush answered.
To justify the war, Bush informed Congress on March 19, 2003 that acting against Iraq was consistent with "continuing to take the necessary actions against international terrorists and terrorist organisations, including those nations, organisations, or persons who planned, authorised, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001."
QUESTION: A lot of the consequences you mentioned for pulling out seem like maybe they never would have been there if we hadn't gone in. How do you square all of that?
BUSH: I square it because imagine a world in which you had Saddam Hussein, who had the capacity to make a weapon of mass destruction, who was paying suiciders to kill innocent life, who had relations with Zarqawi.
You know, I've heard this theory about, you know, everything was just fine until we arrived [in Iraq] and — you know, the stir-up-the-hornet's-nest theory. It just doesn't hold water, as far as I'm concerned.
The terrorists attacked us and killed 3,000 of our citizens before we started the freedom agenda in the Middle East. They were..
QUESTION: What did Iraq have to do with that?
BUSH: What did Iraq have to do with what?
QUESTION: The attacks upon the World Trade Centre.
BUSH: Nothing. . . . .Except for it's part of — and nobody's ever suggested in this administration that Saddam Hussein ordered the attack. Iraq was a — Iraq — the lesson of September the 11th is: Take threats before they fully materialise..
Watch the clip here "Nothing"
President Bush was last week explaining how the attacks of 9/11 inspired his "freedom agenda" and the attacks on Iraq until a reporter, Ken Herman of Cox News, interrupted to ask what Iraq had to do with 9/11.
"Nothing", Bush answered.
To justify the war, Bush informed Congress on March 19, 2003 that acting against Iraq was consistent with "continuing to take the necessary actions against international terrorists and terrorist organisations, including those nations, organisations, or persons who planned, authorised, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001."
QUESTION: A lot of the consequences you mentioned for pulling out seem like maybe they never would have been there if we hadn't gone in. How do you square all of that?
BUSH: I square it because imagine a world in which you had Saddam Hussein, who had the capacity to make a weapon of mass destruction, who was paying suiciders to kill innocent life, who had relations with Zarqawi.
You know, I've heard this theory about, you know, everything was just fine until we arrived [in Iraq] and — you know, the stir-up-the-hornet's-nest theory. It just doesn't hold water, as far as I'm concerned.
The terrorists attacked us and killed 3,000 of our citizens before we started the freedom agenda in the Middle East. They were..
QUESTION: What did Iraq have to do with that?
BUSH: What did Iraq have to do with what?
QUESTION: The attacks upon the World Trade Centre.
BUSH: Nothing. . . . .Except for it's part of — and nobody's ever suggested in this administration that Saddam Hussein ordered the attack. Iraq was a — Iraq — the lesson of September the 11th is: Take threats before they fully materialise..
Watch the clip here "Nothing"
Friday, August 25, 2006
Trial Adjourned
Saddam Hussein's trial for genocide against the Kurds has been adjourned for three weeks until September 11.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)