We shall soon have a new contributor to the Infidel Blog Alliance. His name is JMJ and he blogs at Fu2rman. He hasn't received his official blogger evite yet, but he is raring to go, so he asked me to post this one for him.
Ladies and Gentlemen, JMJ:
I've never been a big fan of Charles Krauthammer but I really think he has hit this one out of the park. Kudos to you, Mr. Krauthammer.
Of all the mistakes that the Bush administration has committed in Iraq, none is as gratuitous and self-inflicted as the bungling of the trial of Saddam Hussein."This has become a platform for Saddam to show himself as a caged lion when really he was a mouse in a hole," said Vice President Ghazi Yawar. "I don't know who is the genius who is producing this farce. It's a political process. It's a comedy show."
But there is no excusing the Bush administration, which had Hussein in custody for two years and had even longer to think about putting on a trial that would not become a star turn for a defeated enemy.
Why have we given him control of the stage?
We all remember the picture of him pulled out of his spider hole. That should be the Saddam Hussein we put on trial.The judge keeps telling him he's out of order. He disobeys with impunity, the guards not daring to intervene.
This is absurd. If anything, Hussein should be brought in wearing prison garb, perhaps in shackles, just for effect. And why was he given control of the script? He shouts, interrupts and does his Mussolini histrionics unmolested. Instead of the press being behind a glass wall, it is Hussein who should be. Better still, placed in a glass booth, like Eichmann, like some isolated specimen of deranged humanity, symbolically and physically cut off from the world of normal human values.
This strikes me as something the Far Left would produce in all their political correctness wisdom. NOT a Republican administration. Still this seems to be the new Republican conservatism for the 21st century, V 2.0!
When Vercingetorix, king of the Gauls, lost to Julius Caesere, Vercingetorix made a huge display of himself as a demigod giving up to a superior force. The Romans dumped his sorry arse in a cart and trundled him off to Rome to go on show as a war trophy. Eventually they executed him and dumped his corpse somewhere.
Result? Rome finalized its quest to become a major empire, and within a short period France received a bishop named Irenaeus, among others.
The above is a story of success, of civilization spreading-- if by force-- and then a settling of conquered territory of greater peace and eventual unity.
Yes, the Gauls were a happy lot before the Romans came. living in the lap of oneness with nature like animals and contentedly so. The small probelms of Human sacrifice and constant inter-tribal warfare and famine and disease and superstition and misery and hopelessness and violence and ugliness and so on, well, that was their culture, and they like it, rightly so. And so what?
Irenaeus put a stop to the gnostics in France and elsewhere. Oh boo! The imposition of universal order on the French by way of catholicism, universalism and Catholicism as religion, well, it ain't Kansas but it's a far cry better than what the earlier lot had, and from there it came to Montaigne able to write in Latin about the noble savages of the New World.
Maybe there are Frenchmen today who hate the results of Descartes and Pascal and others who, rather than sacrificing virgins to the forest spirits, came up with some higher mathematics and logic.
There are certainly many who hate with violence and committment the ones who followed from there, friends of the people such as the rather blood-thirsty but otherwise admirable Marat, no mean mathemacian heimself. Today, the miserable French and our own bickering and whingeing over the trial of a petty little dictator in Bahgdad, a fair trial, a tv trial, a showcase event of democracy in the works, and we're ashamed and endangered by it.
Drag him back to his hole, that Saddam, and bury him in it with a live pig.
We have to change our attitudes. It's time to obey the law with a vengence.
this is the first post Ive seen about the trial, glad someone else is paying attention. what a big joke this is...fair trial...ok.
I think his defense team will prove him innocent, Then what? give him Iraq back?
Agreed. I had hoped that Saddam would have met a fate similar to Mussolini … if not by a natural course of events, then with an arraigned “escape” and recapture by the Kurds or Shiites.
This “OJ” trial for Saddam is about par for the course. The mere fact that Saddam is alive helps keep the Baathist cause alive; but giving him a stage … insane!
I would I hope to never whish anyone dead....but sadly I agree with your mussolini comment...
and your "OJ" comparison. Lets hope we are wrong on that one.
It really makes you wonder. Where is the "consulting" from the US with regard to courtroom legal procedures? Yet Hussein gets a "Ramsey Clark", an ex-US attorney general for his team.
Johnny Cochran is probably drooling right now. Getting Hussein acquitted would've been a way bigger feather in his cap than OJ!
Iraq was a high risk, high reward endeavor. That being the case, nothing but detailed preparation and execution at every level of EVERY issue of this war should have been the only acceptable result. And yes, even then mistakes would still be made.
But this amateurish effort in so many facets of this war continues to amaze me. Because if we don't "get Iraq right", the whole Middle East and therefore the world could explode in chaos.
I don't understand not wishing Saddam Hussein was dead. Does that make me a bad person?
Post a Comment