Wesley Clark calls for transparant trial of Saddam

AMSTERDAM, Netherlands - U.S. presidential candidate Wesley Clark (news - web sites) called Sunday for a transparent trial for captured Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein (news - web sites) that ensured him full legal rights under international law.



The retired general and former NATO (news - web sites) commander said Saddam's capture was welcome news that could have an impact on the anti-coalition insurgency in Iraq (news - web sites).


"I hope this will see a diminishing in the violence against American soldiers in Iraq," he told reporters as he arrived in the Netherlands.


Clark did not say who should try Saddam, but said the trial should be conducted with "the highest legal standards. There can be absolutely no doubt about the rights of the accused."

more

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=524&e=1&u=/ap/20031214/ap_wo_en_po/eu_pol_netherlands_clark_saddam

Even when he's in Europe.

shudder to hear what Clark has to say..junior in awe..

about Clark's comments..Does anyone have a link on any international media site where the trial isn't being censored?

Wesley Clark aced the question, he clearly saw the implications of putting Saddam/Osama on trial at the Hague for
Crimes Against Humanity. This issue is very important for strengthening the cause of International Law and working
multilaterally.

Unfortunately, Dean didn't understand the importance of this issue and thought it was simply a matter of bringing
them to justice.

This is as good a place as any to start making distinctions between Clark and Dean's capacity to handle Foreign
Relations & Policy.


MATTHEWS: General, do you think Osama bin Laden, if we catch him, when we
catch him, should be tried here at the U.S. or in the Hague, the international court?
CLARK: I would like to see him tried in the Hague, and I tell you why. I think it's
very important for U.S. legitimacy and for building other support in the war on terror for
trying them in the Hague,e under international law with an international group of
justices, bringing witnesses from other nations. Remember, 80 other nations lost citizens
in that strike on the World Trade Center. It was a crime against humanity, and he needs
to be tried in international court.
MATTHEWS: Well, 3,000 Americans were killed here. Do you believe he should be
held exempt from capital punishment, because if you send him to Hague he will be. They
don't have capital punishment at the Hague.
CLARK: I think that's a separate issue. I think that's a separate issues.
MATTHEWS: No, it's a key issue, because the sentencing limitation, they do not
execute people at the Hague.
CLARK: I think that you can adequately punish Osama bin Laden, and you've got to
look beyond simple retribution against an individual. You have to look at what's in the
long-term security interest in the security in America and you have to look at how we
handle the war on terror from here on out.
MATTHEWS: But doesn’t life in Holland beat life in a cave?
CLARK: Not in a Dutch prison. Chris, they're under water, they're damp, they're
cold, they're really miserable.

.......................................................................................................................................................................................

MATTHEWS: Who should try Osama bin Laden if we catch him? We or the World Court?

DEAN: I don't think it makes a lot of difference. I'm happy...

MATTHEWS: But who would you like to, if you were president of the United States, would
you insist on us trying him, since he was involved in blowing up the World Trade Center, or
would you let The Hague do it?

DEAN: You know, the truth is it doesn'y make a lot of difference to me as long as he is
brought to justice. I think that's the critical part of that.

MATTHEWS: How about Saddam Hussein? Should we try him in criminal and execute him...

DEAN: Again, we are allowing the Bosnian war criminals to be tried at The International
Court in The Hague. That suits me fine. As long as they're brought to justice and tried, and
so far we haven't had to have that discussion because the president has not been able to
find either one of them.

from his interviews with them.

Dean looks unbelievably weak with his statements.

This is also where he calls Russia the Soviet Union 4 times.

And answered both Yes & No to question about opposing Right to Work Laws.

with Saddam Hussein as accessory to the fact. But here is a good chance for junior to show the Iraqis how democracy works. It could probably be proved that the U.S. knew that Saddam Hussein was a criminal with a bad record for murder before we installed him in the Iraq government to help fight Iran. It could also be proved that we supplied the chemicals for Saddam Hussein to murder the Kurds and his own folks.

So you can see why there won't be any transparency. And yes, Henry Kissinger may be a factor in bringing in the mud! LOL!

to handle Foreign relations and policy"


Their responses on trying Hussein/Bin Laden are a very good example...........compare Clark's intelligent and sensible response to Dean's..........

and it won't happen. Saddam can say to many true things about bush and PNAC.

For everyone here, I should hope.

The world would find out that the U.S. is largely responsible for the Saddam nightmare.

Let the world see!! Imagine hearing Saddam's story about his conversation with April Glaspie before Gulf War I!!

as his limp excuse, does this give the UN some say in how Saddam is dealt with? It should certainly raise the question of multilateral involvement re the trial of Saddam, imo.

:thumbsup:

.... literally within hours of this news, General Clark has issued statements both designed to hit the hull of the Bush Cabal.

First, he congratulates the troops and their commanders on their work. Something a "General" who has served his country (unlike either the presumptive nominee of the Democratic party, Dr. Dean, or the squatter at 1600 who both never saw actual combat) would do.

Second, he calls for transparency in the trial of Sadam. Something that will strike fear into the black hearts of DimSon, Rummy, and Dick. For obvious reasons of their prior complicity.

Just where are the other Democratic primary candidates on this? Especially the now presumptive nominee, according to "Mr." Gore, Dr. Dean?

Hmmmm. Tells a lot about the two men and their ability to do battle with Resident McHappyCrack, does it not?

Insist on an public, transparent, International Trial.

The NoeCons are fond of pointing to the Marshall Plan for a blueprint of successful Democratization. The Marshall Plan included transparent trials of the Nazi War Criminals. While some were put to death, several were held for LIFE in Spandau Prison. bush* cannot afford a public trial...Saddam has WAY TOO MUCH DIRT on Poppy and St. Ronnie. I would LOVE to see this closet opened.

Politically, this is a GREATY DAY for the Democrats.

For the monetary price of removing one man from power in a country that COULD NOT and DID NOT HARM or THREATEN the US in ANY WAY, the US could have had Universal Healthcare Coverage for every man, woman, and child for a year and longer!

behind Clark necesssarily, but he is correct about the sppedy transparent trial. (I still think until the primaries, everybody gets their own choice.) I do agree with the rest of your post completely, though.

I should have specified "on this issue"!

I am a major supporter of DK who speaks for my Liberal Values.

And I like Dennis a lot. If I wasn't married and older, I'd have tried for a date with him my own self. ;-) I agree with his ideas, too. You sure put all my thoughts about this capture perfectly with your first post, it's a goody. :)

I hope Dean does the same right away. This is important. We cannot let the BFEE burry there crimes with Saddam.

but PNAC and the right wing colation and their General Rove made me evil in thought. I don't think there will be a trial - something will happen where 'Iraqi citizen enemies of Hassein' (read into it what you will) will manage to assassinate him due to a glitch in his protection through a fluke (excuse) of planning or of execution. He only has to be taken out like Baxter and Kelly to keep some truth coming out. In no way can it come out in a trial that Hussein says he lied to the world about his weapons for his own protection (or something similarly contradictory and/or provable).

there was discussion about getting international lawyers in there to assist.

The Iraqi callers were pretty much all calling for OPEN TRIAL, on TV...
and they were very aware of the possibility of some damaging stuff on the US being discussed as Saddam testified.

Of course, we will never see those parts of any trial. But the Iraqis already know this and that is one of the reasons we are getting hit there.

Clark should escalate his position on calls for transparency...esp. if it looks like the Bushitas are dragging their feet on going along with a trial. Because to frustrate the Iraqis on this, hand picked Council or guy in the street, will just cause more resentment. So Clark could very easily argue this in terms of our own security in Iraq....

Show Iraqis what real American justice is about! We want to show them what democracy and justice, we should raise a BIG stink if there isn't such a trial.