What type of defense does Sadaam mount? Can he take BushCo down with him?

Just a little question. I am very, very, very happy that Sadaam has been captured. He is an evil being. That being said, does he mount a defense? Who will be his attouney? Will he looke to England for someone? Is anyone in the United States capable of defending him without being branded a traitor? Does anyone in the Democratic Party contribute to his defense fund in hopes that a good lawyer will bring out the obvious closeness of BushCo and Iraq, before and after Gulf War I?

Personnaly, I feel he will be convicted no matter what. And I thank God for that. I would love to see BushCo go down with him. Because I believe the corruptness of BushCo contributed to terrorism thoughout the world.

I don't think any Democrat should support his defense. I know the Saudis will get him an excellent lawyer. All I want is a conviction and bringing down BushCo would be icing on the cake.


Now let's go after Evil throughout the world. Are the Saudis shaking in their boots? Are the facist dictatorship countries in Africa and Asia next? How about the evil country of China?

We already have more than enough evidence to indict Bush and Friends. The challenge lies in making the public care enough to examine and understand it.

I'm sure many other nations are trembling in fear of Bush - not just fascist dictatorships. How many more nations he'll invade and conquer is anyone's guess. But the world is capable of fighting back - and it's capable of kicking his ass.

My fear is that the U.S. is following in the footsteps of Nazi Germany and totalitarian Japan. We're following a madman over the brink, and it appears that the general public simply won't wake up until this country is in ruins.

If that's the case, I hope it happens sooner, rather than later, so we can get on with reconstruction and have something positive to look forward to for a change.

What will the charges be? If it's just on mass murder, then he'll be convicted we'll be happy, no reasonable defense could be mounted. BUT, if they try to charge him on modern WMD and/or terrorism charges, look for one of two things to happen:

a) Bush's people won't allow a fair trial, and will refuse to allow the defense to call witnesses. The trial becomes a kangaroo court and even the neocons get upset and call for Bush's hypocritical head.

b) Bush's people allow a fair trial and Hussein's defense calls all sorts of witnesses that corroborate the lack of WMDs and Hussein's hatred of bin Laden etc. This embarasses Bush immensely, and may result in a not-guilty verdict on those charges.

Considering the lack of focus on WMDs and terrorism lately, I think the Bush team may just go with murder charges. If they persue WMD or terrorism charges they're sticking their hand into a basket of snakes.

There's now way they could bring anything else--too much risk. I think the whole trial will be about the victims of Saddam's regime and how we should all feel bad for them (which we should) and how all the WMD discussion and charges of deciet are really petty when you look at this monster being broght down.

Bryant
Check it out --> http://politicalcomment.blogspot.com

Kiss of death, as it should be. Does he 'mount a defense' - yes he will. He already demonstrated that he believes in 'do what I say and not what I do' - as in calling on all Iraqi's to fight to the death for his corrupt regime. What a joke, he buried himself in a hole and surrendered without a fight. As far as the Bush adminstration's ties to the Hussein regime - only time will tell. Speaking of time, Saddam was in power during the eight years of the Clinton administration. Not sure if there is anything there - but be careful what you ask for - you just might get it.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

By pointing out that Saddam was free to torture, oppress, and line-his-blood soaked pockets during the eight years of the Clinton adminstration. That said, I have problems with the first Bush administration. Regardless of the reasons then given, and of course hind-sight is 20-20, we should have finished the job then. We got Iraqi (Shia) hopes up - they rebelled against the tyrant and we left them in the lurch. BTW - you think right.

USA,Britain,France etc that I don't see how they can let it be an open trial. Yet if they kill him,he will instantly be a muslim martyr so it's a very interesting situation.

US appointed lawyers, a US controlled court and an media blackout will insure nothing embarrassing gets out.

I'm surprised you expected more from this mis-administration.