babble home
rabble.ca - news for the rest of us
today's active topics


  
FAQ | Forum Home
  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» babble   » archived babble   » the middle east and central asia   » Margolis: Saddam and the kangaroo court

Email this thread to someone!    
Author Topic: Margolis: Saddam and the kangaroo court
skdadl
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 478

posted 28 January 2006 05:09 PM      Profile for skdadl     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Forgive me if I'm duplicating, but I couldn't find a recent thread about Saddam's ongoing trial in Iraq.

Over at pogge's place, mahigan draws our attention to this column by Eric Margolis about Saddam's trial.

I figured that the trial would be falling somewhat below the standards of, eg, the Nuremberg courts, but Margolis's distilled reading of what this court is doing and what it could and should be doing is damning and convincing. It woke me up in a way that the dry reports I've been seeing elsewhere (ok: the Grope and Flail) have not done.

quote:
The former Iraqi president could detail how the west sold him materials and technology to make poison gas. He could reveal a fact that I discovered when in Baghdad in 1990: that the British government had secretly sent technicians to Iraq to develop and produce five strains of germs to be used in weapons, including anthrax and plague. These were to be employed against Iran in the final stages of the Iran-Iraq War. Watching Tony Blair condemn Saddam Hussein for trying to make wmd’s is truly world class hypocrisy at its most sickening.

From: gone | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
voice of the damned
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6943

posted 30 January 2006 11:41 AM      Profile for voice of the damned     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
It woke me up in a way that the dry reports I've been seeing elsewhere (ok: the Grope and Flail) have not done.

Kudos for posting that skdadl.

On middle east issues, Margolis is the best mainstream Canadian columnist, bar none. He's a right-winger, but says stuff that the more liberal media wouldn't touch with a ten foot poll.

Unfortunately, a lot of leftists have probably never heard of him because they won't go near the Sun.

On the topic at hand: yes, of course, the trial is a complete sham from start to finish. The president of Iraq even came out before the trial started and said that Saddam was guilty.

[ 30 January 2006: Message edited by: voice of the damned ]


From: Asia | Registered: Sep 2004  |  IP: Logged
anne cameron
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 8045

posted 30 January 2006 11:51 AM      Profile for anne cameron     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Ah, but they're being introduced to DEMOCRACY. It's the greatest good for the greatest number, and you can't make an omelet without cracking eggs.

and anyway he doesn't look like us, talk like us, or eat the same diet as us.

off with his head said the Red Queen!!

curiouser and curiouser said Alice


From: tahsis, british columbia | Registered: Jan 2005  |  IP: Logged
Crippled_Newsie
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7024

posted 30 January 2006 12:40 PM      Profile for Crippled_Newsie     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Obviously Saddam Hussein's trial is not a 'trial' in the sense that North Americans understand one, but, I wonder, is it better than what became of Ceauşescu or Mussolini... or is it actually worse?

I think either tack is arguable.

[ 30 January 2006: Message edited by: Tape_342 ]


From: It's all about the thumpa thumpa. | Registered: Oct 2004  |  IP: Logged
skeptikool
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 11389

posted 30 January 2006 12:50 PM      Profile for skeptikool        Edit/Delete Post
If there was to be a trial, it was logical that it occur in Iraq, be conducted by Iraqis and, one hopes, not lapdogs of the U.S. Administration.

The U.S. trying Saddam Hussein would have made it too obvious to all, if it's not so already, that both Bush and Blair also should be in the dock facing judges.


From: Delta BC | Registered: Dec 2005  |  IP: Logged
No Yards
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4169

posted 30 January 2006 12:56 PM      Profile for No Yards   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I don't really know if it was logical to have the trials held in Iraq and by "Iraqis" ... That doesn't seem to be where other trials of those convicted of of crimes against humanity, captured in similar circumstances, seem to have their cases heard ... isn't the usual place to put overthrown dictators on trial in the International Courts (at least those overthrown by international forces?)
From: Defending traditional marriage since June 28, 2005 | Registered: Jun 2003  |  IP: Logged
skeptikool
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 11389

posted 30 January 2006 01:04 PM      Profile for skeptikool        Edit/Delete Post
No Yards,

Dubya: Duh! International Court? Never heard of it!

To make the post politically and legally correct and return the topic to the "active" list, the quotation marks were removed. The post was intended to portray Dubya's thought process on the International Court - as imagined by this poster.

[ 30 January 2006: Message edited by: skeptikool ]


From: Delta BC | Registered: Dec 2005  |  IP: Logged
anne cameron
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 8045

posted 30 January 2006 01:39 PM      Profile for anne cameron     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Bush would never allow the International Court because it wouldn't grant him the luxury of not being called as a "hostile witness". He won't sign the International War Crimes amendments because he's worried his soldiers will be indicted, he won't sign the Land Mines ban..he won't sign or support....

pretty much anything which might in any way reduce his power to frighten and bully most of the globe.

Still, they did take Noriega to the USA...for one of the quietest trials in the history of such.


From: tahsis, british columbia | Registered: Jan 2005  |  IP: Logged
Stockholm
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3138

posted 30 January 2006 02:34 PM      Profile for Stockholm     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
It never fails to amaze that the Toronto Sun of all media outlets allows someone as contrarian and interesting as Eric Margolis to have a column! The guy has some rightwing views on domestic politics - but when it comes to foreign affairs (which he writes on), i think he is dead-on!
From: Toronto | Registered: Sep 2002  |  IP: Logged
skeptikool
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 11389

posted 30 January 2006 05:46 PM      Profile for skeptikool        Edit/Delete Post
anne cameron wrote:

quote:
Still, they did take Noriega to the USA...for one of the quietest trials in the history of such.

Was wondering about Noriega and, following your mention, Googled "noriega status". A very interesting read.

I'm sure the U.S. would have liked everything swept under the rug and, aided by other events, have been successful in that. Talk about collateral damage! It seems there were many innocents killed and injured and very much damage - all to capture and imprison one man.
THAT is the discussion to be avoided and that reticence, I believe, has been aided by a compliant media.


From: Delta BC | Registered: Dec 2005  |  IP: Logged
Fidel
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5594

posted 30 January 2006 07:09 PM      Profile for Fidel     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by voice of the damned:
On middle east issues, Margolis is the best mainstream Canadian columnist, bar none. He's a right-winger, but says stuff that the more liberal media wouldn't touch with a ten foot poll.

Margolis is so full of shit his eyes are brown. He's an apologist for the ultra-right. He thinks the world outside the USA is an enclave of socialism. I wouldn't touch what Margolis writes with a ten foot pole.


From: Viva La Revolución | Registered: Apr 2004  |  IP: Logged
M. Spector
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 8273

posted 30 January 2006 08:23 PM      Profile for M. Spector   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
To give the Grope and Flail its due, however, it did publish this Rick Salutin column some time ago (the link is to the rabble.ca version), which includes the following:
quote:
The reason for controlling the trial is no secret. The tribunal's former head, deposed by the Iraqi PM, said the aim is to “tailor” the trials to stop Saddam from raising embarrassing questions, as the former Serbian leader has tried to do at his trial in The Hague. There is lots to raise: U.S. encouragement of Saddam in the heinous war with Iran; friendly visits in the 1980s by current Defence Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, who knew about Iraq's use of poison gas; implicit advance approval for the invasion of Kuwait in 1990; U.S. urging of Shiites to rebel in 1991, then abandoning them; sanctions in the '90s that savaged the population but failed to foment a coup against Saddam, yet were left in place since the U.S. had no other policy etc.

From: One millihelen: The amount of beauty required to launch one ship. | Registered: Feb 2005  |  IP: Logged
Michael Watkins
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 11256

posted 30 January 2006 08:32 PM      Profile for Michael Watkins   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
While I agree with what Salutin has to say on Hussein, he probably also would be the first to admit that as these embarassing details - already known to anyone who cares to look for the truth - come out, the public will be distracted by something else.

All it takes is some convenient but tragic fate to befall an unlucky, pretty, blonde, all-American, gal amd voila - weeks of coverage of that affair.

Tragedy or disaster du jour will distract the public down there. History and truth just can't compete.

PS: Or they'll delay the trial until hurricane season in the US kicks in - always good for public distraction.

[ 30 January 2006: Message edited by: Michael Watkins ]


From: Vancouver Kingway - Democracy In Peril | Registered: Dec 2005  |  IP: Logged
Fidel
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5594

posted 30 January 2006 09:09 PM      Profile for Fidel     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I did agree with Margolis when he said that Soviet era elections in Afghanistan were fairer and more open than the recent U.S.-managed one in that country. He's said some inflamatory things about the left that I can't agree with at all though.

[ 30 January 2006: Message edited by: Fidel ]


From: Viva La Revolución | Registered: Apr 2004  |  IP: Logged
voice of the damned
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6943

posted 30 January 2006 09:29 PM      Profile for voice of the damned     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Stockholm wrote:

quote:
It never fails to amaze that the Toronto Sun of all media outlets allows someone as contrarian and interesting as Eric Margolis to have a column! The guy has some rightwing views on domestic politics - but when it comes to foreign affairs (which he writes on), i think he is dead-on!

Fidel's comments probably give us some clue as to why Margolis got the gig in the first place:

quote:
Margolis is so full of shit his eyes are brown. He's an apologist for the ultra-right. He thinks the world outside the USA is an enclave of socialism. I wouldn't touch what Margolis writes with a ten foot pole.


Agreed, Fidel. On what might be called "cold war issues", Margolis is typically right-wing.However:

quote:
I believe journalists like Margolis occasionally have to put out news stories that appear to be factual in order to maintain a lowest level of credibility. The rest of their time is spent spewing right-wing propaganda.

Fidel, about 90% of Margolis' columns these days are about the middle east, and almost all of them are highly critical of US policy and zionism. Margolis' mother was a journalist who opposed the ethnic cleansing of the Palestinians, and as a result recieved death threats against herself and her son(Eric Margolis). So I suspect his views on these matters are quite sincere.

[ 30 January 2006: Message edited by: voice of the damned ]


From: Asia | Registered: Sep 2004  |  IP: Logged
Fidel
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5594

posted 30 January 2006 09:35 PM      Profile for Fidel     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Good for Eric's mother. She didn't raise a total idiot.
From: Viva La Revolución | Registered: Apr 2004  |  IP: Logged

All times are Pacific Time  

   Close Topic    Move Topic    Delete Topic next oldest topic   next newest topic
Hop To:

Contact Us | rabble.ca | Policy Statement

Copyright 2001-2008 rabble.ca