>Good Grief! You have to be kidding me. You can't believe that..... You're just trying to get a rise out of somebody, right?

Actually, I'd agree with him. There should have been a good honest trial, without any shadow of foul play, so that his proponents would have no case to claim. The verdict would be clean as a tear, and even the Iraqis would see the justice taking place.

For that, it should have been a court where any American citizen would feel comfortable to take the stand, knowing it would be a fair trial. As it is, there'll be a shadow of doubt, the trial (and the whole new Iraqi jurisprudence) is tainted forever as mounting a Stalin-style political mockery of a trial.

An international tribunal, Hague style, would be much, much better. Except that it would have meant that USA recognizes the court. And then Americans would have a theoretical chance of being brought to such a court as defendants. And we wouldn't want that, would we?

So instead of a clean victory of justice over a tyrant, we have a monkey court, where defendant's lawyers were routinely killed, where the defense didn't quite have the right to cross-examine the witnesses, where the judges were Shia (which would be a cause for change of venue for even a small theft here) and where pretty much any other assumptions for a fair trial were thrown out the window.

I don't see justice being honestly served in this case.

>>Well, the world is probably a better place without him, but killing still seems wrong. The whole trial was a joke anyway. They should of tried him in international court. Plus isn't there like something that says you can't hand over prisioners of war to their enemy? Oh yeah - guess he's not technically a POW. Geeze what a farce.
>>
>>
>>>According to the news at lunch time today, Saddam Hussein is due to be executed at 4 p.m. EST today. There goes another great humanitarian. (wiping tears from eyes)