April 27, 2006

"The invasion of Iraq was illegal," said Kofi Annan. The governments of three of the U.N. Permanent Security Council (Russia, China, France) agree. So did the government of Germany at the time of the invasion. Then, why is the president of Iraq, Saddam Hussein, sitting in a prison cell?

The reason the U.S. invaded Iraq was to depose Saddam Hussein. Scott Ritter has written volumes about this subject, saying that at one time he was involved with a plan to assassinate Saddam. If the war was illegal, why isn’t Saddam on the outside of a prison?

Logic and justice state that if an illegal act is performed, there should be certain consequences for the act. In cases where things can be reversed after proving an illegality, as much effort as possible is put into getting things back in order the way they were before the infractions. Sometimes they can be restored while, at other times, financial restitution is a part of the settlement.

Hundreds of millions of people agree that the invasion of Iraq was illegal. Its president, Saddam Hussein, represented Iraq before March 2003 and, according to many legal experts, is still the legal president of the country. Some world leaders, such as Moammar Ghadafi of Libya, openly say that Saddam is still the legal president.

Saddam Hussein represents the offended country in this case and he should be released from prison. Saddam’s plight and that of the Iraqi people are identical. Anyone who says that the invasion was illegal and blames the U.S. for the apocalyptic conditions in Iraq, must support the freeing of Saddam Hussein. Any other stance is not only illogical, but cowardly.

To the U.S., Saddam is the ultimate prize. If the troops left Iraq tomorrow with their tails between their legs, but Saddam was hanged, the U.S. would declare victory. His fate represents the final judgement of the U.S. on the success of the March 2003 venture.

Propaganda has demonized Saddam so much that many anti-war people say, "The invasion of Iraq was horrendous, but at least Saddam’s gone." This is illogic at its worst.

Let’s go back in time and see the country of Iraq before the invasion. If there was no invasion, who would be the president of Iraq? Saddam Hussein. Therefore, one who calls the invasion a mistake and says Iraq was better off before the invasion, also must accept the presidency of Saddam Hussein.

Iraq’s president was kidnapped by U.S. forces. And, despite the staged pictures of his capture in a hole, he was apprehended at a friend’s house. The U.S. held off the announcement of his capture for two days while Saddam was drugged and tortured. When the U.S. proudly told the world that he was found, the accompanying uncomplimentary pictures were not of a recently-captured Saddam, but of a drugged person.

Saddam sat in a prison for more than a year before he was allowed to even speak to a lawyer, and that meeting lasted five minutes. For the next few months, he was not granted any meetings, despite international law stating he must have access to legal assistance.

Only when his mock trial began, was Saddam able to speak to his lawyers, and even then, all their conversations were monitored by video and audio equipment. More breaking of international law and rights of human beings.

Saddam’s entire incarceration has been an exercise in the most diabolical misuse of international law. Dr. Curtis Doebbler, a member of Saddam’s legal team, has listed so many infractions that it would take pages to describe.

Members of the current "government" in Baghdad have already called for Saddam’s execution, making a mockery of fairness for his defense. Even some judges have been heard to state they consider him guilty.

Make no mistake, the U.S. is calling the shots in this trial. Outside the courtroom, many U.S. military personnel are present. Even inside they dominate. What appear to be Arabs sitting as spectators, are mostly U.S. military personnel dressed in Arab garb.

The U.S. has spent about $75 million on this trial, even sending Iraqi judges to the U.S. to be trained in how to try Saddam. The defense has not been allocated a penny. They have to pay their own way in defending the president. According to international law, there should be parity in the amount of finances allocated to a trial between the defense and the prosecution.

Defense attorneys have not been allowed to view documents they have requested. However, the prosecution has available any document it wants.

Every aspect of the trial of Saddam Hussein has been illegal, unethical, and a mockery of human rights. The people calling the shots in Iraq are the same people who tried to assassinate Saddam and overthrow the Iraqi government while at war with Iran. Most countries of the world would call them traitors, yet the U.S. has labeled them as true patriots. And, if for some reason, one of the quislings would actually make a fair decision, he would immediately be replaced by a person chosen by Uncle Sam.

The plight of Saddam Hussein is the plight of decency and fairness against deceit and tyranny. I call on all people of the press and anti-war organizations to forget the propaganda about Saddam and unite in stopping this travesty of justice called a trial. Don’t stand in the middle and get eaten up. The U.S. administration is counting on those who opposed the 2003 invasion to keep silent. Those who are mute, are just as responsible for the travesty in Iraq as those loudmouths who called for and still support the invasion.

Saddam Hussein never signed a surrender document. He never signed a letter of resignation. He is still the president of Iraq. If a movement is started to free him, it will be the first step toward justice. What happens later is unforeseen and irrelevant at this time.

The biggest defeat the U.S. could attain in its current quest for world domination will come with the freedom of Saddam Hussein. This will be the biggest blow to U.S. hegemony and pride and could be the first step in a reversal of U.S. foreign policy. It would bolster the many countries who oppose U.S. worldwide involvement, yet are too squeamish to speak out for fear of retribution. Freeing Saddam Hussein, in the long run, will be a crucial event that could be the beginning of a movement that will allow countries to run their own nations without outside interference.