Saddam Hussein's trial in Baghdad has become a circus. The presiding judge refuses to return to court, and defence lawyers have been murdered.
What to make of this spectacle? Emotionally, it's good to see the tyrant who terrorized so many on trial for his life. But morally and legally, Saddam's trial is a travesty of justice. This is an old-fashioned Soviet-style show trial set up by U.S. occupation authorities.
Its goal is not to determine Saddam's guilt or innocence, but to justify the U.S. invasion of Iraq -- which, by the way, was a blatant violation of international law....
If allowed to fully testify, Saddam would reveal the whole sordid story of America's long, intimate collaboration with his regime, and how the U.S. and British governments of Ronald Reagan and Margaret Thatcher encouraged, armed and financed Iraq to invade Iran.
And speaking of kangarooing, what sort of media
Time has seen five photographs of Abramoff and the President that suggest a level of contact between them that Bush's aides have downplayed.
but won't publish the photos? If Bush spent any significant amount of time with Abramoff, those photos are (a) in the White House archive, subject to FOIA, and (b) in the AP archive. That means that Time is sucking up to the White House by pretending that it can't get them. They'll publish them when enough people raise a fuss and pretend that they're giving in to public pressure.
Meanwhile, take it easy on the much maligned kangaroo. They'd never hold a show trial of the kind that Vladimir Ilyich Bush is holding in Baghdad.