Saddam's trial; the good, the bad and the ugly.

Today's session of Saddam's trial was more eventful than the previous ones but it still showed a few things that were present before and made them clearer.To me, there were two good things, two bad and one ugly. One of the bad things, which was really thrilling although I saw it coming and didn't think it would affect me that way, is how one of the victims, the witness was able to stand in front of an Iraqi court beside Saddam and his top aids and telling their hideous crimes. There I saw an average Iraqi, who has no power or wealth, a man whom Saddam used to sign the execution order of hundreds like him without even knowing the name of one of them, standing boldly and exposing this monster's horrible crimes. He was not afraid and returned Saddam's words with stronger ones. I must admit that I saw this man as a hero and I think many Iraqis share a similar view with that of mine, as these people terrorized us for such a long time that even hearing their names used to paralyze us with fear. Till now and when I think of this man's position, I feel unsure on whether I would feel some fear or not if I was in his place.Saddam was trying to remain calm and put a fake smile on his face but I could see through his eyes that he was going to explode. I think he couldn't believe that an Iraqi, just an average Iraqi would talk to him that way and name him as just "Saddam" not the "Mujahi leader Saddam Hussain God bless him" or any of the other crap we had to add before his name otherwise…Saddam's brother, Barzan was in a much worse shape as everybody must have noticed. This is not strange at all and it was one of Saddam's ways of presenting himself as the best available choice by surrounding himself with insanely ignorant and barbarian people. I heard it from so many Iraqis in the past saying, "Well who would replace him if he's gone? Brazan, Izzat Il Douri or Taha Yassin Ramadan, or maybe Oday?? No it's better that he stays" thinking that all alternatives are worse and that there are no men in Iraq but those scum!The other good thing was the general attitude of the trial and the way the judge dealt with the defendants (although it's one of the bad things too in a way). I think the way Iraqis are treating Saddam shows clearly that they're better than being ruled by a man like him and I'm very pleased by the civility of the court. I've heard many Iraqis complaining about how soft the judge was in the 1st session and many said they hated him. This time I heard the same people saying they're starting to love him!Still I must say the judge could've been more firm with the many unacceptable behaviors by Saddam, his lawyers and his brother without crossing the line to being abusive of their rights. To be honest I think the judge was instructed to be extra-nice with Saddam, and I think that has more to do with presenting the trial to the western audience, particularly the American rather than the Iraqi audience. This trial is certainly a universal one but I think Iraqis should count more than others and I also think that American politics, mainly external is playing a major role here. I think Americans are trying to say to the rest of the world, "See how much we have changed this place!" which is ok and good but Iraqis' feelings, and more important justice, should count more than that since contempt for the court is a big deal in the best democracies.The other bad thing is the testimony of the major witness. It was incoherent, but that's ok and it's not the issue. The issue is that the man, whom I have no question about his honesty in telling Al Dujail story, was, as I believe, coached by certain parties inside the Iraqi government, and this is really bad. I can say he was coached by the SCIRI and was offered extra information on the investigation for two reasons. One to show Al Dujail massacre, at leastin a small way, as a massacre against the She'at (the witness kept mentioning Karbala'a and Imam Hussain for no real reason and focused on one of the victims who he said was a visitor from Karbala'a for no real reason to. He said that if Saddam's men had found out that the guy was from Karbala'a they'd leveled the holy shrines with ground). The other point I think is to document some of Saddam's crimes against Iran (the witness mentioned that he saw the Iranian ex-minister of oil in jail, which I think was irrelevant and not needed at all, that's if it's true).Other than that the ugliest part was the behavior of Saddam and his brother, Barzan. These two were very polite with the judge all the time (Barzan was even begging for mercy on one session) but as soon as they saw a simple Iraqi citizen with no power (or so they think) they regained that arrogant look and assumed the faces of the rulers again! How coward and how stupid at the same time! But it was more than great (and surprisingly shocking) to hear the words of that simple man from Dujail saying to Barzan, "Shut up!". That was worth the two hours in front of the TV.