July 03, 2004

WHAT DIDN'T HE KNOW? WHEN DIDN'T HE KNOW IT?

Robert Fisk tries to get "alert, cynical, defiant, abusive, proud" Saddam Hussein off the hook:

Could it be this awful man -- albeit given less chance to be heard than the Nazis at the first Nuremberg hearings -- actually knew less than we thought? Could it be that his apparatchiks and grovelling generals, even his own sons, kept from this man the iniquities of his regime?

Helpfully, US authorities have been bringing Saddam up to speed.

Posted by Tim Blair at July 3, 2004 05:32 PM
Comments

Did Fisk or Pilger ever meet Saddam?

Perhaps they may have discussed Saddam's atrocities over a cup of mint tea. If not, why not? Let's get them in the witness box and find out. That should produce some chestnuts.

Posted by: Stan at July 3, 2004 at 05:49 PM

"Could it be this awful man -- albeit given less chance to be heard than the Nazis at the first Nuremberg hearings...?"

Could it be that this awful eejit Robert "Beat Me Daddio" Fisk doesn't realize that Saddam was merely being arraigned and was in fact given far more opportunity to speak than most defendents at an arraignment?

Most judges would've shushed him for contempt.

Generally, the defendent in such a situation merely has the charges read to him and answers some "yes or no" questions himself or through his attorney. The actual trial will be Saddam's time (with attornies present) to speak on his own behalf.

Fisk is an unbelievable imbecile.

Posted by: JDB at July 3, 2004 at 06:05 PM

Perhaps before we get too carried away with another fuckfiskfest, here's part of the rest of his article;
".Could it be that his apparatchiks and grovelling generals, even his own sons, kept from this man the iniquities of his regime? Might it just be possible that the price of power was ignorance, the cost of guilt a mere suggestion here and there that the laws of Iraq--so immutable according to Saddam--were not adhered to as fairly as they might have been?

No, I think not. I remember how, a decade and a half ago, Saddam asked a group of Kurds whether he should hang "the spy" Farzad Bazoft and how, once the crowd had obligingly told him to execute the young freelance reporter from The Observer, he ordered his hanging. No, I think Saddam knew. I think he regarded brutality as strength, cruelty as justice, pain as mere hardship, death as something endured by others."

Posted by: carlos at July 3, 2004 at 07:03 PM

Given that his last paragraph is a confession that it's all bullshit, what, exactly, what the point of writing the piece at all?

Was it to sow discontent with the lead and retreat to a safe distance at the end, or has he simply run out of material?

Posted by: Aaron at July 3, 2004 at 09:22 PM

Damn, it's 1938 all over again!

"If only Comrade Stalin knew!"

Posted by: F451 at July 3, 2004 at 09:47 PM

Hey, I could write crap if I were only paid for it to.

Posted by: Le clerc at July 3, 2004 at 10:57 PM

Could it be that Fisk has lost all his marbles and can't find them? Is this why he writes such disgusting crap?

Could it be that Fisk will find the balls to go to Iraq and plead Saddam's case? I'd love to have Fisk repeat this crap before an audience of Saddam's victims.

Posted by: Chris Josephson at July 3, 2004 at 11:04 PM

What a fiskwit!!

Posted by: PJ at July 3, 2004 at 11:52 PM

Common phenomenon in Nazi Germany for people faced with the nasty side of the Nazis was to say:

"If only the Fuhrer knew" "He'd sort it out"

If ever anyone complained, someone else would come out with that line.

Posted by: Sheriff at July 4, 2004 at 12:22 AM

Bobby, while you're up there, could you check for polyps?

Posted by: Ken Summers, Perversion Catalyst at July 4, 2004 at 01:46 AM

Who would have thought Saddam would disclose no signigicant intelligence.

Posted by: aaron at July 4, 2004 at 02:04 AM

Did Saddam know of every single atrocity committed by his henchmen? Probably not. Did he know that his henchmen maintained his power by committing atrocities? Most certainly he did. Would they have done it without his approval? Most certainly not.

How hard is that to understand?

Posted by: Rebecca at July 4, 2004 at 02:14 AM

Leftist meme alert: Saddam didn't know - but I bet Bush did!

At least Fisk had the sense to backpedal.

Posted by: Bryan C at July 4, 2004 at 04:59 AM

Remember, Bush is worse than Saddam, at least Saddam was elected!

Remember, Iraqi soldiers' deaths are worse than American soldiers' deaths, at least Saddams' troops were conscripts!

Remember, American torture of Iraqis is worse than Iraqi torture of Iraqis, at least it was Iraqis doing it to Iraqis!

Remember, Oceania has always been at war with Eastasia, and doublethink makes it true!

Posted by: Dean at July 4, 2004 at 07:08 AM

Hell, it's more then I ever got to say at any arraignment.

Wait, nevermind.

Posted by: David [.net] at July 4, 2004 at 07:14 AM

Tim Blair writes:

Robert Fisk tries to get "alert, cynical, defiant, abusive, proud" Saddam Hussein off the hook:
Could it be this awful man -- albeit given less chance to be heard than the Nazis at the first Nuremberg hearings -- actually knew less than we thought?

And what's the next paragraph in Robert Fisk's article, Tim?

No, I think not. I remember how, a decade and a half ago, Saddam asked a group of Kurds whether he should hang "the spy" Farzad Bazoft and how, once the crowd had obligingly told him to execute the young freelance reporter from The Observer, he ordered his hanging. No, I think Saddam knew. I think he regarded brutality as strength, cruelty as justice, pain as mere hardship, death as something endured by others.

Can you spot the rhetorical question, Tim? Oh, how we lie.

Posted by: Jason Stokes at July 4, 2004 at 09:19 AM

The rhetorical question was no innocent device,Fisk would love it if Saddam Hussein was not guilty,but the evidence is too much for even him to turn on its head,but he gave it a try.

Posted by: Peter at July 4, 2004 at 10:04 AM

Carlos, Jason, does it hurt to be the apologist for an apologist? I mean, doesn't that strain the fabric of reality a little too far even for the likes of you?

Seriously. Robert Fisk is a guy who regularly describes people like Osama and Hussein in heroic language. There is a reason for this, and you're being willfully blind to it. His little fig-leaf followup paragraph is no excuse for putting out the idea that Saddam was just the wrong guy in the wrong place at the wrong time.

It would be honestly analogous to someone writing "Hitler, that awful guy, could it be that he just wanted to make the world a better place and that might be what he really meant by the 'final solution'? Even though the truth was that he was actually the most evil man on the planet?" Someone who writes that with any sincerity does not mean the last part. That's their cover.

Given less chance to be heard than the nazis at Nuremberg, my ass. HOW many lawyers does Saddam have?

Posted by: Sortelli at July 4, 2004 at 10:07 AM

Your grasp of nuance frightens and confuses Jason, Sortelli! He is but a simple Unfrozen Caveman Comment Troll! Do not make him angry, or he will smash his keyboard with his mastodon-tooth-studded club! Oh wait, make him angry.

Posted by: Andrea Harris at July 4, 2004 at 10:37 AM

It's not that I'm nuanced, it's that when I move, I slice like a fuckin' hammer.

Posted by: Sortelli at July 4, 2004 at 11:45 AM

Actually, I just really wanted to use that "slice like a hammer" line.

Posted by: Sortelli at July 4, 2004 at 11:46 AM

I am still waiting for the perfect opportunity to use "drop it like it's hot."

Posted by: Andrea Harris at July 4, 2004 at 12:24 PM

Sortelli, I heard somewhere that Saddam's defence team is 1500 people strong.

Will we hear:

"If the Sarin doesn't fit, you must acquit!"

Posted by: Quentin George at July 4, 2004 at 12:25 PM

Yeah, but I bet all of those 1500 people have made qualifying statements about their defense of Saddam.

Therefore he is being silenced and we need SMART BRAVE AND DEFIANT people like Carlos and Jason to stand up for justice.

Posted by: Sortelli at July 4, 2004 at 12:44 PM

I must say that as a reporter, some angles are more difficult to dream up a half-decent lede too. Like a piece explaining the "nuances of Saddam 's trial." Others of this vein include: "Decent SS guards I have known" and "Pol Pot: at least he wasn't Westmoreland."

That said, it must always and everywhere be noted that Robert Fisk is Michael Moore without breasts.

Posted by: rod at July 4, 2004 at 12:55 PM

Thanks Rod, I don't feel so good right now...

Posted by: Spiny Norman at July 4, 2004 at 03:59 PM

Robert Fisk is too good for this world.....nothing meets his needs.....his home in Lebanon must be spotless...or is he just neurotic and continually dissatisfied ? He is the model of innocence when criticised for revealing the name of the Iraqi Judge hold court of Saddam.......but he is vrtuous and innocent.....everyone else is demonic and evil and corrupt, especially if they speak English.........does Fisk spend too much time indulging in narcotics or have the years immersed in Arabia turned him into a native paranoid ?

Posted by: Rick at July 4, 2004 at 09:16 PM