A surprising number of commenters that I respect lined up to defend Ramsey Clark when I attacked him for defending Saddam Hussein. Wrote jez:
Ramsey Clark's job is entirely necessary. This trial must be fair, so Hussein must have representation. (afaik, Clark was mostly appealing for adequate protection for the remaining defence team, after two lawyers were murdered).
Remember, this is why we're the good guys, and they're the bad guys. If we cut any corners on the trial, we loose the moral high ground.
But I think he's giving Mr. Clark far too much credit. Ramsey Clark isn't interested in defending the rights of Saddam Hussein; his only goal in life is to use his stature as a former United States Attorney General to oppose and humiliate America at every turn. Ramsey Clark doesn't care about Saddam, but the trial gives him a stage from which to hurl insult at the United States. Just look at Wikipedia's "Ramsey Clark" entry for a list of people he has represented.
* Nazi concentration camp boss Karl Linnas
* The National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws Advisory Board during late 1970s and early 1980s
* Branch Davidian leader David Koresh
* Antiwar activist Father Philip Berrigan
* American Indian prisoner Leonard Peltier
* Crimes of America conference in Teheran in 1980
* Liberian political figure Charles Taylor during his 1985 fight against extradition from the United States to Liberia
* Elizaphan Ntakirutimana, a leader of the Rwandan genocide
* PLO leaders in a lawsuit brought by the family of Leon Klinghoffer, the wheelchair bound elderly tourist who was shot and tossed overboard from the hijacked Achille Lauro cruise ship by Palestinian terrorists in 1986
* Camilo Mejia, a US soldier who deserted his post in March 2004, claiming he did not want any part of an "oil-driven war"
* Radovan Karadzic, of Yugoslavia and accused war criminal
* Counsel to Slobodan Milosevic, former President of Yugoslavia, accused war criminal
* Saddam Hussein, former president of Iraq and accused war criminal
In every instance Mr. Clark's goal was to hinder and harrass the United States. He opposed the invasion of Iraq from the start as a war of aggression, but he defends Saddam's massacres as legitimate self-defense. Christopher Hitchens in Slate mentions a few more interesting facts:
Clark used to be Lyndon Johnson's attorney general and in that capacity tried to send Dr. Benjamin Spock, Marcus Raskin, and others to jail for their advocacy of resistance to the war in Vietnam. (In a bizarre 2002 interview in the Washington Post, he took the view that he was still right to have attempted this, even though the defendants were all eventually exonerated.)* From bullying prosecutor he mutated into vagrant and floating defense counsel, offering himself to the génocideurs of Rwanda and to Slobodan Milosevic, and using up the spare time in apologetics for North Korea. He acts as front-man for the Workers World Party, an especially venomous little Communist sect, which originated in a defense of the Soviet invasion of Hungary in 1956. ...
The first charge being brought against Saddam Hussein is that in 1982, after his motorcade came under fire near the mainly Shiite town of Dujail, he ordered the torture and murder of 148 men and boys. It's a relatively minor item in the catalog, but there it is. The first prosecution witness in the case, Wadah al-Sheikh, has actually testified that he knows of no direct link between Saddam and the killings. The defense team has to hope that it can prove the same, or perhaps suggest that no such massacre occurred. Not so Ramsey Clark. In a recent BBC interview, he offered the excuse that Iraq was then fighting the Shiite nation of Iran:He (Saddam) had this huge war going on, and you have to act firmly when you have an assassination attempt.
Just go back and read that again. Ramsey Clark believes that A) the massacre and torture did occur and B) that it was ordered by his client and C) that he was justified in ordering it and carrying it out. That is quite sufficiently breathtaking. It is no less breathtaking when one recalls why Saddam "had this huge war going on." He had, after all, ordered a full-scale invasion of the oil-bearing Iranian region of Khuzestan and attempted to redraw the frontiers in Iraq's favor. Most experts accept a figure of about a million and a half as the number of young Iranians and Iraqis who lost their lives in consequence of this aggression (which incidentally enjoyed the approval of that Nobel Peace laureate Jimmy Carter). And Ramsey Clark says that the aggression is an additional reason to justify the massacre at Dujail.
Ramsey Clark isn't an altruistic legal purist, he's anti-American scum.
Grotian Moment, a blog dedicated to Saddam's trial, speaks similarly of Mr. Clark.
Clark is founder and current Chairman of the International Action Center, the largest antiwar movement in the United States. A vocal critic of U.S. military actions around the globe, in Op Eds and newspaper interviews, he calls US government officials "international outlaws," accusing them of "killing innocent people because we don't like their leader." Clark has said that rather than Saddam Hussein, it is the U.S. that should go on trial, pointing to the unlawful invasion, the subsequent destructive siege of Falluja, torture in prisons and the military's role in the deaths of thousands of Iraqis. http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=42165.
Clark is known for turning international trials into political stages from which to launch attacks against U.S. foreign policy. He has represented Liberian political figure Charles Taylor during his 1985 fight against extradition from the United States to Liberia; Elizaphan Ntakirutimana, a Hutu leader implicated in the Rwandan genocide; PLO leaders in a lawsuit brought by the family of Leon Klinghoffer, the wheelchair bound elderly American who was shot and tossed overboard from the hijacked Achille Lauro cruise ship by Palestinian terrorists in 1986; and most recently Slobodan Milosevic, the former leader of Serbia who is on trial for genocide before the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia in The Hague.
Meanwhile, it appears that Ramsey Clark heads several anti-American groups... all out of the same office!
Moonbat Fun House What do terrorists and "antiwar activists" have in common? Here's one nonobvious thing: On Friday and again yesterday we noted the tendency of terror groups to use a variety of names in order to create an illusion that they are more numerous than they are. Turns out left-wing fringe groups do the same thing here in America. Consider this list of "groups":
According to their Web sites, all of these groups are located in the same room, at 39 West 14th Street, #206, in New York City, and all share a phone number. According to this page, that room also is the headquarters of the Mumia Mobilization Office, which doesn't appear to have its own Web site. The International Action Center, run by crackpot (or, as the New York Times calls him, "contrarian") Ramsey Clark, seems to be the moonbat mother ship. Clark is off in Baghdad representing Saddam Hussein, which tells you something about what these "antiwar" "groups" actually stand for.