1 Seems to me this is just to upset the trial progress. If Saddam goes on trial that takes attention away from the terrorists. Also some guy is scheduled to testify Sunday due to cancer he may not live. Who knows.

2 I think the terrorists are afraid that Saddam may spill the beans on them in exchange for his life. He knows names and faces of the leaders of the "insurgency", and he knows where the money is hidden, or at least where it used to be hidden, namely Syria, Jordan, and Saudi Arabia. I have no doubt that those three backward dictatorships are actively supporting the efforts to destabilize Iraq, and will do anything to stop it from succeeding as a free, democratic state.

3 ooorrrr, this wasn't carried out by any anti coalition terrorists. Just retribution from locals for defending the tyrant.

4 My first thought was the retribution angle too.

5 Could be Saddam dissatified with the quality and committment of his defense. If so - I can understand that. I think we all would like to fire an attorney once in a while.

Just having fun with this.

6 I remember the scene in Team America where lil' Kim shoots his translator for failing to get his point across.

Its tough working for such a demanding boss/client.

7 Hey, So it wasn't Ramsey Clark . . IT WAS A LAWYER!

That's good enough for me!

8 Large,

HeHe. One down and how many to go?

9 It wasnt RAMSEY CLARKE or was it J.TONY SERA or many of the most infamous lawyers around and it certanly was,nt CLARENCE DARROW he,s dead jim

10 DEAD!
OBJECTION!!
OVER-RULED!!!

The Defense Rests!

11 I wouldn't declare the 'insurgents' stupid so quickly. IF they did do this, it'd be to make the case with their marginal supporters that no-one can get a fair trial and that the new gov't is corrupt, "killing defense counsel to ensure a victory for the prosecution" (or some such claim). It doesn't take much to make a conspiracy claim stick.

BUT, the retribution from the Kurds has only begun. They will certainly exact a stunning toll for what they endured. If "I" had been a Baathist party loyalist, I'd have either been doing all I could to prevent the new power structure or get some plastic surgery and a ticket to France.

12 Vinnie - I haven't been able to scroll Jawa without cracking up on your title to this post. Kudos.

13 Thanks, Mike.

Yoda, the "insurgents" are taking on the United States of America.

They're not all that bright.

14 Yoda, the "insurgents" are trying to fight a guerilla war, which requires a delicate touch which they most certainly do not have, while simultaneously trying to fight a war of terror and intimidation against their fellow muslims. They can't have it both ways, because a guerilla war requires the support of a majority of the people, which they also do not have. They are losing and will continue to lose.

15 Very much with you guys, I agree.

In the big picture / long haul, the 'insurgents' are engaged in a futile effort. (below). I was only referring to the single tactical act regarding Saddam's trial.
And even at that, I'd place 70% odds that the co-defendant's lawyer got what is a tiny taste of the Kurds' payback, that it wasn't even the insurgents who did it. Butcha never know, and as an insurgent tactic it's not completely mindless.

What the 'insurgents' (that actually means Syria)are doing big picture IS pathetically stupid, besides the horrible evil of killing your own countryman / kin to try to win anything out of them.
This road they're on gets them:
1. As Vinnie points out they're taking on exactly the wrong enemy (USA) -at least unless we get a Europussy Gov't such as Kerry is salivating to install here,
2. They're keeping the shooting gallery active (which was a critical objective for Bush: just let the fools keep running towards US weaponry and kill them by the thousands there vs here). The longer it stays active, the more of them we kill, the deeper we dig into Al-Quida's means, and the more protections we institute.
3. They've finished DEFINING Islam as a murderous, rabid religion since as they keep killing, the "moderate" and "peaceful" Muslims do NOTHING to stop them. Now it's clear to the whole world that ISLAM = MURDER. Even the "peaceful" followers will only occasionally give words (not actions) give a coy "criticism" of murders, words that always include exemptions that make it clear that it's OK to kill non-Muslims and that they're really only objecting to murders OF Muslims.
--This needs to finish running it's course so that even the slowest of US Liberals get the picture. (It WILL run it's course: France and Germany will be on fire in 2 years as the murdering Muslims in their slums break out into killing in Europe's streets). The US Liberals will get the picture after a cyanide bomb goes off in a major US city. Not before that, though.
They put ALL their cards on the square titled "we can make the American people give up". The test here is whether our Liberals + Press can give them enough help to succeed.
As long as we have a dense simpleton like Bush in office we'll stay the fight and wear them down / break them down. (Bush isn't real bright, but he lives by a couple of simple principles such as "Don't tread on me", and that our Parents and Grandparents did't fight and win 2 World Wars to have us bow to THIS).

16 Make a deal with Saddam. We will put him back in office and support him if he agrees to rid Iraq of islamic nutsos.

17 We should never have bothered Saddam in the first place. If he wanted to invade Kuwait, or SA, or whoever else, as long as the oil kept flowing, was it really our concern? The fact is, the first Gulf War was about keeping the corrupt monarchies of SA and Kuwait in power, because of the depth of ownership they have in our government.