i don't get why this is presented as some sort of startling new revelation. it was obvious that saddam's trial was a politicized mess at the time. this "new" revelation--that one of the judge's in the case was replaced in the week before the november 5, 2006 verdict because the maliki government wanted to be assured to get an execution--was reported in 2006. i mentioned the judge's replacement the week it happened and then again when saddam was executed.
of course, people's memory about these things tends to be pretty short. and very few people paid any attention to such details two years ago, so why should they now? in fact, i expect they won't.
