Saddam - The Sacrificial Lion

He he he!! This is going to be so much fun. I can see Indians, Pakistanis, hindus, muslims, arjuns, mohars, tahmeds, hamdims tearing apart this paindoo fool. Let the games begin....

Here`s how Riverbend, the girl blogging from inside Iraq places the `execution` in very vivid terms:

A Lynching...

It`s official. Maliki and his people are psychopaths. This really is a new low. It`s outrageous- an execution during Eid. Muslims all over the world (with the exception of Iran) are outraged. Eid is a time of peace, of putting aside quarrels and anger- at least for the duration of Eid.

This does not bode well for the coming year. No one imagined the madmen would actually do it during a religious holiday. It is religiously unacceptable and before, it was constitutionally illegal. We thought we`d at least get a few days of peace and some time to enjoy the Eid holiday, which coincides with the New Year this year. We`ve spent the first two days of a holy holiday watching bits and pieces of a sordid lynching.

America the savior… After nearly four years and Bush`s biggest achievement in Iraq has been a lynching. Bravo Americans.

Maliki has made the mistake of his life. His signature and unhidden glee at the whole execution, especially on the first day of Eid Al Adha (the Eid where millions of Muslims make a pilgrimage to Mecca), will only do more to damage his already tattered reputation. He`s like a vulture in a suit (or a balding weasel). It`s almost embarrassing. I kept expecting Muwafaq Al Rubaii to run over and wipe the drool from the corner of his mouth as he signed for the execution. Are these the people who represent the New Iraq? We`re in so much more trouble than I ever thought.

And no- not the celebrations BBC are claiming. With the exception of a few areas, the streets are empty.

Now we come to CNN. Shame on you CNN journalists- you`re getting lazy. The least you can do is get the last words correct when you write a story about an execution. Your articles are read the world over and will go down in history as references. You people are the biggest news network in the world- the least you can do is spend some money on a decent translator. Saddam`s last words were NOT ``Muqtada Al Sadr`` as Munir Haddad claimed, according to the article below. If anyone had seen at least part of the video they showed on TV, you`d know that.

``A witness, Iraqi Judge Munir Haddad, said that one of the executioners told Hussein that the former dictator had destroyed Iraq, which sparked an argument that was joined by several government officials in the room.

As a noose was tightened around Hussein`s neck, one of the executioners yelled ``long live Muqtada al-Sadr,`` Haddad said, referring to the powerful anti-American Shiite religious leader.

Hussein, a Sunni, uttered one last phrase before he died, saying ``Muqtada al-Sadr`` in a mocking tone, according to Haddad`s account.``

From the video that was leaked, it was not an executioner who yelled ``long live Muqtada al-Sadr``. See, this is another low the Maliki government sunk to- they had some hecklers conveniently standing by during the execution. Maliki claimed they were ``some witnesses from the trial``, but they were, very obviously, hecklers. The moment the noose was around Saddam`s neck, they began chanting, in unison, ``God`s prayers be on Mohamed and on Mohamed`s family…`` Something else I didn`t quite catch (but it was very coordinated), and then ``Muqtada, Muqtada, Muqtada!`` One of them called out to Saddam, ``Go to hell…`` (in Arabic). Saddam looked down disdainfully and answered ``Heya hay il marjala…?`` which is basically saying, ``Is this your manhood…?``.

Someone half-heartedly called out to the hecklers, ``I beg you, I beg you- the man is being executed!`` They were slightly quieter and then Saddam stood and said, ``Ashadu an la ilaha ila Allah, wa ashhadu ana Mohammedun rasool Allah…`` Which means, ``I witness there is no god but Allah and that Mohammed is His messenger.`` These are the words a Muslim (Sunnis and Shia alike) should say on their deathbed. He repeated this one more time, very clearly, but before he could finish it, he was lynched.

So, no, CNN, his last words were not ``Muqtada Al Sadr`` in a mocking tone- just thought someone should clear that up. (Really people, six of you contributed to that article!)

Then again, one could argue that it was a judge who gave them that false information. A judge on the Iraqi appeals court- one of the judges who ratified the execution order. Everyone knows Iraqi judges under American tutelage never lie- that explains CNN`s confusion.

Muwafaq Al Rubai was said he was ``weak and frightened``. Apparently, Rubai saw a different lynching because according to the video they leaked, he didn`t look frightened at all. His voice didn`t shake and he refused to put on the black hood. He looked resigned to his fate, and during the heckling he looked as defiant as ever. (It`s quite a contrast to Muhsin Abdul Hameed`s public hysterics last year when the Americans raided his home.)

It`s one thing to have militias participating in killings. This is allegedly the democracy the Americans flaunt. Is this how bloodthirsty and frightening we`ve become? Is this what Iraq stands for now? Executions? I`m sure the rest of the Arab countries will be impressed.

One of the most advanced countries in the world did not help to reconstruct Iraq, they didn`t even help produce a decent constitution. They did, however, contribute nicely to a kangaroo court and a lynching. A lynching shall go down in history as America`s biggest accomplishment in Iraq. So who`s next? Who hangs for the hundreds of thousands who`ve died as a direct result of this war and occupation? Bush? Blair? Maliki? Jaffari? Allawi? Chalabi?

2006 has definitely been representative of Maliki and his government- killings like never before and a lynching to end it properly. Death and destruction everywhere. I`m so tired of all of this…

So true ...

The author writes <<< Once he found out the game of the U.S. in the Middle East, he refused to play along, sacrificing himself instead of his country >>>

Actually he didn`t guage the US gameplan until it was too late and before that played right into their hands as most gangsters whose turf is increased by their bosses are tempted into doing. The only thing worthy of respect in him was his uncompromising stand at the end, atleast apparently, to his US mentors, which was the reason of his elimination in the manner it occurred. Had he cooperated, even after his capture, I`m sure the US would have found a way to reward him, considering the mess they are in at the present. Musharraf and his thugs surrendered to Bush upon a mere letter, after peeing in their pants, Saddam had a chance to save himself, his family and his wealth before the war, as ofered by the new colonials, but chose not to, which is worthy of respect, and quite brave if you ask me. In this whole tale of gangsters and higher gangsters, and the current gangsters that the US has placed incharge of Iraq, the Iraqi people are the ones that suffer and bravely endure moreso than any Saddam...

And, a very interesting comment on 29 December by Juan Cole on what Riverbend had written a day earlier:

Riverbend:End of Another Year...

That is Iraq right now. The Americans have done a fine job of working to break it apart. This last year has nearly everyone convinced that that was the plan right from the start. There were too many blunders for them to actually have been, simply, blunders. The `mistakes` were too catastrophic. The people the Bush administration chose to support and promote were openly and publicly terrible- from the conman and embezzler Chalabi, to the terrorist Jaffari, to the militia man Maliki. The decisions, like disbanding the Iraqi army, abolishing the original constitution, and allowing militias to take over Iraqi security were too damaging to be anything but intentional.

The question now is, but why? I really have been asking myself that these last few days. What does America possibly gain by damaging Iraq to this extent? I`m certain only raving idiots still believe this war and occupation were about WMD or an actual fear of Saddam.

Al Qaeda? That`s laughable. Bush has effectively created more terrorists in Iraq these last 4 years than Osama could have created in 10 different terrorist camps in the distant hills of Afghanistan. Our children now play games of `sniper` and `jihadi`, pretending that one hit an American soldier between the eyes and this one overturned a Humvee.

Again, I can`t help but ask myself why this was all done? What was the point of breaking Iraq so that it was beyond repair? Iran seems to be the only gainer. Their presence in Iraq is so well-established, publicly criticizing a cleric or ayatollah verges on suicide. Has the situation gone so beyond America that it is now irretrievable? Or was this a part of the plan all along? My head aches just posing the questions.

What has me most puzzled right now is: why add fuel to the fire? Sunnis and moderate Shia are being chased out of the larger cities in the south and the capital. Baghdad is being torn apart with Shia leaving Sunni areas and Sunnis leaving Shia areas- some under threat and some in fear of attacks. People are being openly shot at check points or in drive by killings… Many colleges have stopped classes. Thousands of Iraqis no longer send their children to school- it`s just not safe.

Why make things worse by insisting on Saddam`s execution now? Who gains if they hang Saddam? Iran, naturally, but who else? There is a real fear that this execution will be the final blow that will shatter Iraq. Some Sunni and Shia tribes have threatened to arm their members against the Americans if Saddam is executed. Iraqis in general are watching closely to see what happens next, and quietly preparing for the worst.

This is because now, Saddam no longer represents himself or his regime. Through the constant insistence of American war propaganda, Saddam is now representative of all Sunni Arabs (never mind most of his government were Shia). The Americans, through their speeches and news articles and Iraqi Puppets, have made it very clear that they consider him to personify Sunni Arab resistance to the occupation. Basically, with this execution, what the Americans are saying is ``Look- Sunni Arabs- this is your man, we all know this. We`re hanging him- he symbolizes you.`` And make no mistake about it, this trial and verdict and execution are 100% American. Some of the actors were Iraqi enough, but the production, direction and montage was pure Hollywood (though low-budget, if you ask me).

My only conclusion is that the Americans want to withdraw from Iraq, but would like to leave behind a full-fledged civil war because it wouldn`t look good if they withdraw and things actually begin to improve, would it?

Juan Cole:Riverbend is Back.

.....I (-) don`t agree that the Bush administration was deliberately trying to break up Iraq. It wants it whole (international corporations like to sign their contracts just once, thank you). It is just that its plan, of putting the Shiites and Kurds in power and making the Sunni Arabs subordinate to them, was never practical and did have the effect of pushing the country toward a break-up.

As always, her comments are canny and give a good sense of what educated, secular Sunni Arabs in Iraq are thinking. It isn`t a position you`d hear in an interview in US corporate media.

It would appear it is what Zeemax had been writing on numerous threads and posts since long, but actually these are the two most respected commentators on the Middle - East situation. Not some lowly chowkie ...

The question is, whether the Americans want Iraq all broken up as Riverbend says, or they want it whole as per Juan Cole. However they both agree that whatever it is, it all according to the original plans.

Nonsense.

It is like calling Bush , if he meets the same fate, as a Crusader Lion, a representative of devout Christian struggles.

Sorry, every other dictator, mafia don, terrorist, thug and thief who calls himself a Mujahid in order to provide a cover and justification for his crimes and make it look respectable is a slur and an abuse to my faith.

This is bizarre!
Trying to justify what Sadam did just because he was hanged? Sadam cannot be a hero no mater what so please stop trying .

#3 by masadi

“Musharraf and his thugs surrendered to Bush upon a mere letter, after peeing in their pants, Saddam had a chance to save himself, his family and his wealth before the war, as ofered by the new colonials, but chose not to, which is worthy of respect”

Should I take this as political analysis or just an emotional outburst? Are you sure Musharaf surrendered in one letter? Perhaps, perhaps he only played his part…Can you consider that possibility?

Saddam never had any chance. It was over for him. Now consider this and I know you are perhaps the only person on this site who can grasp this. He knew it was good for him to die. He never really had any defense.
Sometimes it is better to die hoping that some would still be stupid enough to write a few good words for you.
Most of the dictators are full of it.

Dear Writer,
Irrespective of what Bush and his cohorts have done in Iraq, Saddam was a tyrant unworthy of any sympathy or respect. One can disagree with the Cnn`s and Bbc`s of this world, but listening to Iraqi expatriates who have chiling stories to tell one could only pray for this man`s death.

The manner in which he was executed is questionable that made him a martyr, a Sunni-Arab legend who stood against the Americans, colonials and Persian`s. That is tragic, for he is not a worthy legend. Then again, Muslim world has shown a penchant for idolzing mass murderers as their heroes, OBL and now Saddam. Why is it that we (muslims) cannot have a Nelson Mandela or Mahatmma Gandhi? Why do we continue to honor dictators, mass murderers, tyrants? Something is wrong in paradise.

#6 by HP

HP, excuse me ... Saddam was lynched by a Badr Militia mob ... not hanged through due process. You`ve seen the (assumedly cellphone video) proceedings. I`m disappointed you think that was a judicial execution with masked militia types jeering and shouting.

Whatever else Saddam was, sophisticated he was not.

Using the anology of a thief entering your house and threatening with a knife, Saddam should intelligently saved himself, or at least protected his country - by giving himself upto the Americans initially.

Had he done that, thousands of innocents that the bood hungry neo-cons were determined to kill would have been saved.

Having said that, the hanging of Saddam following a sham trial, with the attendant hype will awaken the world to the dangers that America poses to world peace.

...contd...#8,

He never really had any defense.

Yes I guess not. Three of his defense lawyers were murdered, another one had to flee the country after being severely injured, and the judges were changed twice, the second one after he allowed a small dignity under the law (I think of allowing him to remain in head-gear while in court), accused of being sympathetic and replaced with a known enemy of Saddam whom he had forced into exile.

Indeed, Saddam had no defence.

Akber sahib,

(Every person I spoke to today, Muslim or Christian, devout or atheist, was seething with hidden rage at the timing of execution. )

Some Tambrams in Chennai had a different take. Dec 30 was Vaikunth Ekadashi and apparently anyone who dies on that day goes to heaven.

Regards

Execution gives Saddam a martyr`s crown
Last Updated: 12:01am GMT 02/01/2007

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/main.jhtml;jsessionid=CVDPWK1IETUZJQFIQMGSFFOAVCBQWIV0?xml=/opinion/2007/01/02/dl0201.xml&posted=true&_requestid=202647#comments


In Washington the air is heavy with recrimination as the implications of Saddam Hussein`s grotesquely botched execution sink in. What should have been an act of justice following due process had the baying ugliness of a lynching. A judicial execution designed to show finally that the era of Saddam is over threatens to have the opposite effect. When a dictator of exceptional brutality is shown dying with dignity and no little courage at the hands of hooded thugs, the martyr`s crown surely beckons. No wonder American officials are washing their hands of the whole gruesome affair, and Tony Blair is refusing to make any comment from his Miami poolside.

There is some justice in American claims that it is the Iraqi prime minister Nouri al-Maliki who must shoulder the burden of blame for this debacle. He trampled over religious and legal sensibilities to expedite the execution. The Iraqi constitution (by which the American-led coalition sets such store) requires President Jalal Talabani and his two vice-presidents to sign a decree of authorisation for any execution. Mr Maliki effectively ignored this requirement. Even more inflammatory as far as Iraq`s Sunni minority is concerned was his flouting of the Iraqi law that executions should not take place during the Id al-Adha holiday. For Sunnis, that began on Saturday, the day of Saddam`s execution.

If this had been some careless piece of provocation by an inept government, it would be one thing. But the anti-Sunni chanting of the masked executioners as Saddam died and the way the whole repellent scene was swiftly put into the public domain suggests something more menacing. The Maliki government appears to have used the execution to send a calculated message to Iraqi Sunnis that the Shias are the masters now. An administration whose overriding purpose should be to unify Iraq begins to look like a factional regime intent on repaying the Sunni minority for Saddam`s decades of oppression of the Shias.

American sources have insisted there was little they could do to avert this latest calamity. They may be dismayed at Baghdad`s dismal incompetence yet are constrained from intervening on the grounds that it would simply undermine the fledgling regime. Yet as President Bush completes his plans for a significant reinforcement of US forces in a final attempt to quell sectarian unrest in Baghdad, Saddam`s execution looks likely only to inflame the situation and make the prospects of an orderly withdrawal by the coalition more remote than ever. Mr Bush could be forgiven for thinking that everything he touches in this ill-starred country turns to dross.

---

Outrage mounts over `lynch mob` hanging
By Neil Tweedie
Last Updated: 9:23am GMT 02/01/2007Page 1 of 2



Leader: Execution gives Saddam a martyr`s crown
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2007/01/02/wiraq02.xml
Nurse: Dictator spent captivity feeding birds
Iraqi civilian death toll reaches all-time high
Your View: Is it right to watch the video of Saddam Hussein`s death?
In pictures: Saddam`s daughter speaks out
The execution of Saddam Hussein – widely condemned yesterday as more an exercise in lynch law than judicial punishment – was rushed through by the Iraqi government despite American requests for a delay.

senior Iraqi source said the US ambassador in Baghdad wanted the hanging to be postponed for two weeks but relented when the Shia dominated government rushed through documents approving it. It appeared that the United States was anxious the execution should not be carried out with unseemly haste.

The disclosure follows a clamp-down in Iraq on media coverage of the execution amid growing revulsion at what many across the Sunni Muslim world regard as a sectarian act of revenge by a hostile administration. It followed television and internet broadcasts of unauthorized telephone camera pictures showing Saddam being taunted by Shia witnesses in the death chamber shortly before the hanging.

In the footage, which has attracted thousands of hits on the internet across the world, the onlookers can be heard chanting the Shia version of an Islamic prayer in a calculated final insult to Saddam, a member of Iraq`s Sunni minority. As the noose is fitted another man can be heard telling Saddam he is going to hell.

The former president for life still manages a sarcastic response, asking his executioners: ``Do you consider this bravery?``

The witnesses also repeatedly call out the name of the militant Shia cleric Moqtada al-Sadr, leader of the Mahdi Army, before cheering as Saddam`s body crashes through the trapdoor of the gallows. The dictator`s last words were ``there is no God but Allah and I testify that Mohammed is the messenger of God``.

The soundtrack and images contrasted sharply with officially-released silent pictures of Saturday`s execution portraying it as much more subdued and dignified event. There have also been reports that Saddam, 69, was taunted by his executioners in his cell in the hours before his death, with one brandishing the rope that would later hang him.

``The Americans wanted to delay the execution by 15 days because they weren`t keen on having him executed straight away,`` said a senior Iraqi source. ``But during the day [on Friday] the prime minister`s office provided all the documents they asked for and the Americans changed their minds when they saw the prime minister was very insistent. Then it was just a case of finalising the details.``

The lack of neutrality or dignity during the hanging, combined with the decision to rush it through at the start of the Muslim festival of Eid, has raised fears of a widespread Sunni backlash. Demonstrations as far apart as Jordan and Kashmir were accompanied by condemnation in the Arab press. The unauthorized footage also undermined American and British attempts to portray the execution as an impartial judicial event. The Foreign Office refused to comment on it yesterday.

US forces, who had held Saddam since his capture in December 2003, handed him over only four hours before his death following the conclusion of negotiations between the Iraqi prime minister Nouri al-Maliki and American officials.

Saddam had been sentenced to death for overseeing the murder of 148 Shia civilians in the town of Dujail following an alleged assassination attempt against him. His appeal against the death sentence failed on Dec 26, the court instructing that he should be hanged within 30 days.

According to the Iraqi source, the US ambassador, Zalmay Khalilzad, told Mr Maliki that he would not hand over Saddam unless he signed a death warrant and obtained authorisation from the Iraqi president, Jalal Talabani.

Mr Maliki was said to be anxious to rush through the execution to gain maximum credit among the fractious Shia community, but Mr Talabani, a Kurd, was anxious to see Saddam tried for crimes against his people. Mr Maliki won out. No presidential decree was judged to be needed and Mr Maliki signed the death warrant in front of television cameras. Shia clerics said there was no religious problem with a Saturday execution as Eid would not have begun.

``There were a few guards who shouted slogans that were inappropriate and that`s now the subject of a government investigation,`` said Sami al-Askari, an adviser to Mr Maliki. ``That should not have happened. Before we went into the room we had an agreement that no one should bring a mobile phone.``

No Americans were present in the death chamber.
US officials discussed burying Saddam in the US-controlled Green Zone in Baghdad, but later agreed to have his body flown to Tikrit.

Yesterday, the Iraqi government ordered the closure of the Sharkiya television station, which is seen as sympathetic to the Sunni community, accusing it of stirring up sectarian hatred over the execution.

But it was the government of Mr Maliki that was being blamed inside and outside Iraq for inciting religious hatred. The Sunni cleric group in Iraq, the Muslim Scholars` Association, described the hanging as a ``purely political act``.

Its timing on the day that Sunnis celebrated the start of Eid was a calculated provocation showing the ``grudge`` still held by the Shia. The Saudi newspaper Al-Watan attacked the ``sectarianism gripping the corridors of power in Iraq`` while the Qatar-based daily Al-Sharq described the hanging as an act of sectarian revenge by the Shia majority in Iraq, which suffered for decades under Saddam`s Sunni-dominated regime.

Saddam`s eldest daughter Raghad joined a demonstration in the Jordanian capital Amman. The demonstrators chanted anti-American and pro-Saddam slogans. Raghad, who is exiled in Jordan, told protesters: ``I want to thank you for this show of support. May God protect you.`` One of the banners held by protesters read: ``Leader Saddam the father of martyrs``.

Demonstrations also continued in Saddam`s heartland. In Al-Dawr, near to Saddam`s home village of Awja, where he was buried on Sunday, hundreds of Sunnis took to the streets. Nearby in Tikrit, dozens of mourning tents were erected.

Much of the analyses that tries to elevate SH as martyr is unfounded and reeks of propaganda.

Under Shariat laws of the Islamists much of the executions are infact the real ``mob lynching`` in the public.

Does that turn every other criminal who stands sentenced to death under the antiquated Shariat courts and gets executed in public under the Islamist`s rule turns into a martyr because he faced the lynching with dignity knowing that the antiquated trial proceedings would not stand any where in the modern judicial system ???

This is the real ``public lynching`` of those falsely tried and sentenced under the Islamist`s antiquated Shariat courts:

Saddam Hussein`s regime has carried out frequent summary executions, including:

4,000 prisoners at Abu Ghraib prison in 1984;
3,000 prisoners at the Mahjar prison from 1993-1998;
2,500 prisoners were executed between 1997-1999 in a ``prison cleansing campaign;``
122 political prisoners were executed at Abu Ghraib prison in February/March 2000;
23 political prisoners were executed at Abu Ghraib prison in October 2001; and
At least 130 Iraqi women were beheaded between June 2000 and April 2001.

http://fdd.typepad.com/fdd/2006/01/alert_saddams_c.html

As the trial of former Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein resumes, the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies is posting 4 videos of actual torture and murder that took place under Saddam Hussein’s regime.

FDD President Cliff May notes: “Television news, understandably, will not broadcast such videos. But they are, nevertheless, an important record of Saddam Hussein’s crimes against humanity that should be available to the public as his trial resumes.”

WARNING: This material is extremely shocking and graphic in nature. It should not be viewed by children. Also, it may be necessary to turn the volume down before watching the 4 separate chapters.

Please note, each chapter may take several minutes to download.

Chapter 1

Chapter 2

Chapter 3

Chapter 4

inna lillaha wa inna ilayhi raji`oon. May Allah forgive him and accept his martyrdom at the hand of the Americans and Rafidites. amen.



javascript:popUpWindow(`/mediadb/player.cfm?file_id=5657`, 20, 20, 680, 410)

The official Sunni position:

Allama Ahmad Nisar Baig Qadri on Saddam`s execution

Re: # 6

I do not know how much of this is true. Before the war started USA might have been willing to allow Saddam and his family to leave Iraq for a neutral country like Libya.

Re: # 8

There are several Shite groups in Iraq - supporters of Sadr are not to be confused with Badr party which is ironically one of the Shite groups with out a militia.

Re: # 6 Bizarre . . . trying to justify . . . Sadam cannot be a hero no mater what so please stop trying .

HP, `no matter what` means your mind is made up, which is great, but based on the information we have so far, he was no better or no worse than the many brutal dictators out there. In addition, his rule was good for his country. The Shia-Sunni divide is artificial and newly created - he just put down rebellions ruthlessly, much like Musharraf put down in Baluchistan or Abraham Lincoln put down in the US, or Putin in Chechnya. I did not use the word `hero` for that is very subjective. He was a great mans, and `great` may also be subjective to some, but his place in history cannot be denied.


Re: #7 Why is it that we (muslims) cannot have a Nelson Mandela or Mahatmma Gandhi? Why do we continue to honor dictators, mass murderers, tyrants? Something is wrong in paradise.

rf786, I have pondered over this question often, and a quote comes to mind: ``Everyone`s a pacifist between wars. It`s like being a vegetarian between meals.`` (Colman McCarthy). Pacifism needs a certain political climate, as it works on the conscience of the oppressor. Sadly, the Europe-Islam see-saw history goes back a long way and conscience plays very little part in it. Had Gandhi been part of the 1857 uprising, he would have been hanged in Delhi, and had Martin Luther King started his movement in the 1840s instead of 1960s, he would have been promptly lynched. Only when conditions are right does non-violent resistance work.

#15 by ballukhan: Saddam Hussein`s regime has carried out frequent summary executions

ballukhan, I do not deny that Saddam was a brutal dictator, but everything was documented and within the rule of law (what we have soon so far), however flawed the laws were. If Iraq had become a paradise after he went away, you would have a point. But with militias carrying out torture and extra-judicial murders that are way more numerous than Saddam ever did, one has no option but to conclude that he had put a strong lid on the various religious and ethnic forces in Iraq and had fashioned a modern prosperous secular Arab state, that may have become democratic over time.

Thank you all for your interaction. I will be back later.

Every reason that Western governments and their propaganda machinery had churned out to justify their invasion of Iraq and Afghanistan has turned out to be a blatant lie. Every main stream propaganda outlet like Times, BBC, ABC, CNN, and many more have publically apologized to their readership and viewership for feeding lies about this war, in order to remain credible. And this means that every accusation that they must have made against Saddam, must also have been a blatant lie.

The truth finally comes out, if you trust Lord and do the right thing. They had so much pride in their technology and power of media and propaganda but what is the net result? Take for example, Americans; the number of Americans who now believe that US government is complacent in 9/11 attacks or even perpetrator of it, is almost equal to those Americans who have acute hatered for Muslims and Islam. Britain has stopped using the crass terminology ``war on terror`` through an official decree. Only gukking losers and hindus use this terminology still. All the pride that they had in their war machine (most fearsome war machine ever in the history of mankind) has been tarnished by helpless and unarmed citizens of Iraq and Afghanistan.

God does work in mysterious ways. Everything that they intended to use against helpless people of the world has turned aginst themselves.

#9 by parthaab on January 2, 2007 2:07am PT
.......

Had he done that, thousands of innocents that the bood hungry neo-cons were determined to kill would have been saved.

As they say it is better to die the death of a warrior than live the life of a coward. Just because we Subcontinentals have mastered the art of bending over and made servility seem like a virtue does not mean that we should expect everyone else to do the same. For almost two centuries Indians (includes Pakistanis and Bangladeshis) were like obedient servants to the British and what did we get in return. From a nation that along with China accounted for almost one-half of the world`s output in 1757 was a poster child for poverty in 1947.

We all have to die one day. Yes, four million Vietnamese died in the US bombings in the 1960s and 70s. Yes, most of its infrastructure was destroyed. But at the end of the day, 58000 Americans also died and hundreds of thousands battered physically and psychologically. The war changed the entire psyche of America and the Vietnam syndrome came in. The generation gap became a big rift in the American society. Despite easy victories over Grenada, Panama, Iraq (Gulf War I) and Serbia, the defeat of Vietnam was never erased from its memories. Even today with things getting out of hand in Iraq, Vietnam comparisons have started propping up.

The Vietnam of today is no better or worse off than the Indian subcontinent or many other Third World countries. Yes, it is hard to erase the memories of the dead ones but time is a big healer. Most importantly, the Vietnamese can walk with their heads held high unlike us Subcontinentals who were ``Jewel in the Crown``. If you ever want the enemy to feel your pain then give him a nice kick in the chins. It is not how many Iraqis who are dying that is making the Americans (and the poodles like Britain and Australia) rethink that war is bad; hundreds of thousands died during GW1 and another 2 million due to sanctions under the Clinton regime. It is the thousands of Americans who have died or the tens of thousands who are maimed forever that is making them rethink their strategy. The likes of Cindy Sheehan had no problems in her son joining the military and had it been an easy victory then we would never have heard from her. With her son dead, we are hearing from the likes of her.

HP writes <<< Are you sure Musharaf surrendered in one letter? Perhaps, perhaps he only played his part… >>>

That was no political analysis on my part, I agree with what you say that he played his part, as did Saddam until he refused to play it anymore (that was what the comparison of the appearances was about), neither Musharraf nor Saddam did anything for the sake of their people in these decisons. In the case of Saddam, his decision was that of a gangster that becomes too independant and big for his boots because the master has cut him some slack in the past, he totally miscalculated, and so the `top dogs` eliminated him in their usual manner with a farce trial. Musharraf can only pee in his pants at the thought of going against his masters...

#7 by rf786 on January 2, 2007 1:52am PT
Dear Writer,
Irrespective of what Bush and his cohorts have done in Iraq, Saddam was a tyrant unworthy of any sympathy or respect. One can disagree with the Cnn`s and Bbc`s of this world, but listening to Iraqi expatriates who have chiling stories to tell one could only pray for this man`s death.

Rf786, as the author has correctly pointed out that in that part of the world a danda only works. As to the Dujaal killings for which he was convicted and hanged; the people of that village had tried to kill him. Killing or attempting to kill the head of a state is a treasonable offense under the laws of many nations including the US. Treason carries the death penalty in many nations including the US. Yes, his methods might have been crude but it is a different region with a different set of laws, conditions, beliefs.

As to Iraqi expatriates, I take that with a grain of salt. The BBCs and CNNs are nothing more than sophisticated instruments of deception in promoting the Western interests. They package their shit so nicely that in the end they promote and project those viewpoints that they want. A real life example. India conducted its second round of nuclear tests on May 13, 1998. Whether you agree or disagree with the tests one fact was certain that most Indians supported the tests and nuclearization just as most Pakistanis supported their country`s decision. On May 14, 1998, the local ABC affiliate of San Francisco, KGO-ABC TV had a virulently anti-India report in its 11 `o` clock news. They had one ex-serviceman from India who was anti-tests and based on that they apparently decided that he represented most of the Indians and supported any sanctions against India. Of course, how many Indians did they interview before they found one that matched their opinion is anyone`s guess. The same night on Nightline they had three Americans discussing the tests but not a single Indian was invited to give the Indian version.

Pakistanis, with blood of 3 million Bengalis on their hands, praising Saddam is like Hitler praising King Leopold as a righteous and moral man.

{``Saddam Hussein will be remembered as the lion that rose from Tikrit, the land of Salahuddin. Yes, the same Saladin, the Crusaders` nightmare. And that land will produce more like them.``}

Akber Sahib,
While I cannot, with a straight face, agree with your lavish and extremely generous eulogy to Sadman Houston, I can honestly understand what motivated you to write this. I have always despised this tyrant who is obviously guilty of so much. No single individual, with the possible exceptions of Genghis Khan, Hulagu Khan, and Mohammad Ali Jinnah, is responsible for more Muslim deaths than Sadman Houston. All of his victims were Muslim. All the countries that he voluntarily fought were Muslim. All of his ``victories`` were against Muslims. The deaths of half a million Shiite Eye Ranians, hundreds of thousands of Eye Racki Arab Shiites, thousands of Eye Racki Sunni Kurds, and numerous Kuwaiti Sunni Arabs make him a truly equal opportunity murderer of Muslims. This man squandered billions of dollars of Eye Rack wealth for the destruction of Eye Ran, Eye Rack, and Kuwait. This man set back the cause of Arab freedom by at least two generations. This man, who mocked God by putting ``Allahu Akbar`` on the Eye Racki flag as a cheap means to gather favor, was about as sincere and pious as the lice in his hair when he was discovered in his hellhole by American forces.

Having said that, the manner in which he was ``tried,`` and worse, lynched, reaffirms my faith that given the opportunity, Muslims and especially Arabs, will always do the wrong thing. There was no need to ``execute`` Sadman Houston. He was already weak, already humiliated, and already refuted. The spectacle caught by someone`s cell phone camera depicts a brave man - calm, resolute, defiant, and respectably taking his ``punishment`` with dignity, grace, and patience. Conversely, his hooded tormentors appeared to be acting like cowards - hyena-like in their stupid sounds of ``Muqtada, Muqtada, Muqtada.`` What this tragedy of errors betrayed was that maybe, just maybe, Sadman Houston was slightly justified in liquidating these vengeful, violent, and venomous Eye Racki Shiite militiamen. This was not a good day for Eye Rack, for Shiaism, for Islam, for Arabs, or for the future.
Good article.

Saddam might have been a tyrant, but he wasn`t a fundoo. And that means a lot.

I cursed him the day when he allowed himself to be captured alive. Here was this mofo, posing everywhere with guns and swords, who allowed millions of his countrymen die for his tomfoolery, his empty bravado; and when the crunch came, he didn`t even fire two shots in air. The least he owed to all those dead Iraqis, whoever they were, combatants or non-combatants, the least he owed to them was a shot through his own skull. But he gave himself up to them like a bloody rat, the b@stard. I cursed him when I saw those pics, may he rot in hell forever.

But now that he is dead and gone, I hope his soul rests in peace. May Allah or whichever god they swear by, may he give Iraqis the fortitude and sagacity to put him behind them. His hanging episode is an example of utter stupidity by the present govt. Such idiots will do more harm to Iraqis than ten Saddams could do together.

And for some grave-dancing gleeful Chowkies I would say only this : Respect death. You don`t know when it will come looking for you.

Re: # 25

Salim Bhaijan, as much as I agree with you, I hope you are not looking for any similarities between Saddam and Houston. While Saddam was joyful to see the blood, Sam Houston refused an offer to put down the insurgence and he retired before the civil war. There is simply no comparison between the two. Unless, you mean to imply some oil connection of Saddam the son of a bytch and Houston, TX. Do you see how mind boggling it is to see the Paki Muslims talking about injustice in lands far away? Why can’t Pakis concentrate on Paki issues for a change? Inconsequential morons like Masadi and the author of this article is oh so brave to tell us all how bad the west is, while they will never have the balls to say anything about the butchery of 3 million Bengalis, and the injustices vetted to the religious minorities in their own countries. They are class-A certified wankers with their heads shoved in their own behinds.

#27, Kullee Payee,
I always use the name ``Sadman Houston`` for this tyrant because, as a believing Shiite, I do not want to refer to him by the name of the martyred grandson of the Holy Prophet (PBUH). ``Sadman`` describes him much better than ``Saddam`` which only means confrontational.

As for Pakis cheering or lamenting the execution, the preceding butchery, or the treatment of minorities, I totally agree with you. The way Pakistanis have treated their minorities, their majorities, and everyone in between should land every leader from that God awful Jinnah to Mushy Mushy Mush Mush and every pilfering, murdering, lying SOB in between in hell. There is nothing ``Pak`` about this country and nothing will cure it of its ills other than reunification with India.

there is no big lesson to be learnt, no legacy whatsoever. did bhutto`s hanging leave any ``legacy``? its naked tribalism begetting more tribalism. sure amricans will leanr a lesson from all this, but will the ummah?

paki hearts beat for saddam...

color me shocked...

Kulharee writes <<< Pakistanis, with blood of 3 million Bengalis on their hands, praising Saddam is like Hitler praising King Leopold as a righteous and moral man >>>

``Pakistanis`` are just as much guilty of the blood of 3 million Bengalis (the numbers that you throw out are still contested), as ``Americans`` are of killing tens of millions in their bloody history. Let us see you use the hitler analogy for them.

The people cannot be blamed for the decisions and doings of their elite especially when they have little or no control or representation, consciousness or organization, which is true both of Americans and Pakistanis but moreso for Pakistanis. But your perverted morality and propaganda spewing is incapable of understanding that...

#31 Masadi, why should the people and the society not be blamed? the leaders do not come from a vaccum. pakistani leadership in not un-representative, it represents the will of many of its people. its only fair for pakistani people to take credit and blame for its leadership including the military. the leadership more or less is an outcome of overall social ethos.

#31 masadi {``The people cannot be blamed for the decisions and doings of their elite especially when they have little or no control or representation, consciousness or organization``}

Masadi Sahib,
Eid Mubarak and Happy New Year to you, my friend. Now, as for who is to blame, don`t you agree that at some point, we Muslims need to take responsibility over our own environment? We can`t even remove, try, and hang our own criminals without the support of foreigners.
East Pakistani Bengalis had to resort to Indian interference to obtain their freedom and expel the West Pakistani oppressors. The poor people of Afghanistan had to wait for American interference (more like vengeance and retribution) to rid them of the horrible Tally Bans. The Somali government needed the help of mostly Christian Ethiopian army to drive out the crazy Islamic Courts Union thugs. The Soodis needed American (Christian and Jewish) forces to protect them from brotherly Ayrab and fellow-Sunni Muslim Sadman Houston. All the Stans (Kazakh, Kirghis, Uzbek, Tajik, Turkmen) and Azerbaijan needed Christian Russian and godless Communist Soviet occupation to drive their literacy figures into the 90%+ range.
Slavery is a state when others decide when, why, where, and how you live.

....i think the best way to see how things will pan out in the future is to look at past trends.......most of them are quite clear, yet so many people totally ignore them........

1. no one has, historically, been able to defeat the afghans through an invasion and occupy their lands......the british tried it, the soviets tried it, pakistanis and iranis (?) kind of tried it.......based on this, it should be obvious that nato and usa are not going to be able to do it either........

hence we will soon be seeing a defeated nato coming out of afghanistan.......

2. it is nearly impossible for a structured military to defeat an insurgency, when the military is trying to occupy land.........the only successful example is in malaysia (?) with the brits (?).........all other occupations have failed......at best they have resulted in long term perpetual violence........at worst in all out defeat for the occupying country......french in algeria......soviets in afghanistan.......usa in vietnam.........pakistan in bangladesh.......india in kashmir........israel in lebanon..........israel in palestine.........russia in chechnya.......turkey in kurdistan.........

based on this, the americans were bound to be defeated in iraq......which is what has happened........though it was even a lot faster than i thought.......

3. any dictator, in a muslim country, who sides with the usa, will eventually, one day, get hanged by the usa at some point.........the reason is that sooner or later, the population of that country will rise up against the pro-usa policies of the dictator, thereby forcing the dictator to adopt anti-usa policies....or even more dangerously, anti-israel policy........or the dictator will over-extend himself, in trying to assist the usa, in its conflicts with other countries, thereby weakening himself in his own country............

shah in iran.......zia in pakistan.......saddam in iraq......noriega in panama.......mujahideen leaders in afghanistan........based on this trend, the next on the list are hosni in egypt.....sauds in saudi arabia.......the gulf shiekhs.........the king of jordan.....the leaders of lebanon......and most of all, our own musharraf....

.......the best policy is to niether be a friend of the us govt. nor be an enemy........one is screwed if one does either.......especially if one is a dictator........either your own population will hang you or the americans will.........rumsfeld shaking hands with saddam one day, and executing him the next is a very good example.......

........hence, the best thing for musharraf to do now is to distance himself from the usa and start doing what his own population wants him to do.......rather than waiting till the last second when he has to ditch the usa, in the fear of his own population overthrowing him......or he has to become anti-usa.........in both the later cases, he is screwed............if hilary clinton or borack obama don`t hang him then john mccain or qazi hussain (or nawaz sharif will).........

Re: # 28

Salim bhai:

What are the differences between Shia and Sunni, for a non-religious person to understand?

#35, Anil,
While it is dangerous to generalize and considering that there are many many offshoots of Shiaism and Sunni schools of thought, it is probably fair to state that:

Shias believe that Ali, the cousin and son-in-law of the Holy Prophet (PBUH), should have been the first caliph (successor).
Shias believe that the ruler must rule with the will of the majority, be a good Muslim, and should be removed if not appropriate as a ruler.
Shias believe that Islamic law is not inflexible and should evolve based on interpretation.
Shias believe that true Islam was maintained by the 12 Imams (father and son successors of Ali, the first Imam) - Asna Ashuri (12 ers) are the majority of Shiites from Iran, Iraq, Pakistan, India, the Gulf. Ismaili (7 ers) are an offshoot and found in Pakistan, India, and previously were the majority in Egypt during the Fatimid Caliphate.
Shias believe that the last Imam, Imam Mahdi, did not die and will return to spread justice just before the end of the world.


Sunnis believe that Abu Baker, Omar, Uthman, and Ali were properly selected as the first four Caliphs.
Sunnis believe that Islamic Law is based on the Holy Koran and the Sunnah (tradition of the Holy Propohet (PBUH)) and is not subject to further modification.
Sunnis supported the caliphate of Muawiyah and his son Yazid and their descendants that formed the Ommayad dynasty.
Sunnis supported the Abbasid Caliphate, another hereditary dynasty.
Sunnis supported the Ottomans as Caliphs, another hereditary dynasty.

Over the years, some minor differences in rituals (the position of arms during prayer, time for breaking fast, funeral rites) have taken place between the two major divisions. But these differences also occur within each sect among their various offshoots.

#31 by masadi on January 2, 2007 8:48am PT


``Pakistanis`` are just as much guilty of the blood of 3 million Bengalis (the numbers that you throw out are still contested)


That`s right comrade...tht number is contested...however, the blame for the 600K dead iraqis, most of whom have been killed in shia-sunni violence, lies on america...that can`t be contested..no siree...

SC writes <<< Masadi Sahib,
Eid Mubarak and Happy New Year to you, my friend. Now, as for who is to blame, don`t you agree that at some point, we Muslims need to take responsibility over our own environment? >>>

Eid Mubarak and HNY to you as well. You are confusing public issues having to do with social institutions with ``personal`` responsibility. When the institutions of a country are designed to operate in a particular fashion, no `personal responsibility` can achieve anything except personal sacrifice and slaughter. When Muslims become conscious of the true issues that affect their lives more will be able to take `personal responsibility` towards meaningful ends. Right now they are busy with petty differences which are exploited by those that ensure that Muslim instutions do not serve Muslim people but serve the West.

Jang writes <<< Masadi, why should the people and the society not be blamed? the leaders do not come from a vaccum. pakistani leadership in not un-representative, it represents the will of many of its people. >>>

Amazing, now coups and rule by force is defined as ``representative``. The military as an institution has no part in the political but unfortunately in Pakistan it defines the political. You have absolutely no proof that the rule by this military tyrant defines the will of the people of Paksitan. Even in the atmosphere where these people are offered little hope and little choice people reject these tyrants when given the opportunity.

#38 by masadi on January 2, 2007 10:12am PT

conrade...didn`t you read it in the news...a majority of pakis(and bangladeshis) don`t believe in democracy...which explains why they were dancing when el-presidente heroically, harrison ford style, rescued himself from a hijacking and took over the country....

#37 arjun writes <<< however, the blame for the 600K dead iraqis, most of whom have been killed in shia-sunni violence, lies on america...that can`t be contested..no siree... >>

You posts progess from stupidity to ignorance, every successive post beats the previous one in being dimwitted. If universities, like the ones that come up with the Iraq dead had conducted those studies and come up with the numbers and not only the victims claiming the numbers killed (a biased source) then there would be little contest in those numbers. That however is not the case.

Regarding the blame of the Iraq dead, these occurred in the post US invasion period when the US was the overlord in Iraq. If Saddam can be held responsible for deaths in his period the blame for the country-wide deaths in the US/US puppet thugs time lies on the US, not to mention that these killings are the direct result of the war and how it destroyed civil society in Iraq and deliberately played one group against the other, and let me remind you that both Shias and Sunnis are going to lose in this game the US is playing...

Masadi, it is the same woe is me and blame-displacement mantra that uneducated of your ranks have been spewing from day one. Never to take responsibility but always to find faults some place else. Why can’t you admit that it is your filthy faith that has yielded such results. You guys are more worried about who the last prophet is, and what sky Allah lives in, and less about progress and human rights. George Bushes of the world serve you well. The day your Ummah protests in streets of Cairo and Lahore over suicide Sunni bombers in Iraq, and Palestinian terrorists, Holocaust deniers, your words might resonate with the world, until then, go eat some goat.

Re: # 32

It is a good thesis; however,on one side if it is debateable whether Pakistani leadership is representative or not but there is no doubt that it is in US. Therefore, contrary to masadis 31, Us population is absolutely responsible for the genocide of 650K Iraqis and maintaining a slaughter house in the occupied Palestine and many attrocities around the globe. With an access to all media including internet to overwhelming majority of the population in US, they cannot be given benefit of doubt. Please keep in mind that about 80% of them supported the butchering of Iraq and despite Abu Gariab, death squads, torture cells, extraordinary renditions of human beings from all parts of the planet, and torture centers like gitmo they chose to elect the whole cadre of the buthchers of Iraq once again. The current change of heart on Iraq is not because of some inherent goodness in their hearts but because of the realization of the fact that they cannot win this war and every passing day brings more disgrace and defeat to their country.

Re: #35 In other words meaningless things that are used by those that want to harm Muslims, even though the Quran warned Muslims that those who break up their deen and become sects are like idolators and you have ``no concern with them``. All this difference and not using your sense and the Quran is what has become the opium of the Muslim masses as they lose all sense of morality and justify slaughter of each other for these ``formulas`` that have no justification in the Quran. That is all the ``theology`` I am willing to discuss

Anglo/America the mighty created him and destroyed him. They have written and dictated the history of Asia since the 17th century. Another pawn died when he became of no use.

Pawn is a more approriate term for the tinpot dictators of the world who are used to colonize the former colonies. They are remote controls whose buttons are pushed by these European powers.

Urstruly writes <<< Therefore, contrary to masadis 31, Us population is absolutely responsible for the genocide of 650K Iraqis and maintaining a slaughter house in the occupied Palestine and many attrocities around the globe. With an access to all media including internet to overwhelming majority of the population in US, they cannot be given benefit of doubt. >>>

Your ``thesis`` assumes that the US is a democratic system where people make the choices, the media gives great information, and the internet can be a check on this media if need be. All assumptions are incorrect. The US is not a democracy, the elite that decide are far removed from the people. The people are controlled through polite means using moral symbols of nationalism, and when given proper information they do correct their position as swings in polls often reveal. I do not hold the US public responsible for the Iraq deaths, as a whole, that is because regardless of what they want the US elite would do whatever it saw fit in Iraq, not to mention those that openly opposed the war inspite of the media which is something worthy of respect.

kaurasach writes <<< Pawn is a more approriate term for the tinpot dictators of the world who are used to colonize the former colonies. They are remote controls whose buttons are pushed by these European powers. >>>

In this new form of colonization, they don`t need to ``push buttons``. The institutions they have set in place ensure that these ``tinpot dictators``, operate on auto pilot, any glitch in this automatic system is apltly fixed for the sake of ``human rights`` by killing more than the ones they were claiming to save...

kulharee writes <<< Why can’t you admit that it is your filthy faith that has yielded such results. You guys are more worried about who the last prophet is, and what sky Allah lives in, and less about progress and human rights. >>>

I cannot admit something that is untrue. The only thing filthy is your intellect and your morality, of which you have no sense. Those that are worried about differences in theology and make sects based on those are ``no concern of mine``- as the Quran tells me, Allah will decide between them. What I am concerned with is your biased/prejudiced/rank racist assigning of blame based on nonsense evidence and totally absolving the real culprits whose crimes are open books for all to see, covered up by a flimsy shroud of ``progress and human rights``- when they don`t respect either except for their own tiny little group...

Re: # 36

Salim

Please read your post again and look at the nature of differences that you have cited; half of them are untrue anyway. But the point that I am trying to make here is that Shia-ism is nothing but a cult which is cultivated on the mantra of hatered based on the events that happened 1500 years ago - right or wrong. The fact of the matter is that I will lay down my life for the honor of Ali (ra) or any ahl-e-bait, just like any Muslim, then why a shia child is raised on the basis of hatered for his fellow Muslim.

Personally, I have nothing to do in the matters of selection or election of caliphs that happened 15 centuries ago, then why such hatered for me? Hell, even my ancestors have nothing to do with the whole debacle. Why do this battle of caliphate is still being faught in subcontinent-please explain. At the time when battle for caliphates were being fought in Arabia my great great grandpa lord Ram was mired in the troubles of his own. The then emperor of sri lanka, had kidnapped grandma. It took long time to recover grandma even though grandpa had help from the chief minister of tamil nado, who happened to be a monkey at that time. So I appeal to your good sense to get out of this cult mindset and let human beings live in peace. Say no to cult - say no to tunnel vision.

#40 by masadi on January 2, 2007 10:19am PT


how it destroyed civil society in Iraq


Yup...``civil society`` under a brutal dictatorship is bad if the dictator in question is muslim(and sunni)...but yugoslavia`s civil society being destroyed to give the muslims bosnians or kosovars their freedom is, well, kosher..


and deliberately played one group against the other


yup...the US invasion created the rift between shia and sunni....the sunnis and shias didn`t kill each other under saddam because they just loved each other to death...saddam`s iron fist had nothing to do with it...

Re: # 45 masadi

You make a compelling case but I think it is also a part of Western propaganda to create a perception around the globe that American people are dummies and puppets and there is an elite group who pulls their strings and media controls their mindset. I think the origin of this propaganda lies in the era of Cold War when Soviets protrayed a capitalist elite as the nemesis who was controlling masses in West. After the collapse of soviet union, the Goebles in Western propaganda machinery just keep perpetuating the myth, since it helps them play innocent at times.

#48, Urstruly {``The fact of the matter is that I will lay down my life for the honor of Ali (ra) or any ahl-e-bait, just like any Muslim, then why a shia child is raised on the basis of hatred for his fellow Muslim.

...At the time when battle for caliphates were being fought in Arabia my great great grandpa lord Ram was mired in the troubles of his own. The then emperor of sri lanka, had kidnapped grandma. It took long time to recover grandma even though grandpa had help from the chief minister of tamil nado, who happened to be a monkey at that time.``}

Brother Urstruly,
Eid Mubarak and a Happy New Year to you, my good friend. Anybody who can drive Hamidum Sahib to drink (although it doesn`t take much persuasion) is a hero in my own estimation. When such a person can simultaneously expose the hippo in the hypocratic Tahmed, we all benefit. So, all praise and felcitations are due to you and your valiant efforts in leading the jihad against jahils. :)

Now, as for your comment about laying down your life for Imam Ali, I request that you don`t go that far - just resist the temptation to support that rogue Muawiya and his line of Abu Sufyan tadpoles. Besides, we need your life to make Hamidum`s more exciting.

Now, Shia children are not raised in hatred of Sunnis - especially momin ones like you. If you look throughout history, it is the Shias who have been massacred by Sunnis in large numbers - Ottomans in Turkey, Tally Ban in Afghanistan, Sadman Houston in Eye Rack, Soodis in Arabia, and Saladin in Egypt. The only case in the reverse direction is possibly that of Hafiz Assad massacring the Sunni Muslim Brotherhood in Syria. So much for hatred and yes numbers do count.

I am glad that your grandma was recovered. :) So you guys can stop terrorizing Sri Lanka now. It`s been a long, long time.

#48 by Urstruly on January 2, 2007 10:58am PT


The fact of the matter is that I will lay down my life for the honor of Ali


very niiice...

#49 arjun {``yup...the US invasion created the rift between shia and sunni....``}

Arjun,
When it comes to intra-Muslim fratricide, we are on auto pilot. We don`t need the US invasion of Eye Rack, or Indian invasion of East Pakistan to fight each other. In fact, when there are no Shias, our Sunni bros kill each other. In East Pakistan, there were hardly any Shias. So now, here is the pecking order:

1. Kaffirs - the horrible hindoos that Hamidum doesn`t like but for whom he buys cheap booze
2. People of the Book - you guys and Borat
3. Shias -
4. Fellow Sunnis - including Urstruly
5. Fellow tribesmen - all the zais that produced Hamidum - Popal, Yusuf, Achak,
6. Suicide - as in self-elevation to the highest level. :)

Re: # 52
Arjun,,, these jokers will sell their mothers to come live in the west, can’t change despotic regimes in their own countries, but are willing to lay down their lives for the honor of some dead guy. I tell you, there is nothing like Islami Jazba.

#42 i dont think amricans refuse their responsibility..they are in it with their (and your) tax-dollars and life and limb of their children. they have elections on this issue (a sign of taking responsibility) and that is why they are likely to ``learn`` from this. the question is how will the ummah larn, if they dont take the first step of acceptance?

This post is for one special person...we all know know that person is:

A while ago Princeton philosopher Harry Frankfurt wrote a tiny little book called ``On Bullshit``

His analysis, in part, is that the bullshitter and the liar are not the same: the bullshitter is much worse. Have not read the little tome for a while so forgive me if I do not do justice to Frankfurt`s analysis. It seems that a bullshitter is in fact indifferent to truth and falsity. His/her aim is not to communicate information (which by definition is veridical). His/her aim is to mold people`s personal belief systems in such a way that it is advantageous to him/her and/or to some ``cause`` they are promoting.

A liar merely wants to deceive some person or persons to believe a falsehood. The bullshitter simply mixes lying and truth as different flavors in his/her narrative. The bullshitter is indifferent to the primordial function of language: to convey truth.

Can you guess who the bullshitter is here?

HP #56, {``A while ago Princeton philosopher Harry Frankfurt wrote a tiny little book called ``On Bullshit`` ...His analysis, in part, is that the bullshitter and the liar are not the same: the bullshitter is much worse.... such a way that it is advantageous to him/her and/or to some ``cause`` they are promoting. ``}

HP,
All this wisdom coming from a recently discontinued laser printer!

#57
The one expected response......

the former puppet of the United states has been hanged by the current puppets of the United States -- tomorrow the current puppet Maliki will be hanged by another puppet of the United States -- so what else is new in the puppet lands of the United States....

......so where is the fucking `milestone` in this routine funny business?

the funniest ``milestone`` would have been if the Mexico invaded the United States -- caught Mr. Cheney from his hell hole in the white house -- examined his bloody canines on camera for cavities -- and had him sentenced by Justice Thomas in Alcatraz -- for crimes against humanity in Irak -- and then handed him over to Madame Pelosi -- to `hang till death` -- under the new international law for mass killers -- for `a mother of all milestones` in the anals of the United States history.

I must say this is a well-argued article altho i disagree with the central thesis of it - saddam is no saladdin altho he fancied himself to be such.
#44 kaurasach & #26 subashjoshi have made, imo, some profound points. Saddam was propped up by the CIA (not europeans) and supported in his war against iran by the US & the saudis. The europeans, who have mastered the art of fishing in troubled waters, unlike the americans whose foreign policy tends to be coarse, mean, moralizing, and militaristic, sold armaments to both iraq and iran and kept the war going as long as possible. They recognized the golden goose once they saw it. As for CIA`s role in Saddam`s ascent to power and his subsequent actions, Prof. Juan Cole, has the whole sordid history on his website (Juancole.com).
Saddam, the brave, was ready to sacrifice others when he himself surrendered to the occupation army without firing a shot. He may have redeemed himself somewhat by showing definance in his death but if you are going to hold up anything as symbolic of arabic attitude, the moment of his surrender was it.

On the parallel discussion on the culpability of americans in the destruction of iraq, the american public as a whole is indisputably culpable. This is supposed to be the freeest nation in the history of the universe which makes its populace completely responsible to whatever happens in its name. Have they lived up to that responsibility? Absolutely not. A foreign venture every few decades where they end up destroying another nation (vietnam, nicaragua, haiti, afghanistan, iraq) shows that american public sees nothing wrong in invading other nations periodically and grind them into dust.
Same goes for iraqis, pakistanis, or indians altho perhaps to a lesser extent.

On pakistani culpability, remember Najibullah?

jang writes <<< they have elections on this issue >>>

Saddam also had ``elections `` as does every Pakistani dictator, elections mean nothing, they are a facade, how are campaigns carried out, who determines whom to cover and the issues to be debated and most of all who has the wealth to take part in all of this are the real tell tale. And urstruly, the media`s effects on the public, especially when this concentrated is no soviet conspiracy invention, many studies have been conducted on it, it is part of the organization of power in the US.

soysause writes <<< This is supposed to be the freeest nation in the history of the universe >>>

Free? The moment you step outside after you wake up in the morning, you are surrounded by all kinds of laws and rules from the time of birth to death, everyting is standardized and concentrated in a few hands and that is freedom? Never has that word been so abused as it is as American propaganda. The people in America are among the unfree-est people on the face of the earth not only in this subtle fashion but also explicitly, this nation imprisons more people per capita than any country on the face of the earth...

so masadi nothing will please you. pakis have dictators which are welcomed by the awam with gende ka har and dancing in the street but they are not representatives. nancy wins elections but she is not representative either. what do you want, a god-appointed calipha?

anyways as far i can see amricans are in no confusion as to their involvement in the iraq war and do not deny it and are paying thru their collective noses for it. they accept responsibilty in full. therein lies a chance...for ummah its on to somalia.

This was to be expected.On the occassion of Eid-ul-Azha, Muslims offer a sacrifice to Allah.
Munafiqs do too.Except it is not to Allah.Iraqi govt being a case in point.It offered its sacrifice to the Mushriks;the tyrannies of US and UK.
And if the Iraqi govt is under the impression that it has appeased its gods,let it think again.Its only a matter of time and then it`ll be their turn.

The grace and dignity with which Saddam embraced death has clearly left american and british officials at unease. When he stood on the gallows and cooly responded to his tormentors, he seemed like a giant in comparison to Bush who ran from one shelter to another on 9/11 and who took 7 defferments to actively dodge draft when his nation needed him during Vietnam.

Regardless of the merits of his alleged ruthlessness, even the shias of today`s Iraq long for the days when they did not face death squads, kidnappings and 20 hours per day without electricity. His ba`ath party was more inclusive than the puppet regime of today`s iraq. There were Kurds, Christians, and Shias in the upper ecelons of baath`s leadership. Yes, he was ruthless towards those who tried to fragment the country - but then, as author points out, Abraham Lincoln killed millions of fellow americans too to ``preserve the union`` of america.

Sadly, many more thousands of Iraqis will die violent deaths in the coming years. Its middle and intellectual class will continue to disappear. And an entire country will be laid to ruins and fragmented - no longer a threat to the racist Israel.

#59 by nasah on January 2, 2007 11:57am PT


In reality, Cheney would have shot Calderon in the face and Calderon would have apologized for the anguish the shooting caused Cheney...

Re: # 66

Are you talking about the same guy who was hiding in a rat hole while his nation was under attack?

masadi,

..... this morning when i went to starbucks i was glad glad that my latte tasted the same even though the man-boy who made it had excercized his freedom to get a few more body piercings over the holidays ........... and i was also pleasently surprised when i discovered that people were still driving on the right side of the road, stopping at red lights and that nobody was peeing on the sidewalk ...............and tonight when i go home the mail will be in the mailbox, the electricity will be on as usual and the water pressure in my tap will be the same old standard 60 psi ................. i love these rules and regulations and get really upset if it drops below 45 psi when i am taking a shower ...........

...... i know that for those like you, who prefer to live in caves and have not heard of indoor plumbing, these things don`t really matter as long as you and your donkey are free to pee in the middle of the road ..............

masadi, you talk like an anarchist (#63).

The reason saddam didn`t go down fighting is because he wanted to look good for the 72 virgins..

saddam got free government dental care...something most Americans can`t get...no co-pay, no long waits in the waiting room..

also got a free haircut, a beard trim and a half decent suit..



72 virgins, here he comes...

#66, {``The grace and dignity with which Saddam embraced death has clearly left american and british officials at unease. When he stood on the gallows and cooly responded to his tormentors, he seemed like a giant in comparison``}

Malik Sahib,
While sadistic behavior, lack of compassion, utter cruelty, and resort to capital punishment are common facts of Islamic ``civilization,`` what angers me the most is the element of stupidity in Nuri Al-Maliki`s decision to hang Sadman Houston. There was no need to do this. The man was already a failure, a deposed tyrant, and a proven coward who didn`t have the decency to end his own life in the tradition of solid dictators. By hanging Sadman Houston and thanks to the fallen dictator`s incredible bravery and grace, Al-Maliki and the Shiite mafia look like puny, vengeful, undemocratic, and immature rabble.

Now I understand that the Shiite government of Eye Rack is launching its own investigation over how the grisly scene was recorded. Never mind the ugly, stupid, and vengeful lynching that took place. What matters most to this asinine PM is how dare anyone record his stupidity?

What unites Shias and Sunnis is their common cruelty, common stupidity, and common lack of compassion. May the plague of a thousand rats visit BOTH their houses.

Colonization, by yet another name.

The difference between the colonial masters--the British vs. the Americans is very key. The first replaced a culture with another culture. The second is replacing with nothing. The slaves of old took on language, art and clothes and they were given `education` to change them, the slaves of today will get nothing. They will merely be exterminated like flies that sit on good fruit. This type of modernity will be bloodier than all the wars of the last century. At last, exhausted, when the Earth has become a junkyard of plastic and chemicals, this modernization will retreat, unable to solve any of the problems it will create.