Saddam: The Butcher of Baghdad and the Shame of Mesopotamia

Yes the author is deadly smelly shia. Can`t you see the venomous sting (Kazmi) on this katmal`s caboose? No wonder Whabbi`s call them infidels as one Saudi Mullah declared them worse than jews and christians just a week ago. But to bundle all shias in this category is not fair. Saddam`s shia general Gabbar is now general under American puppet government. Once one sunni said to Jinnah that I would not vote for you because you are shia. Jinnah said to him, `then why do not you vote for Ghandi, he is sunni`. Same thing is happening here. Saddam has been condemned for 153 killings. But Bush and Israel is loved in Baghdad now a days even after 700,000 deaths. Both Bush and Blair are not sunnis that is why they are loved over there. The religious politics is fascism whether it is islamic, hindu, shia, christian, jewish, communists etc. religion and politics should never be mixed.

Re: # 59
Thank you most sincerely for the kind compliment.

#57 by Saroya

Exactly as I said, he is in plenty of good company.

the deadliest Saturday of the war -- 21 GIs killed in Iraq -- so much for Mr. Bush`s `surge` and Ms. Riceoroni`s `augmentation` -- and so much for pacification of post Saddam-hanging Irak. --

it is time to IMPEACH George Bush to save our precious American kids from the Iraqi meat grinder -- there is no other way -- where is mama Pelosi -- cut the allowance of this murderous juvenile delinquent -- ground him......

Re: # 38
Honestly Zeemax, don`t you think that history, as the name suggests, really should remain in history?

Re: # 20
Very well said!!!
After an exhaustive search I find another example of sanity.
Keep up the good work.

Re: # 54
Countries pursue their national interests, as they perceive them. It was in America`s national interest to support Saddam against Iraq, and it was in their national interest to get rid of him. It has never been about spreading democracy.

Instead of expecting America to do something about their dictators, why don`t Muslims do something about it themselves?

People only get the governments they deserve.

Najeeb,

Now that they have hanged Butcher of Baghdad I, how about Butcher of Baghdad II and III? There is also a butcher in Cairo, Riyadh, Tel Aviv, Damascus, Washington, Islamabad and Kabul (and vice-butchers too). How are is the world going to get rid of them?

In reality -- Bush is the Butcher of Baghdad and Maliki, the Shame of Mesopotamia.

Like Saddam -- the Quisling M Twins-- Maliki and Mushrraf -- will find out sooner than later that -- ``what Kissinger meant when he observed that in this world, while it is often dangerous to be an enemy of the United States, to be a friend is fatal.``

Re: # 36
Dear Vanguard,
I agree, but Musharraf is not the only one in the history of Pakistan who has plundered Baluchistan. The problem is that no one really knows what is going on in that part of the world. Baluchistan is indeed a sad story. It is a land totally plundered by fuedal nawabs, military generals and bureaucracy in civilian clothes.

... #49, yes, both are doing ``jihad``, claiming god is on their side. And both are going at each other`s throats.

Additionally, ummah is happily slaughtering their own in order to embarrass the US. And US seems to be stuck in a quagmire, reliving the painful days of Vietnam. Al-hamdu lillah, these goons will continue to tear each other apart... takbeer

Ironically both sides are waiting for Jesus to appear and take them to ultimate victory. What would happen if he actually shows up ...???

[Urstruly miaN, any thoughts from your enlightened ullema on his whereabouts? It`s high time, you know. Or perhaps zeemax can elaborate ... No??]

Re: # 48
Spot on, sir! This is a contest between two extremely malignant right-wing ideologies both of whom think God is on their side. However, one side has the advantage of 500 years of scientific and technological development. The other side is stuck in the deserts of 7th century Arabia.

jamesmaxwell (#42),

It is a sign of ummah’s overriding moral bankruptcy, punctuated by occasional spells of common sense.

Umman hates neo-cons/west to the point of delusion, where they are willing to make heroes out of mentally sick animals.

Americans are idiots alright. For one thing, they grossly underestimated how far ummah is willing to go killing their own in order to give the US a black eye. And the ummah thinks it is winning in Iraq (#40)!

... and so do the neo-cons. And this is the travesty of delusion on both sides.

Re: # 46
You are asking them to stop killing each other! How naive!

It is much easier, and far more fun, to kill each other and blame everything on the Zionists and George Bush.

Re: # 45

Fine - you are a shia... it doesn`t matter... my point was: trying for intra-muslim reconciliation is the need of the hour... muslims hating other muslims on sectarian basis shoould be considered the biggest problem... but apparently not....

Re: # 44

``What the f*** is wrong with you?``........you stupid ignorant Indian gungadeen -- what makes ``you f***ers`` think that I am not a Shia......not all Shias are nazi collaborators -- same way not all Hindus were Raj orderlies.......:)

Re: # 41 nasah
[...Is puppet Maliki an authentic Iraqi -- is he an authentic Iraqi shia patriot...]

Who knows?.. what the f*** is an ``authentic`` iraqi anyway?... are you an authentic american[ or wherever you live]?... are you an authentic muslim sunni patriot?

What the f*** is wrong with you?... muslims are killing other muslims like flies... bombing and brutalizing the heck out of each other... they are literally cutting each other`s throat.. and here you are passing judgements on authentic iraqi... what you should be doing now is trying for reconciliation, peace and shia-sunni bhai bhai... get some sense into the barbaric bedouins...

as a muslim you should be hanging your head in shame that you kill each other on slightest pretext, you cut shia throat and video-tape it, dance around [as shown in CNN the other day] and make merry... you f***ers have no humanity, no common sense, no loyalty... you can`t even live with your own...

badgering on george bush ain`t going help anything - george bush didn`t make you this way.... for all his fault, george bush actually wants iraqis get along....

Re: # 41
One day, for a change, try writing a few lines in simple, polite language. Trust me, they will make sense.

Re: # 40
Post 19: ``So even if Saddam killed one person or a million the punishment cannot exceed capital punishment. Hence he has paid his due to the society, and we must let him rest in peace.``


Post 40: ``All said and done, it does not releive Saddam of any crimes against his own people. Those crimes are there. But we must put everything in perspective and truth must be told.``

Logic, anyone?

when an intruder takes over your house enters your bedroom -- and sprawles on on your bed -- if you have an iota of national dignity self respect and shame left in you -- you don`t start lamenting about the `butchery` of your `spouse` -- while lying on the same bed with the intruder.....how ridiculous that would sound -- this is why this article is rather ridiculous -- (sawal-e degger jawab-e deggar) -- and this is why Saddam hanging while under the knee of a foreign occupier was so stupidly illtimed and illplaced and illconducted.

This is the kind of stuff that the turncoats are made of.....

in any other respectable European country a quisling like Maliki will be considered a Nazi collaborator like Gen Petain-- who will be spared being hanged for a life sentence for betraying his own country.

Is puppet Maliki an authentic Iraqi -- is he an authentic Iraqi shia patriot -- or is he an Iraqi shia quisling -- Maliki is a pathetic puppet of US neocons -- even worst than that Sunni quisling Zaleelzad -- at least Zaleel is serving his very own country -- which country Maliki is serving – Iran or the United States?

Yet for all that service -- Maliki is being treated by the Americans like a mangy dog
(because the Americans have inherent contempt for quisling despite paying them so well).

Maliki is alternatively being petted and being kicked by George Bush -- the sectarian militia man is under Dubyas order to disarm Moqtadar sectarian militia -- and help the US neocons and Israeli zionists to invade and `contain` a sectarian Iran -- or ELSE!

it is almost like Maliki is made to lick his own spit -- in fact that double dose of ironic indignity should serve a tail wagging quisling hangman like him -- indeed very well.

Re: # 39

As Zeemax said below, the history did not start yesterday. First of all your claim is not entirely true. Please remind yourself that the first insurgency (I should call it struggle for freedom, since word ``insurgency is such a loaded word) came from shias and not sunnis. If you remember, the first bombing of Muslim religious places and shrines were done by Americans while crushing the resistence by Mehdi Army. IN the city of Kufa the Mehdi Army faught for weeks in the local graveyards and around the shrines. The fighting only stopped when Ayoullah Siyastani interferred and managed a truce between Muqtada-alsadr and Americans, most probably at the behest of Iranians. That insurgency made Iranians aware of their potent strength and that how badly they had had big satan trapped in the Iraq.

Siyastani collborated with Americans keeping the bigger picture in mind - it was the picture of a Greater Iran - sacrifices had to be made for the new Iranian Empire and ayatullahs were ready to pay the price. The idea was to crush any insurgency against occupation with heavy hand and then oust the Americans using politics thus creating a Shia dominated pro-Iranian Iraq. Americans were aware of the Iranian aspirations but putting any resistance down was their first priority. At that time they establsihed torture cells all around the country and started crushing Iraqis with the methods that would put even the third world dictators to shame. American army tried its best, you can`t blame them.:





But this senseless violence against a conquered people backfired and resulted in the making of a sunni insurgency. The sunni resistence picked up its pace when Americans in their collosal arrogance used their propaganda machinery to dessemninate the pictures of Abu Gharaib prison in order to intimidate the freedom fighters; which needless to say double backfired. In order to crush sunni resistence Americans started establishing shia death squads and for that they appointed their expert of creating and mangeing death squads, Nagroponte, in Iraq; the guy had almost 25 years of experience from operations in south america under his belt. This butcher established new records in killing civilians in the American history of invasions so that if casualty figure of 655K Iraqis is true, about 80% of deaths can be easily attributed to this a-hole.

As far as Kurds are concerned - their history goes back to the Soviet era. At that time there were two groups in Kurds; one headed by Jalal Talbani and other by Masud Barzani. One of them was backed by Soviets who used to create trouble for those states who were pro-USA like turkey while other group used to create trouble for those countries that were pro-soviet or were against USA, like Iran. When Iraq was fighting Iran, USA provided chemical weapons to Saddam to gas soviet backed kurds who intensified their efforts against Iraq when soviets started feeling heat in Afghanistan. (soviets were providing arms to Iranians as well). The two kurd groups were milking both powers to the fullest until soviet union collapsed. At that time Americans united those groups and started using them against Iraq and Iran, around the Gulf war time. So the Kurd cooperation has less to do with saddam and more to do with being clients of one power or the other.

All said and done, it does not releive Saddam of any crimes against his own people. Those crimes are there. But we must put everything in perspective and truth must be told.

Re: # 19

If Saddam did not commit any crimes against Shites and Kurds why would those groups co-operate with the USA against his regime ?

#37 by rafi_aamer ,

Because he is stuck in the sickly sweet Reader`s Digest style two-bit morality kind of stuff.

He doesn`t know that history began before yesterday, or the week before, or before Saddam came to power, or went to war with Iran, or crushed the Barzanis, or removed from power, or before he was executed. But that`s ok. He is in plenty of good company.

For what`s really happening, read #95 by okhla99 on the other board in the interest of time. He`s summed it up pretty well.

Re: # 13
zeemax

Could you please elaborate on why you think Mr. Kazmi is naive?

Thanks.

If Saddam is a butcher of Baghdad, then Musharraf may very well be butcher of Baluchistan. As per Christian Science Monitor (http://www.csmonitor.com/2006/1221/p01s04-wosc.html)

``I would say this now qualifies as a `crimes against humanity` situation,`` says one foreign observer who has interviewed delegates from the region.

For six months, aid agencies and diplomats have been pressing Pakistan authorities to permit them to distribute aid packages, which include emergency rations, tents, and medicine. The UN won`t deliver aid without permission from the host nation, says Robert van Dijk, the top UNICEF officer for Pakistan.

``When we went back there recently, we found the same numbers of people,`` he says, ``and even worse conditions - among the worst I`ve ever seen.``

Re: # 16

So since apart from Malaysia and Turkey the entire Muslim world is Munafiq as they do not have functioning democracies and are police states.

Regards
Sanatani

Re: # 2

Oye Stuke kuttya,

eh te meri line see. Tune votichod kyon la lai.

Anyway what you have written is true. Let us see this guy talking in the same vein as Ayatollah Khomeini.

Regards
Sanatani

lap dog? Do you people even know how good lapdogs have it in the US...

Pakiland is much much lower than a lapdog...a lap dog`s litter box perhaps...

Re: # 31

I do not think Pakistan has been a blind follower of USA after the cold war. I doubt a lapdog would ignore Clinton administration`s diktats on Osama Bin laden. The current low level support for the Taliban would not happen if Pakistan was a blind follower of USA.

Re: # 27
Dear bbabu,
Rightly said, Pakistan was not a lap dog for Uncle Sam once upon a time. It has always been so. Foriegn policy of Pakistan has always been dirty to the core and rotten to the end, serving the dirty interests of US, nothing else.

Re: # 25
Dear Mr. Nasah,
You sound like a very angry person. Please control yourself and in the interest of dialogue, please listen to others as well. Thanks and wish you well.

Re: # 28
Two wrongs don`t make a right.

Saddam`s crimes do not justify the invasion of Iraq and the lies propagated by the neocons.

And the argument works the other way also.

Just that some people do not have the honesty and/or the moral courage to apply the same rules to themselves that they want to apply to others.

This is called hypocrisy.

Re: # 18

``Do the lies of Bush and Blair wash away Saddam`s crimes?``

may I ask -- do Saddam`s crimes wash away Bush and Blair crimes?

-- so why that pathetic puppet hangman Maliki -- the `sovereign` ``prime minister` of `sovereign` Iraq -- did not ask his foreign masters -- may I put the same noose around you two criminal`s necks sirs -- for massacring MY fellow Iraqis -- destroying MY `beloved` country?

if that quivering quisling Maliki had an iota of Shia shame and national and ethnic pride in his own Iraqi people and Iraqi land -- he would have told the Americans

---

thanks for delivering Saddam but no thanks -- our bruised national pride -- as a foreign occupied and foreign enslaved country -- would require us to keep our native tyrant in jail -- TILL you occupying bastards -- get off of OUR Shia/Sunni/Christian/Kurdish back – go home and leave us alone.

.......when WE are TRULY MASTER of our own free land, our own free government, our own free judiciary, our own free police, our own free army and our own free to choose destiny -- THEN & THEN ONLY -- the TRUE undictated accounting of our own tyrants -- all by OURSELVES will begin -- not before -- NOT as long you two foreign criminals are parading as the Supreme Masters of our country -- in glittering uniforms and dazzling armaments -- invading the sanctity of our homes at midnight -- covering the shia nakedness with a cruel joke of fig leaf of a pathetic ``shia sovereignty`` -- with an occupying army of 150,000 foreign soldiers. What a denigration of Shia martyrdom!

Re: # 4

Saddam was friendly towards India because he perceived Pakistan to be stooge of USA and Saudi Arabia. Why is so hard for Pakistanis to accept that once upon a time they were lap dogs for Uncle Sam ?

As far as Saddam attacking Iran - The Iran under Shah did support the Kurds and undermine the Iraqi state.

Re: # 8

Saddam was not a stooge of USA. He was on ``US State Department terrorist list of states`` in 1983. Fearing an Iranian victory USA decided to support Saddam against Iran. Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Egypt, Soviet Union, France, Germany threw their lot with Saddam. His military was primarily equipped with Soviet and French military hardware. USA provided him with intelligence. So did the Soviets.

``The ``islamic world`` that was strangely silent during saddam`s time is raising a hue and cry about the majority shia ruling the country?``(Bushollah Arjun)

The ``islamic world`` that was strangely silent during saddam`s time is NOT raising a hue and cry about the 1% minority shia ruling the majority 88% sunni country syria -- either......:)

Re: # 23
Oh come on! The Islamic World has more important things to be outraged at. Like some cartoons in an obscure newspaper in a tiny European country.

#17 by nasah on January 16, 2007 8:37am PT


in order to hand over a native Sunni tyrant to a bunch of puppet Shia hangmen



The ``islamic world`` that was strangely silent during saddam`s time is raising a hue and cry about the majority shia ruling the country?


p.s. Not directed at you personally(I know you`re more a worshipper of mao than mo)..

#19 by Urstruly on January 16, 2007 9:16am PT


has turned into another human tragedy like holocaust


Hmm..So you`re saying most of the jews killed during the holocaust were killed by other jews..

you do know that most of the 600K iraqis have been killed by..sit down for this...sunni wahabis or shia militias...like the 60 or so killed today...

Poor chap. They tore his throath apart. Thats the dawn of Democracy

Re: # 19
Read my post again. The invasion of Iraq was illegal, wrong. However, this does not justify the crimes of Saddam. Let us show some moral courage and condemn evil irrespective of who commits it. Selective criticism is hypocrisy, called munafiqat in Arabic and riyakari in Persian.

A, B or C are not responsible for Muslim on Muslim violence. Muslims themselves are. And if they kill each other at someone else`s behest, that makes them both murderers AND stupid.

Re: # 18

The alleged ``crimes`` of saddam and the invasion of Iraq are either irrelevant to each other or they are relevant to each other. They cannot be both at the same time; neither you should make them relevant when it suits your agenda nor vice versa.

The fact of the matter is that one of the pre-text under which the invasion of Iraq was conducted was that of alleged crimes of sadam against his own people, hence, the character of judge, jury, and executioner is aboslutely subject to scrutiny; especially now when this so called ``justice`` has turned into another human tragedy like holocaust or invasion of vietnam. Which brings us to question the allegations against the condemned.

As far as violence of ``Muslim upon Muslim`` is concerned every Muslim is concerned about it; yet every Muslim also knows that if this violence is a serpent then the head of this serpent lies somewhere else.

Re: # 14
Urstruly, does the illegality of the American invasion of Iraq lessen Saddam`s crimes?

Do the evil designs of the neocons for world domination justify Muslim hypocrisy in keeping quiet over Muslim on Muslim violence?

Do the lies of Bush and Blair wash away Saddam`s crimes?


The problem with ideologues, Islamist and of the neocon variety, is that they go to any extent to prove the other side wrong without considering the possibility that both may be equally wrong.

And by the way, the study from which you quote the figure of 650,000 dead also says that 30% of these deaths are attributable to action by occupation forces. The rest, 70%, are a result of Shia-Sunni violence (started by Sunni Jihaids). That comes out to 455,000 Muslims killed by fellow Muslims.

for the spin doctors of Bush`s new puppet Maliki -- just a reminder -- Saddam was also once the puppet of the United States. For the hangman`s noose the new neck could be Malikis own -- for helping the USA to bust Iran just like Saddam -- which is in the pipeline right now.

-- let me ask the racist sectarian apologistas of Bush`s Irak invasion an equally racist sectarian question -- what right a born-again evangelical Christian buffoon foreigner -- has to kill and maime more than 2 million Iraqis -- send a beautiful country back to stone age -- in order to hand over a native Sunni tyrant to a bunch of puppet Shia hangmen -- that a native Sunni Saddam does not have to kill native Iraqi Shia or a native Shia Assad of Syria doesn`t have to kill native Syrians Sunnis in Hamma......?

By Bush`s standards of equal opportunity tyranny -- THEY HAVE AS MUCH RIGHT AS BUSH HAS........so quit your puerile partisan pandering for selective US puppetry.

Re: # 15

Thank you.

There is no doubt that Islam is anything but a pacifist religion. As a matter of fact it portrays pacifism as the opium of the hypocrite; the malaise of deadwood, which is eaten by termites and cannot do anything about it.

Here is something Qateel Shifaii said about malaise i.e. pacifism:

Duniya main Qateel iss saa munafiq nahin koi
Jo zulm to sehta hai baghawat nahin karta