Saddam is dead.
The same Saddam we armed to fight Iran.
The same Saddam who shook Rummy’s hand.
The same Saddam who used American-supplied chemical weapons to kill the Kurds.
The same Saddam who had Al Qaeda connections according to Bush.
The same Saddam who had Al Qaeda connections according to Cheney.
The same Saddam who had Al Qaeda connections according to Rummy.
The same Saddam who had Al Qaeda connections according to Condi.
The same Saddam who had Al Qaeda connections according to Colin Powell.
The same Saddam who had Al Qaeda connections according to Rudy Giuliani.
The same Saddam who had Al Qaeda connections according to every GOP Convention speaker.
The same Saddam who had Al Qaeda connections – or so we were told.
The same Saddam who had Al Qaeda connections – or so Congress was told.
The same Saddam who had Al Qaeda connections according to FoxNews.
The same Saddam who had Al Qaeda connections according to CNN.
The same Saddam who had Al Qaeda connections according to the entire corporate media.
The same Saddam who was behind 9/11 according to Bush, Cheney, Condi, Rummy, Powell, et al.
The same Saddam who was behind 9/11.
… well not really…
Why exactly did we attack Iraq again?
The same Saddam who had NO Al Qaeda connections according to Bush… eventually.
The same Saddam who had NO 9/11 connections whatsoever.
Why exactly did we attack Iraq again?
The same Saddam who hated Osama bin Laden.
The same Saddam who had no nuclear weapons.
The same Saddam who had no missiles capable of reaching Israel, much less the USA.
The same Saddam who bought no Yellowcake uranium from Niger.
The same Saddam whose aluminum tubes were incapable of use in a nuclear centrifuge.
The same Saddam who had no mobile chemical weapons labs.
The same Saddam who had no other WMDs.
The same Saddam who allowed Hans Blix to inspect his nation until Bush pulled Hans Blix out.
The same Saddam whose Iraq’s skies we have controlled and patrolled since the Gulf War.
Why exactly did we attack Iraq again?
Saddam is dead.
The same Saddam whose personal pistol is a hunting trophy in President Bush’s office.
The same Bush who Europe’s press titled: “The Executioner” as Governor of Texas.
The same Bush who chose not to stay the execution of the first 131 death row inmates – the vast majority black men – whose time had come under his watch.
The same Bush who after five callous years as Governor finally granted his first stay of execution in a Rovian flourish shortly after announcing his candidacy for the Presidency.
The same Bush who fiddled while New Orleans flooded and the poor blacks drowned.
Saddam is dead.
And President Bush didn’t even have to wear a black hood.
Nor a white one.
You ask a lot of questions. Why was he killed? Because he was a bad man.
My question to you. What should the contry (sic) of Iraq have done with this man? Make him President? Set him free? Give him the keys to the country?
Gotta think you either love Saddam or you hate President Bush so much that you are blind to any sort of reality.
Comment by Tim — January 1, 2007 @ 10:35 am
Tim,
Thank you for your comment.
I do ask a lot of questions. It is impossible to get answers or to learn without asking questions. Are you opposed to asking questions? Do you favor simply believing and blindly obeying those in authority over you?
You say:
“Why was he killed? Because he was a bad man.”
That is rather simplistic. Of course he was a bad man, but by the same criterion he was judged, many, if not most leaders of foreign countries would have or should be put to death – not to mention our very own statesmen throughout our nation’s history. Have you ever read anything about the Presidency of Andrew Jackson? Richard Nixon?
Henry Kissinger, Robert McNamara and Donald Rumsfeld arguably would be convicted if judged by the same standard as Saddam just was. McNamara himself has said that he would be tried and convicted as a war criminal if his country had lost the Vietnam War and been occupied. Rumsfeld faces charges of war crimes in the German courts at this very time.
Speaking of war criminals, have you ever done research into the resume’ of new U.S. Director of National Intelligence John Dimitri Negroponte? Thousands of South Americans lost their lives by his decree. If you ask me a question, I’ll tell you more about that too.
The questions remain: Why was Saddam pursued in particular by the Bush Administration when they knew he had nothing to do with 9/11 and they knew he had no affiliation with Al Qaeda nor with Osama bin Laden? Why were Saddam and Iraq the targets when those accused of perpetrating the crimes of 9/11 were mostly Saudi and none were Iraqi?
More questions, I know, but I can’t help myself. I prefer learning over mindless subservience.
What should the “contry” of Iraq have done with this man you ask? I guess we will never know, since Saddam was captured by American soldiers, held in an American base on Iraqi soil, tried and convicted by judges hand-picked by the American government, transferred to a different American base on Iraqi soil and put to death under the supervision of the American military and with the total support and encouragement of the Bush Administration at the hands of a select few Iraqis who hated Saddam – mostly for political reasons – and who are loyal to the American occupiers.
There was a strong disagreement among Iraqis as to what to do with Saddam, but there is no question that putting him to death will only inflame the situation and increase global hatred of America – especially among Muslims no matter what they feel about Saddam personally. Many Muslims the world over resent the American aggression in a Muslim country no matter what sect they are affiliated with. If there is anything that President Bush is good at, it is getting the rest of the world to hate us more than ever and creating breeding grounds for future terrorists.
Love Saddam? No. He was a despicable tyrant although he wasn’t powerful enough to harm those outside of his own borders for the most part.
Hate President Bush? Not really. He is just highly under-qualified to run the country and has done a miserable job of it. He is grossly incompetent, intolerably loyal to his wealthy cronies over the interests of the American people and ignorantly impervious to decent action on the global issues of peace, fair trade or environmental sanity. He has done enormous damage to the American worker and to Unions. He is a chronic liar, morally bankrupt and as hypocritical a “christian” as ever held public office. He should be impeached and removed specifically for the following reasons:
http://www.impeachforpeace.org/evidence/
Impeaching President Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney is what I am devotedly working to achieve along with hundreds of thousands of fellow patriots and defenders of the U.S. Constitution, American civil liberties and our Democratic Republic all across this great nation.
Stay tuned, this is the year of investigations. If you take the time to follow these as led by Senator Leahy and Representatives Waxman and Conyers along with the perjury trial of Cheney’s first lieutenant, Lewis “Scooter” Libby this year, you will begin to see how deeply corrupt and self-serving this Administration is and has been. The fallout from the Jack Abramoff GOP-fundraising scandal has not run its course as well.
Of course… to really learn from these headlines to come, you might have to ask a few questions along the way…
Thanks again for your input and drop by any time.
~ Mikael
P.S. The timing of Saddam’s execution couldn’t have been chosen for a better day if the goal was to anger and inflame the global Muslim community as much as possible according to this OpEd piece on OhMyNews International:
U.S. Tactics Fuel for Islamists
[Opinion] Hussein’s execution on Eid day angered even his enemies
Comment by Mikael — January 1, 2007 @ 10:45 pm
Reading your blog, there appears to be more than enough evidence that you “Hate President Bush”. It’s an unnatural hate.
Research? OMG…research all you want. This President was elected, not once but twice. I’m not going to get into a pissing contest. Just thought you should know that the more unreasonable you sound the less credibility you have. I will not be back to this website. It’s like reading the “I Hate President George Bush Blog”.
Good luck in your attempt to Impeach a sitting President of the US! Oh, just read that statement and it says it all. The harm you are trying to cause far outweight the benfits. Progressive Democrat are like that tho.
Oh, I know you will bring up the Clinton Impeachment. That certainly did this country a lot of good now didn’t it.
Comment by Tim — January 2, 2007 @ 5:28 pm
Tim,
You are always welcome to read or not read my blog. I promise to allow you an open voice if you should choose to continue to post here. My experience recently on The People’s Cube website showed me how tacky some web hosts can be in that regard.
Hatred for Bush? No.
Disgust with his policies, lack of integrity and being devoid of compassion? Absolutely.
Research? I will, thank you. That is a lot of what occupies my time already. Research into the illegal “caging” of 90,000 voters in largely black, largely poor, largely Democratic voting areas of Florida in 2000 and the criminal activities that twisted the 2004 election results in Columbus, Ohio. Here is a good place to start:
http://www.rollingstone.com/news/story/10432334/was_the_2004_election_stolen
Robert Kennedy did excellent research into this should you have any interest in the truth. Kennedy should know, his Grandfather helped steal enough votes in Chicago in 1960 to get his Uncle John win Illinois’ electoral votes and gain the Presidency.
Holding a sitting President accountable to American and International Law will strengthen our Republic rather than harm it. Letting criminals go untethered is bad enough in general, but when the one breaking the law is in public office – their prosecution is that much more critical to the health of the nation.
I have no interest in bringing up the Clinton impeachment. That was an entirely separate matter based on entirely different motivations.
Take care and I very much appreciate your civilized, coherent communications.
Comment by Mikael — January 2, 2007 @ 6:21 pm
This blog format of a black background and pale narrow grey print type is practically unreadable for me! Please change the appearance so that it is readable! A pale background and dark print type is generally regarded as reader friendly! Thanks!
Comment by Mira — January 3, 2007 @ 6:54 am
Mira,
As you wish!
Thanks for the input. I have changed the background to gray and the type to black.
I hope that helps.
Comment by Mikael — January 8, 2007 @ 3:08 pm