Blogosphere
Deputy Web Editor N.P. Krishna Kumar
Pick of the week: Saddam's execution
I'm happy You see, the important thing when it comes to the morality of the death penalty, that a lot of its exponents think is a justification, is increased happiness. BTW (by the way) I'm not arguing on the merits of the death penalty…
Do I believe killing Saddam will likely result in his becoming a martyr and increasing the cycle of death in Iraq? Yes, yes I do. Did I sound like Rumsfeld just then when I asked a rhetorical question? Yes, yes I did. Was the US partially responsible for the support of Saddam Hussain right up until he invaded Kuwait thanks to people like Rumsfeld? Yes, yes he was. Will he ever face trial for assisting a murderous dictator kill his own people? No, no he won't. http://harrangueman.blogspot.com/2006/12/hanging-saddam-makes-me-happy.html What about Iran? One outcome of the American invasion is that it has generated a much more uncompromising "fundamentalist" politico-ideological constellation in Iraq. This has led to a predominance of the pro-Iranian political forces there - the intervention basically delivered Iraq to Iranian influence.
One can imagine how, if President Bush were to be court-martialed by a Stalinist judge, he would be instantly condemned as an "Iranian agent."...
This is the trick being attempted by those who claim today, "But the world is nonetheless better off without Saddam!" They forget to factor into the account the effects of the very military intervention against him.
However, one should note the strange but key fact that, when the United States representatives and the Iraqi prosecutors were enumerating his evil deeds, they systematically omitted what was undoubtedly his greatest crime in terms of human suffering and of violating international justice: his invasion of Iran. Why?
Because the United States and the majority of foreign states were actively helping Iraq in this aggression. And now the United States is continuing, through other means, this greatest crime of Saddam Hussain: his never-ending attempt to topple the Iranian government.
This is the price you have to pay when the struggle against the enemies is the struggle against the evil ghosts in your own closet: you don't even control yourself. http://phronesisaical.blogspot.com/2007/01/zizek-on-iraq-war.html Death of a 'warrior-hero' Fox News revealed that for seven days straight the New York Times had been full of articles expressing horror and abhorrence at the execution of Saddam Hussain, without once mentioning his crimes against the Iraqi people.
That's an outstanding record. Have the Fairfax papers (in Australia) managed to do that for seven days in a row? Still, we've got Bob Ellis, and I don't believe anybody at the New York Times can equal his prose pustules.
He was at it again in yesterday's The Age. Bob Ellis believes that Saddam Hussain will be missed by "university graduates, civil servants, medical professionals, lawyers, judges, soldiers, police and schoolteachers". I'm not sure about that.
Even The Age should feel ashamed for publishing such merde. http://www.diogeneslamp.net/?p=589 Cellphones in Iraq Has anyone else stopped to ponder the double dose of bad news delivered to us by cellphones in Iraq? First they're used as a way to trigger IEDs (improvised explosive devices) when one of our military vehicles is driving by, and then we get the Saddam hanging video that's made his execution just another fiasco for the United States and our beleaguered President.
How about this for a better scenario: "The government of Iraq wishes to announce the execution of Saddam Hussain. Here is a picture of his body, similar to the ones after his sons were killed." No, that would have been too easy.
The genius who thought up this war wanted to use the execution as a way to establish credibility for the Iraq government, but thanks to a cellphone, it turned into a hideous, sectarian event run by apparent thugs who seemed to be wearing whatever they happened to put on that morning.
I forget ... was it Casual Friday over there when this happened? Oh well, at least the hoods matched.
One of the positives about Saddam's hanging is that future leaders of Iraq will always have that image in their heads when they decide to torture someone. http://portlandfreelancer.blogspot.com/2007/01/cellphones-in-iraq-and-other-ramblings.html Beyond travesty Of the 6 billion people on this earth, not one killed more people than Saddam Hussain. And not just killed, but tortured and mutilated - doing so often with his own hands and for pleasure.
It is quite a distinction to be the pre-eminent monster on the planet. If the death penalty was ever deserved, no one was more richly deserving than Saddam Hussain. For the Iraqi government to have botched both his trial and execution, therefore, and turned monster into victim, is not just a tragedy, but a crime - against the new Iraq that Americans are dying for, and against justice itself.
Instead of exposing, elucidating and irrefutably making the case for the crimes of the accused - as was done at Nuremberg and the Eichmann trial - the Iraqi government lost control and inadvertently turned it into a stage for Saddam. The trial managed to repair the image of the man the world had last seen as a bedraggled nobody pulled cowering from a filthy hole. Now coiffed and cleaned, he acted the imperious president of Iraq, drowning out in the coverage seen around the world the testimony of his victims.
That was bad enough. Then comes the execution, a rushed, botched, unholy mess that exposed the hopelessly sectarian nature of the Maliki government. True, Saddam's hanging was just and, in principle, non-sectarian. But the next hanging might not be. Breaking precedent completely undermines the death penalty provision, opening the way to future revenge and lawless hangings. That larger canvas will never be painted. The starting point became the endpoint. The only charge for which Saddam was executed was that 1982 killing of Shiites - interestingly, his response to a failed assassination attempt by Maliki's own Dawa Party. Maliki ultimately got his revenge, completing Dawa's mission a quarter-century later. However, Saddam will now never be tried for the Kurdish genocide, the decimation of the Marsh Arabs, the multiple war crimes and all the rest.
Finally, there was the motley crew - handpicked by the government - that constituted the hanging party. They turned what was an act of national justice into a scene of sectarian vengeance.
The world has now seen the smuggled video of the shouting and taunting that turned Saddam into the most dignified figure in the room - another remarkable achievement in burnishing the image of the most evil man of his time. The whole sorry affair illustrates not just incompetence but the ingrained intolerance and sectarianism of the Maliki government. http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2007/01/saddams_botched_execution_was.html
Do I believe killing Saddam will likely result in his becoming a martyr and increasing the cycle of death in Iraq? Yes, yes I do. Did I sound like Rumsfeld just then when I asked a rhetorical question? Yes, yes I did. Was the US partially responsible for the support of Saddam Hussain right up until he invaded Kuwait thanks to people like Rumsfeld? Yes, yes he was. Will he ever face trial for assisting a murderous dictator kill his own people? No, no he won't. http://harrangueman.blogspot.com/2006/12/hanging-saddam-makes-me-happy.html What about Iran? One outcome of the American invasion is that it has generated a much more uncompromising "fundamentalist" politico-ideological constellation in Iraq. This has led to a predominance of the pro-Iranian political forces there - the intervention basically delivered Iraq to Iranian influence.
One can imagine how, if President Bush were to be court-martialed by a Stalinist judge, he would be instantly condemned as an "Iranian agent."...
This is the trick being attempted by those who claim today, "But the world is nonetheless better off without Saddam!" They forget to factor into the account the effects of the very military intervention against him.
However, one should note the strange but key fact that, when the United States representatives and the Iraqi prosecutors were enumerating his evil deeds, they systematically omitted what was undoubtedly his greatest crime in terms of human suffering and of violating international justice: his invasion of Iran. Why?
Because the United States and the majority of foreign states were actively helping Iraq in this aggression. And now the United States is continuing, through other means, this greatest crime of Saddam Hussain: his never-ending attempt to topple the Iranian government.
This is the price you have to pay when the struggle against the enemies is the struggle against the evil ghosts in your own closet: you don't even control yourself. http://phronesisaical.blogspot.com/2007/01/zizek-on-iraq-war.html Death of a 'warrior-hero' Fox News revealed that for seven days straight the New York Times had been full of articles expressing horror and abhorrence at the execution of Saddam Hussain, without once mentioning his crimes against the Iraqi people.
That's an outstanding record. Have the Fairfax papers (in Australia) managed to do that for seven days in a row? Still, we've got Bob Ellis, and I don't believe anybody at the New York Times can equal his prose pustules.
He was at it again in yesterday's The Age. Bob Ellis believes that Saddam Hussain will be missed by "university graduates, civil servants, medical professionals, lawyers, judges, soldiers, police and schoolteachers". I'm not sure about that.
Even The Age should feel ashamed for publishing such merde. http://www.diogeneslamp.net/?p=589 Cellphones in Iraq Has anyone else stopped to ponder the double dose of bad news delivered to us by cellphones in Iraq? First they're used as a way to trigger IEDs (improvised explosive devices) when one of our military vehicles is driving by, and then we get the Saddam hanging video that's made his execution just another fiasco for the United States and our beleaguered President.
How about this for a better scenario: "The government of Iraq wishes to announce the execution of Saddam Hussain. Here is a picture of his body, similar to the ones after his sons were killed." No, that would have been too easy.
The genius who thought up this war wanted to use the execution as a way to establish credibility for the Iraq government, but thanks to a cellphone, it turned into a hideous, sectarian event run by apparent thugs who seemed to be wearing whatever they happened to put on that morning.
I forget ... was it Casual Friday over there when this happened? Oh well, at least the hoods matched.
One of the positives about Saddam's hanging is that future leaders of Iraq will always have that image in their heads when they decide to torture someone. http://portlandfreelancer.blogspot.com/2007/01/cellphones-in-iraq-and-other-ramblings.html Beyond travesty Of the 6 billion people on this earth, not one killed more people than Saddam Hussain. And not just killed, but tortured and mutilated - doing so often with his own hands and for pleasure.
It is quite a distinction to be the pre-eminent monster on the planet. If the death penalty was ever deserved, no one was more richly deserving than Saddam Hussain. For the Iraqi government to have botched both his trial and execution, therefore, and turned monster into victim, is not just a tragedy, but a crime - against the new Iraq that Americans are dying for, and against justice itself.
Instead of exposing, elucidating and irrefutably making the case for the crimes of the accused - as was done at Nuremberg and the Eichmann trial - the Iraqi government lost control and inadvertently turned it into a stage for Saddam. The trial managed to repair the image of the man the world had last seen as a bedraggled nobody pulled cowering from a filthy hole. Now coiffed and cleaned, he acted the imperious president of Iraq, drowning out in the coverage seen around the world the testimony of his victims.
That was bad enough. Then comes the execution, a rushed, botched, unholy mess that exposed the hopelessly sectarian nature of the Maliki government. True, Saddam's hanging was just and, in principle, non-sectarian. But the next hanging might not be. Breaking precedent completely undermines the death penalty provision, opening the way to future revenge and lawless hangings. That larger canvas will never be painted. The starting point became the endpoint. The only charge for which Saddam was executed was that 1982 killing of Shiites - interestingly, his response to a failed assassination attempt by Maliki's own Dawa Party. Maliki ultimately got his revenge, completing Dawa's mission a quarter-century later. However, Saddam will now never be tried for the Kurdish genocide, the decimation of the Marsh Arabs, the multiple war crimes and all the rest.
Finally, there was the motley crew - handpicked by the government - that constituted the hanging party. They turned what was an act of national justice into a scene of sectarian vengeance.
The world has now seen the smuggled video of the shouting and taunting that turned Saddam into the most dignified figure in the room - another remarkable achievement in burnishing the image of the most evil man of his time. The whole sorry affair illustrates not just incompetence but the ingrained intolerance and sectarianism of the Maliki government. http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2007/01/saddams_botched_execution_was.html
No comments:
Post a Comment