Where Was The Outrage?

'The Return of the Prodigal Son' by Rembrandt ca. 1669, The Hermitage, St. Petersburg

 

A dear friend in New York sends me this in an e-mail:

"The last few days’ news coverage in Europe of the pending and then the actual execution of Saddam Hussein has been bewildering. It has removed some of the satisfaction of justice finally being done.  It is unbelievable how the “world” now in a reinvigorated fashion is calling for the ban of the death penalty. Where were these cries when Saddam Hussein, apart from all his well documented atrocities, regularly had innocent people condemned to death and executed by his favorite method – by hanging. But Saddam hanged people publicly letting the poor victims’ bodies remain hung for hours for public display and “games”. Where was the outrage by the world? Where was the outrage of the world when 9 innocent Jews were hung in a public spectacle accused of spying for Israel and where their through the wall air condition units were deemed to be secret radio transmitters? Nothing of what was allowed Saddam Hussein, was ever afforded to his innocent victims – Christians, Jews, Kurds and Shiites.

CNN and the International Herald Tribune have actually inferred that the US may be behind the execution, the trial was unfair, the US should never have handed Saddam over, life imprisonment would have been a crueler sentence, he will be more dangerous dead than alive, he will become a celebrated martyr in the Islamic world for standing up to America, the violence in Iraq will increase dramatically, the world will be outraged and broadly condemn the execution etc., etc. Each statement is ludicrous and irresponsible. It doesn’t only show bias against the US, clumsy and cheap flirtation with the Arab world, but it demonstrates ignorance, superficiality, total lack of responsibility and no attempt to uphold the most basic standards of journalism.

Most of media today have concluded that every reason for the invasion of Iraq was wrong and they applaud Bush Senior’s handling of the Gulf War in 1992. It is amazing that no one has seriously begun to re-evaluate this version of history. The truth is that the ending of the Gulf war before removing Saddam Hussein was one of the most incomprehensible, irresponsible, short term political opportune and cowardly decisions ever. Saddam had not only occupied Kuwait without the slightest provocation. He had killed hundreds of innocent Kuwaitis and many more disappeared without ever being heard from again. He plundered Kuwait of its treasures, he destroyed properties and his soldiers went on raping sprees etc. How can anyone maintain that the responsibility of the free democratic world was only to put Saddam in his place and bring matters back to where they were before the invasion? An incomprehensible conclusion that even more astonishingly till this day remains unchallenged. Bush Senior will unfortunately most likely be devalued in history to a person with no leadership skills and totally lacking in vision. An incurable “number two” type more suited to report to someone than to lead. His son seems to have realized this and tried with far more courageous leadership to do what had to be done. One of the biggest ironies is that if Bush Senior would have gone all the way to Baghdad and removed Saddam (even without the blessings of the French and Russia was in too much of a mess to be able to mount any opposition), he would with certainty have been re-elected President. Instead his “wishy washiness” remained evident to the voters who abandoned him.

Looking back virtually every recent President’s real impact and contributions has been completely reassessed. The media’s unified adoration for Gerald Ford today stands in stark contrast to their accusations during his time in power.

Another noteworthy fact is that George Bush Senior as Vice President was outraged by Israel taking out Saddam’s nuclear reactor (of the cabinet only Ronald Reagan and Alexander Haig gave the Israeli action the benefit of the doubt) and wanted to impose serious sanctions against the country only to later have to accept that the Secretary of Defense during the Gulf War – Dick Cheney – sent a letter thanking the Israeli leadership and stating that the action and victory of the Gulf War would not have been possible without Israel having destroyed Saddam’s nuclear capabilities earlier.

The undignified behavior of the new forces of power in Iraq and the unchecked undercurrent of religious fanatics, only serves to re-enforce the importance of the presence of the US and Western forces in Iraq. To suggest that this behavior will disappear with the withdrawal of troops borders on the infantile at best. There is little doubt that the positive alternatives in Iraq are hard to find, but sparing Saddam’s life would not have been such an event. Rather than more violence being triggered by his execution, the Sunnis now most likely are finally realizing the fact that there is no turning back the “clock”. There was never a successor in the wings to Saddam except for his sons, therefore only Saddam’s complete departure guarantees that all the factions in Iraq are looking forward."

Jeremayakovka sends me a link to a David Horowitz 'Revenge Is Justice' slam dunk comment:

It's a pinch myself day when the lead news story is about recriminations and regrets that Saddam Hussein, a man who incarnates evil, was not treated more decently at his belated hanging. And the editorial hand-wringing is that this was revenge not justice. As though being nice to someone who put human beings in plastic shredders -- head first -- and boiled even his relatives in oil, would make us more civilized rather than less. Revenge is justice. Saddam should have been drawn and quartered. The best thing about his execution was the presence of Shi'ia muslims taunting him with the memory of one of his Shi'ia victims. The shameless left and shameless liberals who would have kept this monster in power and are now shedding tears over the fact that he was killed should have the decency to let the Iraqis have their moment of revenge, pitiful as it is compared to the crimes this monster committed. Thankfully, at least one liberal -- the editor of the New Rep ublic Marty Peretz -- has had some sensible things to say on this subject in today's Wall Street Journal

Comments

[Crusader.NoRegrets.]

Geez, GD. Move on, get over yourself already.

GWB is desparately trying to persuade the rest of the world that he is still relevant, but everyone knows the US is on the run ideologically and strategically. The battle with the lone giant is coming to a close. The battle of the pygmies is about to begin.

And by the way, how exactly am I "freeking" out again? Just wondering. Tell me I'm wrong and why, if you are able. Else I stand by my claims. Do you think (a) Israelis will allow Olmert to allow Iran to get the bomb, or (b) allow Olmert to allow Abbas to allow Hamas to lob rockets into Israel indefinitely?

Not to mention the looming criminal corruption cases against the Livni-Olmert cabinet....

[Ghost Dansing]

Here's an interesting insight from Maureen Dowd from which we can predict the next political gambit by this Republican administration:

"With the Surge, as with the invasion of Iraq, W. is like the presumptuous date “who reserves a hotel room and then asks you to the prom,” as my friend Dana Calvo put it.

Teddy Kennedy gave a speech at the National Press Club yesterday about his new legislation that would require Congressional approval before troop levels can be increased. Afterward, he was asked if he would try to block the escalation with an amendment to an upcoming Iraq spending request.

“The horse will be out of the barn by the time we get there,” Senator Kennedy replied. “The president makes his speech now. We’re going to get the appropriation request probably the end of January, early February.” He said it could take eight more weeks for Congress to act. “By that time, the troops will already be there,” he said. “And then we’ll be asked, are we going to deny the body armor to the young men and women over there?”

In other words, the president will ask us to the prom once he reserves the hotel room."

Maureen Dowd, NYT, 10 January 2007
"Love Among the Ruins" 

Dubya and the Republicans are experts at keeping the Nation in a double-bind... Puts us all in a bad position, they stand their like dopes and ask "Well, whaddya want me ta do 'bout it?"

Modern Republicanism... "Seldom in doubt... frequently wrong". Americans, however, are beginning to see that these guys are very very predictable.

The "surge" tactic has been tried before in Baghdad, and has already failed... Biden is right... this administration is just cynical... buying time so that the problem will end up the problem of the next administration.

 
 

[Jeremayakovka]

Check out the Sanity Squad's 30-minute discussion of the execution at PJM.
(And thanks for the nod, Alexandra. -:))

[Ghost Dansing]

Alexandra... come back! We miss you! It's time for you to post another picture or something! Crusader is freeking-out!

[Crusader.NoRegrets.]

Israel is now dropping less-than-subtle hints that the genocidal slobbering and chanting from Iran will soon be coming to an end (to be replaced by howls of outrage from the International Left. Good. Let the maggots bleed.)

Indeed, there are growing grumblings from the Israeli right for an ouster of the Olmert gang, and they are nothing if not political opportunists (I stand by my assertion that we'll live to see him assassinated or thrown in prison anyway) so they'll seize on the UN's systemic anti-semitism to beat the living s--t outta the Iranian nuclear program, in order to appear to be super-duper wise and wily. In other words "oh that clusterf*** in Lebanon, that was all part of our super-duper topsy-secret 'cunning plan' (sorry Baldrick)".

I doubt nuclear weapons will be needed. The Israelis will find a conventional way to set Natanz back about three years, but from that point on Iran and Europe will be on notice that the next time Iran starts frothing at the mouth, Israel will be answering with a fission weapon. Which is the appropriate response for the people whose main crime of the last thousand years has been "living while Jewish".

Oh boy, ain't life grand!?

[lucas]

the thing god would want you to do is forgive saddam. i can forgive anyone for anything. but i could forgive him and still say he must die. there are the laws of god and there are the laws of man. they do not have to work together but in many cases they do. forgiving someone and showing them mercy is not the same thing. everyone has to pay for their actions in this life as well as the next life.

[Ghost Dansing]

RR, I think your correct in pointing to the political leadership as the central problem with the Vietnam war. However, I think you are drawing the wrong conclusions; tactical successes and superior force-on-force acknowledged

The problem was that the political leadership was self-deceptive and dishonest about what could realistically be achieved through military power in Vietnam... Just like Iraq.

The Pentagon papers brought to light the fact that the military staff, itself, realized that the situation was impossible from a military perspective.

Article

Article

The Pentagon Papers is the colloquial term for United States-Vietnam Relations, 1945-1967: A Study Prepared by the Department of Defense, a 47 volume, 7,000-page, top-secret United States Department of Defense history of the United States' political and military involvement in the Vietnam War from 1945 to 1971, with a focus on the internal planning and policy decisions within the U.S. Government. The study was commissioned in 1967 by Robert McNamara, then Secretary of Defense. McNamara appointed Leslie H. Gelb, who was also director of policy planning at the Pentagon, as director of the project. Gelb hired 36 military officers, civilian policy experts, and historians to write the monographs that constituted the content of the project. The Papers included 4,000 pages of actual documents from the 1945-1967 period, and 3,000 pages of analysis.

Wikipedia 

 

[RunningRoach]

GD

Just tell me, what memories do you have of Vietnam?

Were you there?

Know anyone who was there?

Ever meet a vet who was?

Ever been in a shooting war?

How about a race riot?

How about a street fight?

Anything?

When I returned, arriving at Newark airport, I was in full uniform and was spit at by a bunch of orange nightgown clad faggots singing a bunch of nonsense out of time to a guy/girl(couldn't tell which)with a tamborine. So I marched through the throng with a few other vets hoping these faggots would start something. They didn't have a set of balls among them, and all it took was one eyeball to eyeball look at their apparent "leader" to back them off.

We won in Vietnam. Kicked the S**t out of the NVA and VC. We all know the rest of the story, sad as it might be.

Those "people" (some deranged species of the human race) thought they had it right. War is not a good thing...peace is the way. No matter the consequences. Too bad it's a fantisy. I would love to go back to the sixties and sing Kumbya with a bunch of less than fully clad (no underware) pot head, flower children broads frolicking in the parks in NJ. They were easy marks and it would have been a lot of fun to play with them if only they had bathed like about once a week. The're ilk is still out there, for the time being... Pelosi, Kennedy, Kerry et al. I never met a combat vet, from Westmoreland on down the ranks (Yea ,I knew the guy personally.) who was not committed to winning that conflict. WE held off the "commies" at a critical time. Problem was that our political "leadership" sucked. Period!

If I have one regret, it would be that I was born into the wrong generation. This war against the Islamo-fashists has much more at stake than what we were fighting in Nam. By the way, Petraeus is no slug...Brookman is.

JCC

PS. When you can measure up to "Dubya" I'll be the first to salute you.

[Ghost Dansing]

Where is the outrage indeed?

Back in 1987, with memories of the Vietnam War still fresh, a young Army major writing his doctoral dissertation at Princeton explored the many ways in which that war had changed the American officer corps.

"First, they have become sensitive to the finite limits of public support for protracted military operations," the officer wrote. "Second, they have developed a nagging doubt about the efficacy of military operations. And third, they have carried from Vietnam a greater disillusionment with and heightened awareness of civilian officials."

That officer was David Petraeus — now Lt. Gen. David Petraeus. Twenty years later, he is about to be appointed by President Bush to replace Gen. George Casey as commander of all U.S. forces in Iraq...

...Petraeus has been stationed at Fort Leavenworth, Kan., where among other duties he has overseen the drafting of a joint Army-Marine doctrine in how to fight an insurgency like that in Iraq, the first such field manual since the Vietnam era.

As the doctrine points out, counterinsurgency is often, well, counterintuitive. You can't win by killing all the insurgents, and in fact will lose if you try to do so. And your most effective weapons are often political and economic — weapons that don't shoot.

The new doctrine also reflects the military's commitment to learning from its mistakes (among the units under Petraeus' command at Fort Leavenworth, for example, is the Center for Army Lessons Learned, or CALL).

...reading the counterinsurgency manual is like reading a post mortem on our debacle in Iraq. At one point, the manual lists eight unsuccessful practices in fighting an insurgency; the U.S. has committed every one of those mistakes, from overemphasizing the killing of insurgents to failing to control Iraq's borders.

The doctrine also lists three stages in a successful counterinsurgency; after almost four years of fighting and dying in Iraq, we are stuck at Stage One: "Stop the Bleeding."...

... (Dubya) desperately wants to convince the American people that he is making a fresh start in Iraq. The appointment of Petraeus, whom (Dubya) can plausibly describe as one of our nation's top counterinsurgency officers, will bolster that claim. And to address the manpower issue, the president is expected to propose escalating our commitment in Iraq by around 20,000 troops.

Unfortunately, most military experts say that escalation would be far too small, and come far too late, to alter the course of events in Iraq.

Gen. John Abizaid, commander of U.S. forces in the Middle East, told the Senate Armed Services Committee exactly that last fall, in response to a question from Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.).

Abizaid said he had asked every top commander in Iraq whether more troops would add considerably to odds of success. "And they all said no," Abizaid reported.

As Abizaid pointed out, our primary problem in Iraq is the absence of a working Iraqi government, and that's something that can't be fixed by more American troops.

"In the end, the host nation has to win on its own," the new manual states, and there is no evidence that the Iraqi government is capable of doing so.

That puts Petraeus in an interesting situation. Among the lessons of Vietnam noted in his dissertation 20 years ago was that gradual escalation is unlikely to work against an established insurgency, because the insurgents will adapt to it. He also noted that Vietnam had imbued senior American military leaders with "a conviction that the military leadership has not just a right, but a duty, to question those who would send American soldiers to war."

That obligation to question, however, applies more strongly still to Congress and the American people. These are critical times, and too many have been too quiet for too long.

Jay Bookman, Journal Constitution, 8 Jan 2007

 

[Ghost Dansing]

Didn't my link to the full article work for you Darrell?

If a quotation runs more than four typed lines in your text, make it a block quotation.

    Block quotations should be indented 10 spaces (or thereabouts) from the LEFT margin.  They are left-justified, which is to say, aligned at their left margin but ragged at the right margin.  (Justifying both margins often introduces peculiar spacing.)  In long papers, quote blocks should be double-spaced, like your text, but in short papers like those we are doing in the seminar, I'd like you to single-space any quote blocks that you create.

    Sometimes you begin a quote block with a sentence that starts off a paragraph in the text you're quoting.  If so, indent that sentence an additional three spaces, or 13 spaces from the regular left margin of your text.  Subsequent lines should begin a 10 spaces from the left margin, of course.  In quote blocks of two or more paragraphs, each new paragraph should begin three additional spaces from the left margin to indicate the paragraph break in the text you're quoting.

I'll use the example of the previous two paragraphs to indicate the proper style; this sentence will stand for a sentence in the text of your paper preceding the quote block.  The actual number of spaces you indent from the left margin (14 in this example, if I count right) is not terribly important; but the additional three spaces (or five, if you think it looks better) to indicate new paragraphs should be considered a rule.  Add the spaces manually, after you've used your word processor to indent the "block" passage.  Here, then, is the example:

     Block quotations should be indented 10 spaces (or thereabouts) from the LEFT margin.  They are left-justified, which is to say, aligned at their left margin but ragged at the right margin.  (Justifying both margins often introduces peculiar spacing.)  In long papers, quote blocks should be double-spaced, like your text, but in short papers like those we are doing in the seminar, I'd like you to single-space any quote blocks that you create.



     Sometimes you begin a quote block with a sentence that starts off a paragraph in the text you're quoting.  If so, indent that sentence an additional three spaces, or 13 spaces from the regular left margin of your text.  Subsequent lines should begin a 10 spaces from the left margin, of course.  In quote blocks of two or more paragraphs, each new paragraph should begin three additional spaces from the left margin to indicate the paragraph break in the text you're quoting.

I really don't hold myself to a lot of rules when I'm blogging... time constraints, etc. However, I do try to convey authoritative information on the subject... unless the subject it totally subjective like making an interpretation of art or something.

As I've said before, I'm not submitting work for mercentile publication, nor for the conference of academic degree... Just blogging.

Fun Rules 

 

[Darrell]

You are kicked out of school, Ghost, for plagiarism! Shame on you!
http://wdtprs.com/blog/2006/01/vigil-of-epiphany/
VIGIL of Epiphany
CATEGORY: SESSIUNCULUM, WDTPRS, 06 YEAR SIX ( 2005/06): SUPER OBLATA (2) — Fr. John Zuhlsdorf @ 6:21 am
What Does the Prayer Really Say? Vigil of Epiphany

Be gone now!

[Ghost Dansing]

Information Please

Epiphany comes from the Greek word for a divine “manifestation” or “revelation”. The Latin Church’s liturgy for this feast, especially in its antiphons for Vespers, reflect the tradition that Epiphany was thought to be the day not only when the Magi came to adore Christ, but also the day Jesus changed water into wine at Cana, and also when He was baptized by St. John. Each of these three mysteries reveals Jesus as more than a mere man: He is the man God. There are many “epiphanies” or “theophanies” in Scripture (e.g., the burning bush, the Transfiguration). The history of the feast of Epiphany is complex, stretching back to the Church’s earliest times. In the East, Epiphany was of far greater importance than the relative latecomer Christmas. In the West, Christmas came first and the celebration of Epiphany developed later. In many today Epiphany, not Christmas, is when people exchange gifts in imitation of the Magi. In truth, Epiphany falls on 6 January, the twelfth day after Christmas, as in “On the Twelfth day of Christmas, my true love gave to me…”, a song some think comes from Ireland during the time when Catholicism was illegal. Shakespeare’s play Twelfth Night refers to Epiphany.

Exquisite customs grace this day, including giving gifts and enjoying King Cake and Lamb’s Wool (a drink made from cider or ale with roasted apples, sugar and spices). People blessed apple trees by pouring a libation of cider on them. There is a special blessing of chalk used for hallowing homes: on the lintels of the doors you write “20 + C + M + B + 06”, the year with the initials for the names of the Magi found in the older Rituale Romanum, Gaspar (G and C being related), Melchior et Baltássar. A few years ago a WDTPRSer wrote suggesting that CMB is really “Christus Mansionem Benedicat… May Christ bless this dwelling”, but is so only by coincidence. The names of the Magi are traditional and are not in Scripture. Some ancient authors thought there were as many as 24 Magi… which would fill up a lintel pretty fast. Sometime people call the three stars of the “belt” of the constellation Orion “the Three Kings”. In Italy children wait for “La Befana” (from Italian “Epifania”), an old woman invited by the Magi to accompany them on their journey to find the newborn King. The old woman declined because she was sweeping her house, but she realized her error followed the Magi, who were far ahead of her. She is still searching for Jesus, riding her broomstick. Santa-like, she visits homes leaving toys and candy for good children, and the proverbial lumps of coal for the naughty. Santa gets cookies and milk by fireplaces to sustain him on his way, but Italians appropriately leave wine and oranges for La Befana.

I have a secret to tell, from my electrical well... it's a simple message and I'm leaving out the whistles and bells... like the Longine Symphonette... the message is infinite...

[Darrell]

20+C+M+B+07
Christus Mansionem Benedicat

That should protect us against all manner of Ghosts. . .

Happy Epiphany, everyone!
****
The Left's tears have nothing to do with who deserves them: They are solely for the acquisition of power. And once firmly in control, the tears magically disappear: They show no mercy, nor shed no tear.

[Ghost Dansing]

saddam fans sing the blues

[Ghost Dansing]

saddam fans

[Ghost Dansing]

saddam

[Ghost Dansing]

saddam

[slowtrain]

The question should never be whether or not Saddam deserves to die and I don’t believe it has ever been. For anyone to make that the question is completely absurd. Just laws demand that Saddam pay fully for his crimes and he should. But I don’t know that it would ever be enough.

Therefore, the point to be made is that people should be relieved by his execution, rather than revel in it. For the very fact that Saddam’s execution cannot make up for his crimes; it cannot bring back those he murdered or restore those he maimed. The fact remains that, after his execution is “celebrated”, if it is “celebrated”, his victims will still be left with the pain they bear, as a result of murdered or maimed loved ones, who will never come back and will never be restored. This is a hard cold fact that will outlive any euphoria his execution may bring. Clearly, the wishes of the victims in their quest for justice or vengeance are understandable and highly regarded, and perhaps, they find solace in “rejoicing” over Saddam’s execution.

Nevertheless, reveling in Saddam’s execution may not mean anything in real terms, as an end product analysis, to those he maimed or the families of those he murdered. In apparent terms, perhaps it does, and may be that would suffice for the victims, albeit fleetingly. But does it, or rather can it restore the lives that have been damaged or lost? Can it remove the pain his victims bear? We all know the answer to that. For this reason, it may be illusory to be overjoyed by his execution. Saddam’s execution is not as substantive as one might think, particularly to the victims who have suffered terribly at his blood stained hands.

Reveling in Saddam’s execution, as the focus of the event, runs the risk of exposing people to an experience paralleling Saddam’s exhilarating feeling over the demise of his victims.

I understand that my view is a bit philosophical, especially in light of the realities of the moment. But in the heat of the moment, we must not forget that our moral principles are essentially philosophical, and are the cornerstones of our civilization and values, which restrain us from being corrupted by whatever circumstance that may beset us.

[Crusader.NoRegrets.]

Have any of you guys ever watched videos or seen still images of a Palestinian street-mob execution of someone randomly labelled a "collaborator" with Israel? Surely, plenty of nastiness to get worked up about, but NOOOOooooooo...., we gotta get all tied up about some worthless sh--bag being taunted before taking the drop of doom. And there was no doubt whatsoever about Hussein's guilt.

I personally agree with David Warren. He should have been quietly strangled once he could (or would) no longer provide useful information on the Iraqi insurgency, and his body hung up from a lamppost, like the p.o.s. he was.

[Crusader.NoRegrets.]

GD is on the right side of history here.

Indeed, I have been waiting for the howls of outrage and anguish from the left on the treatment of Iranian and Saudi women, and Palestinian homosexuals, and Jewish and Hindu minorities in Muslim lands, and Christians in Pakistan, and so on.....

[antimedia]

Ghost, hand-wringing does not count as outrage, nor is it helpful to the victims.

[antimedia]

Where was the outrage? Where it's always been. Safely tucked away, reserved for just the right political opportunity to use it.

[Ghost Dansing]

In 1993, the International Commission of Jurists said that there was "sufficient evidence of the fact that torture has become widespread in Iraqi prisons" and deplored the fact that Iraq "disregards the most important right, namely the right to life." The UN Special Rapporteur on Human Rights in Iraq said in November 1999 "Extreme and brutal force is threatened and applied without hesitation and with total impunity to control the population" and has frequently expressed the sentiment that the human rights situation inside Iraq is worse than any country since the end of World War II.

Help



 

[karen]

"Torture and ill-treatment of prisoners and detainees were widely reported. According to reports, at least six people had their hands amputated as punishment."

I believe two of these men visited the White House and shook W's hand to thank him for finally doing the most obvious thing- take Saddam out of power.

GDansing... I'd say you almost agree w/the majority here. Kewl :0).

[Francis W. Porretto]

Not to have executed Saddam Hussein would have demeaned the rights to life of all his victims -- to say nothing of the old monster's value as a figure around whom the Syrians could rally Ba'athists and Sunnis determined to rule Iraq once more. But one must expect leftists to make a mascot out of any murderer. It's their way of asserting their moral superiority to the rest of us, who merely want to sleep safely in our own beds. Six out of ten of them would argue even today that Saddam was the "rightful ruler" of Iraq, and that our toppling him was unjustifiable and criminal.

[Ghost Dansing]

 Amnesty International, Annual Report, 1999: Iraq

"Suspected political opponents, including possible prisoners of conscience, continued to be arrested and tens of thousands of others arrested in previous years remained held. Scores of Kurdish families were forcibly expelled from their homes and members of targeted families detained. Torture and ill-treatment of prisoners and detainees were widely reported. According to reports, at least six people had their hands amputated as punishment. There was no further news on the fate of thousands of people who “disappeared” in previous years. Hundreds of people, including political prisoners, were reportedly executed; some may have been extrajudicially executed. Death sentences continued to be imposed, including for non-violent offences. Human rights abuses were reported in areas under Kurdish control."

 Amnesty International, Annual Report, 2001: Iraq

"Hundreds of people, among them political prisoners including possible prisoners of conscience, were executed. Hundreds of suspected political opponents, including army officers suspected of planning to overthrow the government, were arrested and their fate and whereabouts remained unknown. Torture and ill-treatment were widespread and new punishments, including beheading and the amputation of the tongue, were reportedly introduced. Non-Arabs, mostly Kurds, continued to be forcibly expelled from their homes in the Kirkuk area to Iraqi Kurdistan."

Amnesty International: Iraq; Disappearances since the 80's

Human Rights is Saddam Hussein's Iraq: Wikipedia 

[Ernesto Ribeiro]

Alexanda, excellent post, good point. This is the real outrage:

Our infants, our future...

Education in the Saudi Arabia: video of the state-owned TV IQRA, showing as should be "the ideal education" of a Saudi infant on Jews - shocking!

3 years and half. In that age, the girl already knows to repeat what learned how in the school and at home:

"The Jews are monkeys and pigs. Who said that was our god (Allah), in the Koran. Because... they do not like our prophet Mohammed... he killed someone. ..”

http://www2.youtube.com/watch?v=u3z-B7L8LQ4