HAPPY NEW YEAR

Looks like 2007 will be Saddam-free:

A top Iraqi official says Saddam Hussein will be executed before 6 a.m. Saturday, Baghdad time, that’s tonight at 9 p.m. Central [US] Time.

Which is, I think, 2pm Sydney time. Saddam’s lawyers have attempted a last-minute rope-avoidance gambit:

His attorneys argued that because Hussein also faces a civil lawsuit in Washington, he has rights as a civil defendant that would be violated if he is executed. He has not received notice of those rights and the consequences that the lawsuit would have on his estate, his attorneys said.

“To protect those rights, defendant Saddam Hussein requests an order of this court providing a stay of his execution until further notice of this court,” attorney Nicholas Gilman wrote.

Nice try. Meanwhile, Europeans are unhappy.

UPDATE. Mark Steyn: “Just in time for Eid, the Iraqis decided Saddam Hussein was one old acquaintance who really should be forgot.”

UPDATE II. Saddam’s half-brother Barzan Hassan and former chief justice of the Revolutionary Court Awad Bandar were also executed.

UPDATE III. Not only is Saddam dead, he’s also been ejected from a soccer match: “Before the execution, Saddam was reportedly presented with a red card …”

UPDATE IV. Saddam was first sentenced to death 48 years ago:

Under his uncle’s influence, Saddam joined the Baath Party, a radical, secular Arab nationalist organization, at age 20. A year later, he fled to Egypt after taking part in an attempt to assassinate the country’s ruler, Gen. Abdul-Karim Qassim, and was sentenced to death in absentia.

UPDATE V. Iraqis are happy. Ramsey Clark is sad.

UPDATE VI. Dan Lewis:

CNN are such pricks.

They mentioned that footage of the execution will be made available by Al-Arabiya. CNN will be debating the issue internally and being “very sensitive” in the manner in which they show it, probably only showing the lead-up and the aftermath, but not the execution itself.

They were never that sensitive when they showed footage of American soldiers being shot.

UPDATE VII. Jules Crittenden toasts justice and rounds up blog reaction.

UPDATE VIII. Ten News earlier showed footage of ecstatic Sydney Iraqis; one man told the network Saddam had killed 61 members of his family.

UPDATE IX. Kevin Rudd “questions whether the execution of Saddam Hussein will in any way reduce sectarian and political violence in Iraq, which has already brought that country to the brink of civil war.”

UPDATE X. Saddam’s body count.

UPDATE XI. The New York Times:

Ultimately, underneath all the socialist oratory, underneath the Koranic references, the tailored suits and the invocations of Iraq’s glorious history, Mr. Hussein held onto the ethos of a village peasant who believed that the strongman was everything. He was trying to be a tribal leader on a grand scale …

The entertainment at public events often consisted of outpourings of praise for Mr. Hussein. At the January 2003 inauguration of a recreational lake in Baghdad, poets spouted spontaneous verse and the official translators struggled to keep up with lines like, “We will stimulate ourselves by saying your name, Saddam Hussein, when we say Saddam Hussein, we stimulate ourselves.”

Baghdad’s poets are evidently big Divinyls fans.

UPDATE XII. Scott Wickstein: “Goodbye Saddam Hussain …”

Posted by Tim B. on 12/29/2006 at 08:44 PM
    1. “He has not received notice of those rights…”

      Funny that. I couldn’t really give a toss about his rights. Especially after he denied and killed the rights of thousands of innocent Iraqis.

      Let him learn how it feels.

      Posted by The Best Infidel on 2006 12 29 at 08:50 PM • permalink

 

    1. Isn’t it hillarious the way the leftist fucktards are always bleating on about how it was so wrong for us to “impose” democracy on the Iraqi’s – and yet as soon as the ELECTED gov’t of Iraq carries out an act they don’t like – they start demanding that we impose their demented morality on the Iraqi people

      Does your hypocrisy gene get removed when you become a leftist fucktard?

      Posted by Pogue Mahone on 2006 12 29 at 08:59 PM • permalink

 

    1. Can’t think of a better start to a new year than this. Getting rid of the garbage, that’s what it’s all about.

      Posted by SwinishCapitalist on 2006 12 29 at 08:59 PM • permalink

 

    1. Hey, man, like have some hemp and chill out, dude.

      Posted by andycanuck on 2006 12 29 at 09:01 PM • permalink

 

    1. One more thing before my two dollars runs out:
      Merry Christmas SC! And tell your Mom Paco says “hey”. 
      Can you give me a little more info here, Paco? ‘Cuz Mum just turned a deep shade of red and changed the subject.

      Posted by SwinishCapitalist on 2006 12 29 at 09:04 PM • permalink

 

    1. The EUros are unhappy?

      Perhaps they’d be happier if Sadd-ass had murdered and terrorized them instead?

      Pardon the language, but it seems appropriate to the occasion:  The EUros can go fuck themselves.

      Sadd-ass cannot swing too soon.

      Enjoy eternity in HELL with your sons and your buddies, Sadd-asshole.

      I’m looking forward to popping the cork on the champagne in the fridge.  😀

      Posted by Barbara Skolaut on 2006 12 29 at 09:10 PM • permalink

 

    1. #6—when are the Euros EVER happy.  My wife has lots of family in Europe and the only happyones are the Americans—the Euros are all not happy.

      (Maybe the Not Happy John people are really Euro transplants)

      Posted by Room 237 on 2006 12 29 at 09:12 PM • permalink

 

    1. Afterward we can have the FBI remind him that in the US he has the right to be silent.

      Posted by David A on 2006 12 29 at 09:13 PM • permalink

 

    1. Psst, Angel of Death, while you’re down here taking Saddam, could you swing by Cuba and take Fidel too?  Don’t know if you do two-for-one specials, but we here would appreciate this one.

      Thanks,
      Freedom Lovers.

      Posted by rbj1 on 2006 12 29 at 09:15 PM • permalink

 

    1. #2 yes.

      I’ve been laughing at the same hypocrisy.

      Posted by Nilknarf Arbed on 2006 12 29 at 09:18 PM • permalink

 

    1. #9 deaths are supposed to come in threes arent they?

      let’s hope the angel of death includes Amadhimmlerjad in the trifecta

      Posted by eeniemeenie on 2006 12 29 at 09:25 PM • permalink

 

    1. #7 Room 237:  In my travels one of the characteristics about Americans (and I’m assuming Australians) that REALLY get on the European’s nerves is our optimism and happiness.  Particularly in light of the very obvious fact that to them, we have nothing whatsoever to be happy about!

      Saddam tonight:  couldn’t happen to a more deserving fellow.

      Posted by Kathy from Austin on 2006 12 29 at 09:26 PM • permalink

 

    1. That’s the estate he murdered, raped and pillaged out of the Iraqi people, right?  Oh, and every eurotaxpayer who donated to the Oil for Food Palace Fund…

      Posted by richard mcenroe on 2006 12 29 at 09:35 PM • permalink

 

    1. #11, You are correct.  That would be a nice trifecta.  How about a two-for-one trifecta:  Saddam + Fidel + Ahmedummyjohn and Lil Kim + Chavez + ______?

      Nominations for the last spot are now open.

      Posted by rbj1 on 2006 12 29 at 09:36 PM • permalink

 

    1. And they helpfully scheduled it for U.S. primetime, too.

      Posted by PW on 2006 12 29 at 09:38 PM • permalink

 

    1. One of the arguments against hanging Saddam now is that he doesn’t face trial for all his other crimes.  He gets a walk, so to speak, and history will not record the convictions against him.

      Posted by anthony_r on 2006 12 29 at 09:40 PM • permalink

 

    1. I sort of agree with the Euros, though only a little – I’m deeply opposed to the death penalty, but I believe executing Saddam is a necessary evil.

      Posted by James Waterton on 2006 12 29 at 09:40 PM • permalink

 

    1. Saddamite Hinsane is gonna dance, baby!

      And the EUniks cant do squat about it.

      Posted by Grimmy on 2006 12 29 at 09:41 PM • permalink

 

    1. A fitting end. Do the Iraqis employ long drop or short drop?

      I may even take a drink to mark the occasion.

      Posted by Simon Darkshade on 2006 12 29 at 09:43 PM • permalink

 

    1. Wow. By the time I get outta bed in the morning, Saddam will have been sent to the hottest depths of Hell. Hale-frickin-lujah! If I was still a drinker, I’d start my day with a cold one. Or twelve. Since I’m not, I’ll just salute the Flag, praise G-d, & say thanks to all the Yanks, Diggers & others who made it possible.

      It’s been said before, but I’ll say it again – couldn’t happen to a more deserving thug.

      Life Is Good.

      Posted by KC on 2006 12 29 at 09:44 PM • permalink

 

    1. #14 – would it be rude to suggest Jimmah?

      Posted by KC on 2006 12 29 at 09:45 PM • permalink

 

    1. That’s a weak argument, rebase, because dragging the trials on for years (again) would probably do more harm in the long run, in the sense that a wound should be treated immediately, and not permitted to fester.

      The only thing more trials would do is put the official stamp of approval on the other reasons (read, “thousands of murders, rapes, and torture”) he should be executed for.

      Besides, dead is dead.  And it’ll be over.  Works for me.

      But I have to wonder…..will there be any of the candle light vigils we see here in the US, when executions are carried out?  Being scheduled for prime time really opens the door for some lurid moonbat posturing.

      Posted by The_Real_JeffS on 2006 12 29 at 09:46 PM • permalink

 

    1. Somewhere, Ramsey Clark is crying.

      And the NYT.

      Delay Execution, sez NYT

      Posted by Patricia on 2006 12 29 at 09:52 PM • permalink

 

    1. #22 TRJ, it’s not a great argument but it’s the only argument I’ve heard against hanging Saddam that makes some sense.  And it’s not really something the defence team could put forward.

      Posted by anthony_r on 2006 12 29 at 09:57 PM • permalink

 

    1. And every ghost in Europe has a good laugh.

      Posted by Jim Treacher on 2006 12 29 at 10:04 PM • permalink

 

    1. This is a travesty! I’ve not got enough time to get the beer cold. so a decent red it will have to be.

      Whatever happened to justice…

      Posted by Harry Buttle on 2006 12 29 at 10:12 PM • permalink

 

    1. History will well record the full total of this monster’s depravity.

      Court approval for hanging on one murder or a million, dead is dead and gone is gone. His record of grotesque mass murder and depravity is documented well enough to not need court papers for future academics to leaf through.

      Posted by Grimmy on 2006 12 29 at 10:13 PM • permalink

 

    1. Re #24: Oh, the argument does make sense, rebase.  It just doesn’t overwhelm the rest of the facts, is all.

      Posted by The_Real_JeffS on 2006 12 29 at 10:15 PM • permalink

 

    1. Saddam + Fidel + Imonajihad and Lil Kim + Chavez + Red Ken

      Posted by Rob Read on 2006 12 29 at 10:15 PM • permalink

 

    1. Hanging Saddam at dawn.

      I like the tone – they’re saying it’s a new day for Iraq.

      Posted by Ian Deans on 2006 12 29 at 10:23 PM • permalink

 

    1. Saddam, we’ll miss him like we miss cancer.

      Posted by Infidel Tiger on 2006 12 29 at 10:27 PM • permalink

 

    1. #5 SwinishCapitalist: Wait a minute. Er, she wasn’t at the Led Zeppelin concert in Greensboro, North Carolina in 1975, was she? Dude, I swear! I’m not the one who planted that pot in her handbag!

      Posted by paco on 2006 12 29 at 10:35 PM • permalink

 

    1. The only thing half as much fun as SH playing pendulum, is hurting the poor wittle euros’ feeeeelings. Fuck ‘em. Arrogant little creeps. 100 years ago, when they claimed everybody but them was a barbarian, they at least had more guns than everybody else. What’ve they got now? Their only remaining claim to relevance on the world stage is that they make more stylish kitchen accessories than just about anybody. Except for the Japanese, obviously.

      Posted by Don’t Bogart that Midget, Comrade! on 2006 12 29 at 10:49 PM • permalink

 

    1. Well, looks like they’re getting ready to flip the Permanent Alimentary Canal Off-switch on ol’ Saddam. But, as Thomas Jefferson said, “The gallows is the highest form of justice” (or was it the “tallest” form of justice? Hm. Have to ask John Kerry about that.).

      Posted by paco on 2006 12 29 at 10:50 PM • permalink

 

    1. “What are you doing, Saddam?”
      “Just hanging out.”

      Posted by andycanuck on 2006 12 29 at 10:53 PM • permalink

 

    1. Jefferson said hemp is the highest form of justice?

      Posted by andycanuck on 2006 12 29 at 10:54 PM • permalink

 

    1. #36: Dude. Jefferson said hemp got him higher than justice.

      Posted by paco on 2006 12 29 at 10:56 PM • permalink

 

    1. As someone who has commented here hundreds of times on Iraq-related threads, I would like to say – on the occasion of this curiously anti-climactic denouement – that I do not believe Saddam Hussein should be executed.

      He is not beyond redemption.

      Posted by C.L. on 2006 12 29 at 10:58 PM • permalink

 

    1. 10,9,8,7,6,5,4,3,2,1 … is that how they do it?

      Posted by Stevo on 2006 12 29 at 11:00 PM • permalink

 

    1. It would’ve been better if they hanged him at midnight on New Year’s. I mean, we’ve already got the lights and the fireworks set up and ready to go…

      Posted by Ian Deans on 2006 12 29 at 11:03 PM • permalink

 

    1. #38 – Agreed. He’d make a perfectly suitable UN Chief.

      Posted by Infidel Tiger on 2006 12 29 at 11:04 PM • permalink

 

    1. “He is not beyond redemption.”

      Just make sure you wash him out before you return him for the 10-cent deposit.

      Posted by Jim Treacher on 2006 12 29 at 11:05 PM • permalink

 

    1. Apparently it’s barely breaking 0 degrees in Baghdad this mroning (32F) – I wonder if it will be enough to him for eternity in Hell?

      Posted by Ian Deans on 2006 12 29 at 11:08 PM • permalink

 

    1. *to prepare him…

      Posted by Ian Deans on 2006 12 29 at 11:09 PM • permalink

 

    1. Sky News reports he’s now been executed . . . . and Satan is warming up the K-Y gel.

      Posted by Young and Free on 2006 12 29 at 11:09 PM • permalink

 

    1. Via Fox

      Al Arabiya has reported that he has been executed.  Take it for what it’s worth.

      Posted by yojimbo on 2006 12 29 at 11:11 PM • permalink

 

    1. It’s done – good bloody riddance

      Posted by Bruno on 2006 12 29 at 11:12 PM • permalink

 

    1. Sky article.

      Posted by Ian Deans on 2006 12 29 at 11:12 PM • permalink

 

    1. Sunni rather than later is what I say.

      Posted by yojimbo on 2006 12 29 at 11:12 PM • permalink

 

    1. And he’s taken the drop.

      Posted by Simon Darkshade on 2006 12 29 at 11:13 PM • permalink

 

    1. Fox reports that he’s gone.Unfortunately no live vision but a tape is expected to be released to satisfy the locals that he is in fact dead.BBC World and CNN have a fine selection of Terrorist Apologists on display.

      Posted by Lew on 2006 12 29 at 11:13 PM • permalink

 

    1. #45 Have you been watching South Park the last few years?  Saddam was Satan’s lover.  Another example now of life imitating art.

      And a silent toast to all of Saddam’s victims.  May you have peace now.

      Posted by rbj1 on 2006 12 29 at 11:14 PM • permalink

 

    1. According to The Enquirer he has already been sighted in Rio.

      Posted by Infidel Tiger on 2006 12 29 at 11:14 PM • permalink

 

    1. Though I oppose the death penalty on philosophical grounds (it makes it harder to secure a jury conviction in a capital offence trial), this is a great day for the world!

      Posted by Kaboom on 2006 12 29 at 11:16 PM • permalink

 

    1. HE’S DEAD. Just in from CNN alert.

      Posted by SandiM on 2006 12 29 at 11:17 PM • permalink

 

    1. he’s a real swinger

      Posted by Squiffy on 2006 12 29 at 11:18 PM • permalink

 

    1. Dead, dead, dead, dead, dead.

      Next up, Mutaq al Sadr.

      Posted by joe bagadonuts on 2006 12 29 at 11:19 PM • permalink

 

    1. He’s finally learned the ropes.

      Posted by rbj1 on 2006 12 29 at 11:19 PM • permalink

 

    1. Watching CNN now on SBS> YAY!

      Posted by Nilknarf Arbed on 2006 12 29 at 11:19 PM • permalink

 

    1. …and tonight the world is a better place.

      Posted by Not My Problem on 2006 12 29 at 11:20 PM • permalink

 

    1. Former Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein is dead—executed by hanging for killings committed during a brutal crackdown nearly 25 years ago –- Iraqi TV stations report.
      Breaking news

      Posted by SandiM on 2006 12 29 at 11:21 PM • permalink

 

    1. I have made a commemorative souvenir family game. Good for ages 5 and above.

      Posted by Dan Lewis on 2006 12 29 at 11:23 PM • permalink

 

    1. He’s twistin’, twistin’ in the wind!

      Posted by Rob Crawford on 2006 12 29 at 11:23 PM • permalink

 

    1. #62 – Is it an ‘o’?

      Posted by Infidel Tiger on 2006 12 29 at 11:24 PM • permalink

 

    1. #62 j?  Man, this is a hard game.

      Posted by rbj1 on 2006 12 29 at 11:26 PM • permalink

 

    1. This just in:

      He’s dead meat! Bout time!

      Posted by rinardman on 2006 12 29 at 11:27 PM • permalink

 

    1. He is not beyond redemption.

      Perhaps, Lad. But timing is everything. He should have commenced his journey on the path to redemption a long time ago.

      Posted by paco on 2006 12 29 at 11:27 PM • permalink

 

    1. Hey, where’s the misleading link from troll boy to that stupid Bush-basjing video?

      Posted by paco on 2006 12 29 at 11:28 PM • permalink

 

    1. they really stretched this whole thing out

      Posted by Squiffy on 2006 12 29 at 11:28 PM • permalink

 

    1. “Basjing” is mandarin for “bashing”. PIMF!

      Posted by paco on 2006 12 29 at 11:29 PM • permalink

 

    1. ee’s pinin’ for the fjords

      Posted by Squiffy on 2006 12 29 at 11:30 PM • permalink

 

    1. #45 Have you been watching South Park the last few years?  Saddam was Satan’s lover.  Another example now of life imitating art.

      Relax, guy.

      Posted by Young and Free on 2006 12 29 at 11:33 PM • permalink

 

    1. “” “” “”” :” ” “: ” :” :”:  : “: “

      “Champagne bubbles on NYE” by 1.618

      For Sale a bottle of Champers.(hicup)

      Happy New Year Tim B and the team xxx
      Tim you would be my first choice for 12 O’clock pash rash!! smootches lol

      Posted by 1.618 on 2006 12 29 at 11:36 PM • permalink

 

    1. #73: Er, who’s your designated driver, 1.618?

      Posted by paco on 2006 12 29 at 11:39 PM • permalink

 

    1. #74

      I believe it’s .382, and that’s a problem.

      Posted by yojimbo on 2006 12 29 at 11:41 PM • permalink

 

    1. He is not beyond redemption.

      Well, now he can discuss it with God in person.

      Posted by Andrea Harris, Administrator on 2006 12 29 at 11:46 PM • permalink

 

    1. May you roast in the same hell that you surely created for God knows how many people, you filthy, but d-e-a-d bastard.

      To the Leftists of the world, to bad another of YOUR hero’s is dead, eh? Well, go fuck yourselves.

      When will the glorification and raised to a deity T-Shirts make their debut?

      OH, did I mention…go fuck yourselves?

      Posted by El Cid on 2006 12 29 at 11:49 PM • permalink

 

    1. And for the occasion, some famous last words from other condemned criminals.

      H/T Ace of Spades

      Posted by paco on 2006 12 29 at 11:52 PM • permalink

 

    1. CNN are such pricks.

      They mentioned that footage of the execution will be made available by Al-Arabiya. CNN will be debating the issue internally and being “very sensitive” in the manner in which they show it, probably only showing the lead-up and the aftermath, but not the execution itself.

      They were never that sensitive when they showed footage of American soldiers being shot.

      Posted by Dan Lewis on 2006 12 29 at 11:54 PM • permalink

 

    1. It don’t mean a thing
      if it ain’t got that swing.

      Posted by Latino on 2006 12 29 at 11:54 PM • permalink

 

    1. Video on Youtube.

      Sort of.

      Posted by Dan Lewis on 2006 12 29 at 11:57 PM • permalink

 

    1. He is not beyond redemption.

      Jesus H….You are entitled to your opinion.

      Although I do agree in a way…He can NOW be used for third base, aka “the hot corner”.

      Posted by El Cid on 2006 12 29 at 11:59 PM • permalink

 

    1. I’m familiar with his crimes, Paco. Recourse to the death penalty by the new Iraq will make the repetition of those state crimes in the future more likely, not less so.

      I’ll leave commentary about who is and isn’t in hell to madrasa mountebanks.

      Posted by C.L. on 2006 12 30 at 12:04 AM • permalink

 

    1. Now let the chorus of “this doesn’t change anything” from the leftist fucktards begin…just before they return to “we still haven’t gotten bil laden!” chants

      Posted by Pogue Mahone on 2006 12 30 at 12:08 AM • permalink

 

    1. “The tree of Liberty must be watered periodically with the blood of Tyrants and Patriots alike.” – Thomas Jefferson

      Dictators, like franchise horror movie monsters, need to be unprofitably dead dead dead. The proto-UN (if I may slander them with that name) of the european alliance tried the life sentence thing: they thought Napoleon was safely out of trouble there on Elba. Nope, back he came.
      Where Saddam is there’s no coming back!  YAY!

      Posted by kiwinews on 2006 12 30 at 12:11 AM • permalink

 

    1. Recourse to the death penalty by the new Iraq will make the repetition of those state crimes in the future more likely, not less so.

      Much like hanging the Nazi leadership has caused Germany to return to being a genocidal police-state.

      Posted by Rob Crawford on 2006 12 30 at 12:11 AM • permalink

 

    1. In the circumstances of his death, we see a glimmer of the same evil Saddam rained down on others. I don’t think that’s worth aspiring to.

      I strongly object to capital punishment. I can see the utility of it in this one particular case, but it still sits very uneasily with me.

      Posted by James Waterton on 2006 12 30 at 12:12 AM • permalink

 

    1. Oh who cares about your delicate feely-weelings! Tell it to the relatives of everyone he gassed and ran through shredders and had shot in the back of the head and buried in mass graves. Oh, but we’re approaching a glimmer of the same evil. I’ve never read anything so idiotic in my life. Well actually yes, I have, on the stupid lefty twaddle websites. I never thought I’d read it here.

      Posted by Andrea Harris, Administrator on 2006 12 30 at 12:16 AM • permalink

 

    1. In memory rock, paper, Saddam.

      I still think we should have offered him a deal in exchange for what he knew about international terrorism (like, say, sheltering one of the 1993 WTC bombers), but there is no way to argue that the bastard didn’t get what he deserved.

      Posted by 68W40 on 2006 12 30 at 12:19 AM • permalink

 

    1. #83: I did not mean to imply that you weren’t familiar with his crimes, C.L.; I have read your comments here and elsewhere for quite a while, and there are few who are better informed. I meant only that Saddam’s enormities occurred without letup over many years, and that nothing – not even the fear of death – caused the tiniest ripple of remorse in that evil mind of his (at least, it was not publicly observable). In the strictly Christian sense of redemption, if I may use such an incongruous construction in connection with a (supposed) true Muslim believer, I would agree that no one can be presumed to have forfeited it. But, also in that sense, none of us can presume to have an infinitely long time to achieve it. As to your conclusion – that this execution will make state crimes more likely, not less so – I am perhaps too dull a fellow to see why this should obviously be so, but would genuinely (and I mean that in a completely sincere, non-facetious sense) be interested in hearing your argument elaborated more fully.

      Posted by paco on 2006 12 30 at 12:20 AM • permalink

 

    1. Oh who cares about your delicate feely-weelings! Tell it to the relatives of everyone he gassed and ran through shredders and had shot in the back of the head and buried in mass graves.

      Or just the fellow who lived for years inside the walls of his parents’ home.

      Posted by Rob Crawford on 2006 12 30 at 12:22 AM • permalink

 

    1. James & Lad, I too am against capital punishment, but I can’t find even the smallest amount of regret in me that this has happened.  You only have to think of the children that he tortured to realise he got off lightly.

      If that makes me a hypocrite, so be it.

      Posted by 8_8_8 on 2006 12 30 at 12:22 AM • permalink

 

    1. #79, Dan Lewis

      Agenda
      Priorities
      Demographics

      Posted by yojimbo on 2006 12 30 at 12:27 AM • permalink

 

    1. Sic Semper Tyrannis.

      Deserved it a hundred times over. Good riddance.

      As an almost 30-year Dire Straits fan, I find it a bit distasteful, but I guess we can now call Saddam “the Sultan of Swing”.

      Posted by Spiny Norman on 2006 12 30 at 12:27 AM • permalink

 

    1. the crybaby left will be bleating for days over this

      arent ‘we’ awful, isnt ‘our’ society corrupt and cruel……..

      good riddance to the bastard. death sentence like this is not a deterrent, it is getting rid of garbage!!!!

      Posted by rick9 on 2006 12 30 at 12:28 AM • permalink

 

    1. Now if only they’d throw Castro’s moldy corpse out a window or something.

      Posted by Andrea Harris, Administrator on 2006 12 30 at 12:40 AM • permalink

 

    1. #95

      the crybaby left will be bleating for days over this

      arent ‘we’ awful, isnt ‘our’ society corrupt and cruel……..

      For some reason, “crybaby left” made me think of DU. Imagine that! So I went and looked, and what did I see first?
      This:
      I have no opinion on Saddam’s guilt or innocence None. Not one bit. Not my decision. I wasn’t involved, and I have kept myself blissfully unaware of the details.

      BUT

      This is an orgy of revenge. This is being covered as a circus. The media isn’t covering, they’re gloating. They’re making a spectacle out of this to show how big and powerful we are.

      So, folks who are asking why people seem hypocritical about this, and aren’t rejoicing over the death of a dictator – I can’t bring myself to do so. Not because of any feelings about him, but because of feelings about how our society looks now.

      Good (easy) call, rick9!

      Posted by rinardman on 2006 12 30 at 12:43 AM • permalink

 

    1. He’ll never ride that unicorn now!

      Posted by Andrea Harris, Administrator on 2006 12 30 at 12:51 AM • permalink

 

    1. #88 Agreed Andrea. There are quite a few criminals who it is a nonsense to keep alive, and he is was at the worst end of the spectrum.
      Too may feely-weelings make Jack a dull boy or at least a sitting duck for those who go straght into murdering control-freak mode in the name of their so-called religion.
      If we are not prepared to pull the lever, the trigger, or press the big red button from time to time, we will end up being dominated by those with no feely weelings.

      Posted by blogstrop on 2006 12 30 at 12:55 AM • permalink

 

    1. #97

      Went there myself!  Some really great threads.  This sure has the freepers out and frothing.  Do you really believe what the government said about Saddam?  Didn’t he serve a purpose by holding Iraq together?  His death equals Cris Rock’s “O.J. Prize” Why don’t they show the picture of Saddam shaking hands with Rummy?

      You can’t beat the price and fun for the whole family.

      Posted by yojimbo on 2006 12 30 at 12:57 AM • permalink

 

    1. This explains a lot.
      Saddam’s mother is said to have ‘been suicidal when she was carrying him, trying to abort the pregnancy’.

      call it mother’s intuition

      Posted by Squiffy on 2006 12 30 at 01:12 AM • permalink

 

    1. Goodbye Saddam Hussain
      Though I never knew you at all
      You had the grace to shit yourself
      When the Americans found you cowering,
      Dragged you out your maggot-hole,
      And dentally examined you,
      They set you on a chair
      And made you trim your beard

      And it seems to me you lived your life
      like a candle in the wind
      Never knowing who to invade
      when the bullets set in
      And I would have liked to have shot you
      but I was just a kid
      Your merit burned out long before
      your regime ever did.

      Posted by Scott W on 2006 12 30 at 01:22 AM • permalink

 

    1. Sniff… That was beautiful, Steve W.  I can almost see the soft-focus montage of highlights from Saddam’s happier days playing on CNN now.

      Anyway, the leftards should be happy for—or even envious of—Saddam.  After all, he’s now hanging out with Che, Yasir, Mao, Pol Pot and all of the other SOB’s they idolize.

      Posted by Polish Frizzle on 2006 12 30 at 01:35 AM • permalink

 

    1. He never asked to see anyone else—not even his wife, said his lawyers. She was the mother of his five children.

      Link
      Why am I not surprised?

      Posted by SandiM on 2006 12 30 at 01:36 AM • permalink

 

    1. Thanks Nancy Pelosi!

      Posted by Scott R on 2006 12 30 at 01:41 AM • permalink

 

    1. “Before the execution, Saddam was reportedly presented with a red card …”

      me, i wanted the free kick…

      Posted by dub kitty on 2006 12 30 at 01:48 AM • permalink

 

    1. Maybe CNN would show the footage if Iraqi authorities would have put some panties on his head first? Oh, and Awad, we hardly knew ye!
      8==^(

      Posted by andycanuck on 2006 12 30 at 01:52 AM • permalink

 

    1. I wonder if he qualifys for the “70 Virgin Allocation”.

      Posted by Lew on 2006 12 30 at 02:04 AM • permalink

 

    1. Nice to read that he received a dignified exit, unlike the victims of his regime.  Personally I wouldn’t have objected to him being towed by his heels around the streets of Baghdad and his corpse thrown on a rubbish pile for stray dogs to pick at.

      Posted by lotocoti on 2006 12 30 at 02:12 AM • permalink

 

    1. Doritos, Cheetos…just today I read of his love for Burger King. I feel like I was just getting to know him, and now he’s gone.

      Posted by Donnah on 2006 12 30 at 02:12 AM • permalink

 

    1. Let’s see if we can’t leave this sad, sad news behind us, everybody. I know! Let’s play hangman. Guess what this phrase is:
      **** ***, ******, ** ****.
      See you in about 7 hours to see how well you guys and gals are doing with this head-scratcher. Bye.

      Posted by andycanuck on 2006 12 30 at 02:15 AM • permalink

 

    1. Regarding the death of Saddam Hussein, I regret nothing.

      I do however, rue and lament the fact that the horrors of the Anfal Campaign, without the exposure of a trial, may eventually come to exist only in the collective memory of that admirable folk—the Kurds.

      Those who have made close study of the culture and history of the Near East, both ancient and modern, will understand what I mean.

      The refusal of the Turk to acknowledge the Armenian Genocide is a modern example of this repetitive pattern of behaviour.

      It is not without some considerable thought that I conclude that the Government of Iraq preferred to execute the Butcher for crimes against Shia, rather than against the Kurds.

      Still, dead is dead.

      Now, time to obliterate the Iranian hegemony and their proxies.

      No Substitute for Victory…

      Posted by MentalFloss on 2006 12 30 at 02:17 AM • permalink

 

    1. Those guys don’t mess around. Good riddance to the old butcher.

      Time to recycle that old joke:

      What is the most deadly spider in the world?

      The Baghdad trapdoor.

      Posted by rbresca on 2006 12 30 at 02:23 AM • permalink

 

    1. Andrea – well, I’m sorry that I’m not singing from the party hymn book. I was as delighted to see the demise of Saddam’s regime as anyone on this thread. And like I said earlier, on balance his execution is probably a necessary evil. Killing him via the judicial process is bad; locking him up and throwing away the key (until some Ba’athist revivalists spring him and resurrect his regime) is worse.

      I suppose I’m more conflicted than I should be at first blush because as a first principle I profoundly object to the State killing its citizens – especially via the civil justice system. It’s a few steps down the road to tyranny.

      I am well aware that Saddam’s state killed its citizens with sporting relish. That doesn’t change the fact that giving the doctor a (relatively mild) dose of his own medicine makes it difficult to argue the above principle convincingly.

      Posted by James Waterton on 2006 12 30 at 02:28 AM • permalink

 

    1. sorry for the lenth of this but here are a choice selection of reactions at daily kos
      for those who cant hold their breath long enough to wade through the BusHitler shit
      This is so medieval Bush first killed his sons and his grandson. Now Saddam himself.

      I am sick over the thought of the pure, sexual pleasure the people on Fox seem to be having over the execution of Saddam Hussein

      I don’t care.  I hate that Saddam was executed.  I’m not even 100% anti-death-penalty.  I know he was evil and brutal and all that.  But this was just wrong.

      Filthy blood-sucking pieces of human waste.All of them. This is the despicable icing on a horrible, stinking cake.

      Another death, among hundreds of thousands.  American justice, Alabama style.  That’s what we gave them.  Saddam didn’t do anything to us beyond sticking out his tongue at us, and we executed him for it.

      but McDoodypants [Bush] is STILL the worst human being ever

      Psychopaths like Dubya need death and violence to get it up. He probably has his very own videotype or DVD of the execution—and he can slow-mo the death of Saddam whenever he wants to.

      The part I do not get is the celebrations and jubiliation and dancing in the street…just strikes me as too gruesome and freaks me out.

      the money shot.Laura must be SO proud

      Bush signed death warrants over that number while governor of Texas

      I smell the foul stench of Karl Rove

      it tries to take some of the air out of John Edwards announcing for president

      just the official start of the Iraqi civil war

      This is tragic, justified evil…
      Just tragic.

      Posted by eeniemeenie on 2006 12 30 at 02:32 AM • permalink

 

    1. #103 Polish Frizzle,
      According to Bill Leak ( Australian 29/12 ) he’ll also be hanging out with presidents Nixon and Ford. http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/index/0,,20581,00.html

      Posted by chrisgo on 2006 12 30 at 02:38 AM • permalink

 

    1. Poor Robert Fisk.
      Poor Phillip Adams.
      Poor Mike Carlton.
      How sad to have your favorite mass murderer meet Alah right in the middle of the festive season.

      Phil Adams will be particularly bereft.

      Posted by Bonmot on 2006 12 30 at 02:51 AM • permalink

 

    1. If there’s an opportunity to put the boot into Bush or Howard, the left will do it or manufacture a reason to do it.  I cannot understand the hypocrisy of many in the left.  Real injustices in this world get ignored by the left in the hunt to belittle the leaders of two great democratic nations.  Sad.

      Posted by Stevo on 2006 12 30 at 02:52 AM • permalink

 

    1. Much like hanging the Nazi leadership has caused Germany to return to being a genocidal police-state.

      Germany’s abolition of the death penalty in 1949 – for reasons we now know to have been mixed – nevertheless helped ensure that didn’t happen. Brutal old East Germany abolished it in 1989 as part of its own slow and overdue rehabilitation. Sorry, friends, I loathed this tyrant as much as any citizen commentator and I loathed those who objectively supported the continuation of his vile regime perhaps marginally more than other citizen commentators. I simply don’t acknowledge any State right to kill people. Furthermore, in a polity as delicately poised as Iraq’s, I fear such a right could transmogrify into Saddam-like abuses rather quickly. Today a tyrant, tomorrow a group of villagers allegedly involved in an assassination attempt.

      Posted by C.L. on 2006 12 30 at 02:57 AM • permalink

 

    1. #115, Wow, some of the posters at daily kos seem to have a weird notion of the path to sexual pleasure. Makes me wonder what sort of buzz they got watching film of westerners having their heads sawn off by MOMEA.

      Posted by mareeS on 2006 12 30 at 03:06 AM • permalink

 

    1. #79 Dan Lewis, I watched CNN interview his daughters who described Saddam as a kind man who they will remember fondly.  Astounding.  CNN did squeeze in the fact that Saddam had ordered the daughters’s husbands shot.

      But what am I saying – just wait until the next edition of The Age and SMH come out.  The letters pages will be dripping.  Of course the Age will also have a suitable Leunig cartoon…

      Posted by anthony_r on 2006 12 30 at 03:07 AM • permalink

 

    1. Is it too late to hang Ramsey Clark too?  Maybe, you know, make it look like an accident or suicide?

      Posted by Shaky Barnes on 2006 12 30 at 03:17 AM • permalink

 

    1. CL, I understand where you are coming from and why. The counterpoint is teh unanswerable question: ‘well, if not this, then what other workable alternative gives us the same guarantee that he will not be back to do it all over again?’

      The issue (as with truly evil and depraved), boils down to ‘how do we make sure that he/she never does it again’.

      Some people are beyond redemption, or are so dangerous that no other solution is possible.  So while I understand and appreciate your moral and philosopical issues with the death penalty and the cultural basis from which they flow, I also understand that practicality has also to be taken into account.

      I suspect that you too understand that different cultures have quite different valuations on the worth of human life. And this is the difference between you and the moonbats who cannot comprehend that anyone could possibly think any different to the way they do.

      As with others, IMHO Saddam was too dangerous to let live and if nothing else, what he did at Halabja requires the fate he has met.

      MarkL
      Canberra

      Posted by MarkL on 2006 12 30 at 03:25 AM • permalink

 

    1. THIS JUST IN:  The DNA evidence finally came back, turns out he was innocent! He wasn’t the real dictator after all!

      “That’s the night that the lights went out in Baghdad

      That’s the night that they hung an innocent man

      Don’t trust your soul to no lib’ral Carter administration lawyer

      ‘Cause the judge in the town’s got falafel stains on his hand…”

      Posted by Shaky Barnes on 2006 12 30 at 03:28 AM • permalink

 

    1. #112 MentalFloss

      Regarding the death of Saddam Hussein, I regret nothing.

      I do however, rue and lament the fact that the horrors of the Anfal Campaign, without the exposure of a trial, may eventually come to exist only in the collective memory of that admirable folk—the Kurds.

      Not quite. Ali Hassan al-Majid aka “Chemical Ali”, who carried out Saddam’s orders in Anfal, is yet to stand trial for that horror.

      Posted by Spiny Norman on 2006 12 30 at 03:57 AM • permalink

 

    1. QLD Premier Peter Beat-me weighs in on the death of Saddam-
      No weapons of mass destruction- troops out now- yadda yadda-
      Fails to realise that there by the grace of God go he.

      Posted by Squiffy on 2006 12 30 at 04:05 AM • permalink

 

    1. oh well.  24 hours too early.

      Posted by murph on 2006 12 30 at 04:48 AM • permalink

 

    1. #126 queer huffer: Beattie said twice in the link that he “didn’t know”.  So why did he give an opinion, other than to get some political mileage.  I wouldn’t be surprised if the violence escalates over there, but that is how they operate.  It’s the Arab and Muslim mindset.  Now don’t get me started on religion …

      Posted by Stevo on 2006 12 30 at 05:22 AM • permalink

 

    1. #126 queef: … oops, preview is not my friend … 1400×1050 is hard to read …

      Posted by Stevo on 2006 12 30 at 05:27 AM • permalink

 

    1. Hmmm, that scum bag won’t be missed…  And the death penalty in certain cases is a very good thing, I can think of several other more than worthy candidates, right here in Oz….

      As for holding further trials, what with lawyers being killed and threatened, judges resigning, Saddam being allowed to turn them into circuses with his outbursts, nothing would have been proven for the sake of posterity…  They will have to rely on documentaries for the truth…

      Finally, just like the nazi war criminals, his body should be burnt and the ashes dumped in a river, or he should be dumped into a nameless mass grave somewhere, like most of his victims…  Its insane to give the body back to the family, or to let his cronies take it back to Tikrit where it can be turned into a nice little pilgrammage and shrine for the rest of his scummy mates…

      Unless its some sort of auto selection policy for Saddam-lovers and they plan to have a couple of snipers on nearby buildings…

      Posted by casanova on 2006 12 30 at 05:43 AM • permalink

 

    1. Does anyone know if they taunted him before the deed was done? Any gallows humour? One can only hope so.

      Posted by Jack Lacton on 2006 12 30 at 05:54 AM • permalink

 

    1. Whether it was right or wrong to execute Saddam Hussein is, of course, a moral question and such questions are ultimately answered according to one’s view of the nature of reality.

      Atheists have to try and figure out the complexities of right and wrong using only their own finite intellectual powers coloured by self-interest.  We have seen, over and over again in the last 100 odd years, how murderous of their own citizens the rulers of officially atheist states tend to be.

      Muslims, I suspect, take a dimmer view of the murder of fellow Muslims in good standing than they might take had the victims been, say, black slaves, homosexuals, uppity females, Jews, or Christians.  In recent years in Afghanistan under the Taliban, and elsewhere, we have seen how established Islam can use (or, in our eyes, misuse) the power of the state to execute.

      For Jews and Christians (or at least those who aren’t given to worshipping whatever god matches their own credulity) the answer is simple.  All human beings are made in the image of God and have life as a gift from God.  Anyone who deliberately and maliciously kills another human being has forfeited their own life.  Numbers 35:33 says that the blood of the murdered pollutes the land and no expiation can be made for that pollution except “by the blood of him who shed it”.  In Deuteronomy 19:13 we are explicitly told not to pity the murderer and that is the big temptation.

      Those who advocate that murderers should be imprisoned for a few years, or even for life, are sanctioning murder.  By preserving the murderer’s life they are saying that his or her life is more valuable than that of the murdered.  But it’s not.

      The execution of murderers is the clearest possible statement a state can make that murder will not be tolerated.  In very recent times we’ve seen two teenaged girls charged over the murder of another girl of 16 and a boy of about 14 charged with attempting to murder an even younger boy by setting him alight.  Could it be that our decades-long failure to execute proved murderers has something to do with that?  I think so.

      But read this Death Penalty Paper.
      A snippet:

      F.  CHRISTIANITY AND THE DEATH PENALTY

      5) “The rejection of capital punishment is not to be dignified as a ‘higher Christian way’ that enthrones the ethics of Jesus. The argument that Jesus as the incarnation of divine love cancels the appropriateness of capital punishment in the New Testament era has little to commend it. Nowhere does the Bible repudiate capital punishment for premeditated murder; not only is the death penalty for deliberate killing of a fellow human being permitted, but it is approved and encouraged, and for any government that attaches at least as much value to the life of an innocent victim as to a deliberate murderer, it is ethically imperative.” Dr. Carl F. H. Henry, Twilight Of A Great Civilization, Crossway, 1988, p 70,72.

      Posted by Janice on 2006 12 30 at 06:04 AM • permalink

 

    1. At last. Some closure.

      Saddam, Uday and Qusay were given the chance to leave Iraq. They decided not to, and now they’re dead.

      Whatever can be said about the situation in Iraq, it showed that there was a price to be paid for their decisions.

      Posted by Andjam on 2006 12 30 at 06:07 AM • permalink

 

    1. If you can’t enforce the laws of the land, the country descends into chaos…  Even the mamby pamby ones are made a mockery of these days and the crims get the benefit of the doubt…  God is not the author of chaos and confusion…  The Bible is full of laws and laws need to be obeyed and if necessary enforced…

      Its not all about hand wringing and not judging your neighbour and all that crap, that is a recipe for where we have come to today and are rapidly descending too!!!  As far as I am aware, Saddam and Milosevic and other tyrants have admitted no wrong, they seek no forgiveness, and they weren’t entitled to any…

      Their crimes were heinous and callous beyond extreme, the only pity is they got off so nicely…  But they will get to be judged like everyone else…  Its not up to us to condemn them as beyond hope…

      Posted by casanova on 2006 12 30 at 06:16 AM • permalink

 

    1. The Italian Prime Minister was ‘horrified’ by the execution of Husssein. The Euros would be horrified, after all the deals done with him when he was alive. CNN’s Michael Ware, the Australian journalist would not shut up about secterian violence in Baghdad. They way he was going on, you would think he had graduated with honours from the Robert Fisk school of journalism

      Posted by BJM on 2006 12 30 at 06:24 AM • permalink

 

    1. I simply don’t acknowledge any State right to kill people.
      C.L. – if you can’t fight back against those who would harm your country, your religious beliefs are doomed to die with you. I do not make light of them, but it flows from your rejection that there must be those who will protect you in your vulnerable, principled enclave. That old quote about rough men etc.
      One of the things which prevents me from becoming an active church member is this sort of blanket injunction. I would prefer to be one of those who will commit the acts which preserve the churchgoing christians’ world. I value the purity, but see the need for a janitor (with extreme prejudice!).

      Posted by blogstrop on 2006 12 30 at 06:34 AM • permalink

 

    1. Janice – common sense combined with some scholarship, as usual. Thanks.

      Posted by blogstrop on 2006 12 30 at 06:38 AM • permalink

 

    1. “James & Lad, I too am against capital punishment…”

      Might as well be against the sun being hot.  All states kill, always have, always will.

      There is no such thing as a state that doesn’t have “capital punishment”…including Australia.

      “Ramsey Clark is sad.”

      Wait’ll we get a no-nonsense government that won’t tolerate traitors…you’ll be as sad as it gets…until that lil’ trap door opens.

      Posted by Dave Surls on 2006 12 30 at 06:52 AM • permalink

 

    1. Hmmm. I keep hearing a tune.

      “Ding dong the witch is dead….”

      over and over

      Posted by CujoQuarrel on 2006 12 30 at 06:54 AM • permalink

 

    1. Saddam has been executed.
      Hicks is still in Gitmo
      Castro is about to cark it.
      Theres about 1000 fewer Hezboscum in Lebanon
      Al Qaeda leaders keep blowing up after they get hit by predator drone missiles

      2007 is shaping up to be a pretty good year.

      Posted by bondo on 2006 12 30 at 07:20 AM • permalink

 

    1. I’m against capital punishment except in very rare circumstances. This qualifies.

      My only regret about Saddam’s demise is that it happened so late, 20 years ago would have been better.

      I hope his death brings some degree of closure to the millions of people who lost relatives or friends to this thug.

      As regards what Fisk, Eurocrats, the Lunar Left or whoever thinks about it, I don’t care. And I’m not celebrating, either. Others may, I’m just glad he’s now got a new career as plant fertiliser. I’m ready to move on – to the next items of unfinished business. Chemical Ali perhaps. Little Kimmie. Not Mugabe – he’s a monster, but not in the same league. Yet.

      But Saddam was the business of the Iraqi people, and what I or anyone else think doesn’t matter. They were his victims : they had the right to deal with him as they wished.

      Posted by Zoe Brain on 2006 12 30 at 07:23 AM • permalink

 

    1. Not Mugabe? – maybe in 20 years time?

      Posted by blogstrop on 2006 12 30 at 07:38 AM • permalink

 

    1. These idiots have had 50 YEARS!
      Two thousand AK-47 automatic rifles, 20,000 magazines and two million rounds of ammunition. This is Ehud Olmert’s Christmas present to P.A. Chairman Mahmoud ‘Abbas’ troops in the Gaza Strip. In addition to his approval of this arms shipment by Egypt Israel’s Prime Minister has a bag full of goodies for the Palestinians including the release of prisoners and an ongoing policy of restraint in the face of continuous rocket attacks against Sderot.  The goodwill gesture of arming Fatah forces so they can (hopefully) use the weapons against radical opposition was tried before in 1994. The Oslo Agreement permitted 7,000 guns to enter Gaza and Israeli right wing groups chanted the slogan “Don’t hand them guns!” We know how it ended.
      http://vitalperspective.typepad.com/

      Posted by blogstrop on 2006 12 30 at 07:42 AM • permalink

 

    1. 2pm Sydney time?  Why, that means it was High Noon here in Perth.  Huzzah! Rot in hell, you bastard.

      But regarding the “closure” Saddam’s death will supposedly achieve, sadly that’s just psychobabble.

      Posted by slammer on 2006 12 30 at 08:13 AM • permalink

 

    1. I am opposed to the death penalty in all circumstances.

      But this killing wasn’t only punishment for unspeakable crimes. It was carried out in the middle of a brutal war. It was an act of self defence. To let Saddam live a day longer than the law and expediency required would have been a culpable breach of duty.  An act of cowardice in the face of the enemy.

      Posted by geoff on 2006 12 30 at 08:15 AM • permalink

 

    1. It’s allways a good day when tyrants die.

      Posted by Blue on 2006 12 30 at 08:30 AM • permalink

 

    1. Arrived home after a day of golf and an extended 19th. It appears some foreigner has been executed. I feel it shouldn’t have happened before the full facts were known. A knee jerk, gut reaction I’m afraid and not particularly just and fair.

      I extend my sympathies to the family and friends of Mr Duncan Fletcher. He did not deserve this and I hope the ECB’s lust for blood and retribution ceases forthwith.

      Posted by Whale Spinor on 2006 12 30 at 08:35 AM • permalink

 

    1. Here‘s the first pic I’ve seen.

      Posted by Donnah on 2006 12 30 at 09:18 AM • permalink

 

    1. Blogstrop, with respect, the Middle East is full of states that have the death penalty and none of them do anything to protect what you call my “vulnerable, principled enclave”. The famous “rough men” saying you reference relates to a willingness to wage war against enemies that would destroy us. It is not a saying related to capital punishment. I do not now – nor have I ever – questioned the licitness of self defence or pre-emptive self defence. There is, I would add, nothing particularly rough about the men who pull the lever on gallows or push a button injecting poison into the veins of the condemned.

      Posted by C.L. on 2006 12 30 at 09:23 AM • permalink

 

    1. PS:

      …there must be those who will protect you in your vulnerable, principled enclave.

      On the contrary, if Pope Benedict’s apparently one-man campaign to save Europe is anything to go by, my enclave is doing more than its share of protection. Not for the first time, of course.

      Posted by C.L. on 2006 12 30 at 09:53 AM • permalink

 

    1. Always thought Saddam was highly strung.

      Posted by Ubique on 2006 12 30 at 10:16 AM • permalink

 

    1. I’d rather do it when Saddam was in power than the civil war craziness that exists now where hundreds sometimes thousands are killed every single week.

      Amber of Geelong, that would be the Iraq under Saddam where, according to Amnesty International in 2002, women could be beaten and beheaded without charge or trial, where prisoners had their eyes gouged out, limbs broken and lopped off, and where victims of Saddam and his regime had family members tortured in front of them.

      Among other things, of course.

      Yeah, as a woman I’d love to live in that world, too.

      As to Saddam’s trial and execution? If the Americans had topped him on the spot, there would have been an outcry from the bleeding hearts who felt that he should have been given a trial.

      Now he has been given a trial, according to the Iraqi constitution, was found guilty, even allowed to appeal the original sentence (which was denied), and been executed, what is the problem here?

      One minute, America (and her allies) is Evil for interfering in another nation, and when America steps back and allows Iraq to run their own courts, you are carrying on about the result being wrong.

      So which is it? Is Iraq allowed to run her own courts, or should it only be allowed under a specified set of circumstances? (ie those that fit the agenda of the bleeding heart lefties).

      My comment on the matter over at news.com.au. my mind just boggles at the idiocy on parade.

      The baying for George Bush and John Howard is growing, and I’m waiting to see the first of the peasants with the pitchforks surrounding Kirribilli House by the light of a full moon.

      Posted by Nilknarf Arbed on 2006 12 30 at 10:21 AM • permalink

 

    1. Just on a side note, those who say they dislike the idea of “the State” doing anything to anyone need to realize that they are coming close to reifying the term “state” into something that exists apart from human agency. And also, are you across-the-board anti-death-penalty people also as completely anti-war? If not, what do you think happens in a war, and what do you think starts and ends wars but states?

      Posted by Andrea Harris, Administrator on 2006 12 30 at 11:07 AM • permalink

 

    1. Oh by the way, James Waterton, thanks for telling me that disagreeing with you is “following the party line.” Nice to know.

      Posted by Andrea Harris, Administrator on 2006 12 30 at 11:08 AM • permalink

 

    1. #131

      Does anyone know if they taunted him before the deed was done?

      No. America handed him over at the last second and were very keen to ensure this didn’t happen, nor was there to be any desecration of his corpse. Quite appropriate, though I can imagine some are frustrated by it.

      I also can’t help but echo someone’s comments I read somewhere, that had they put a pair of undies on his head for a hood as they hanged him, CNN would have wall-to-wall coverage of the humiliation…

      Posted by Dan Lewis on 2006 12 30 at 11:43 AM • permalink

 

    1. Life imitates South Park.

      Posted by Dan Lewis on 2006 12 30 at 11:47 AM • permalink

 

    1. Andrea – it was the manner in which you chastised me for disagreeing with you that prompted the “hymn book” crack. I don’t really understand your hostility; I’ve been nothing but courteous to you.

      To answer your question, there is a clear and long-understood distinction between the actions of the state in times of war and in peace in the civil sphere (in which Saddam Hussein was tried and executed).

      I believe in very limited government. National defence (including fighting wars with all the accompanying bloodshed in defence of the nation) is one of the few legitimate roles of the state.

      Posted by James Waterton on 2006 12 30 at 12:01 PM • permalink

 

    1. …are you across-the-board anti-death-penalty people also as completely anti-war?

      Yes Andrea, bearing in mind those aggression-enabling qualifications enunciated within just war theory/theology. I have always believed – and continue to believe – that the War on Terrorism and the wars against Saddam’s regime and the Taliban were just. This so-called Long War is a new matrix of conflicts within a larger anti-Western war and it was declared against us.

      Any attempt to conflate opposition to the death penalty with rank pacifism is self-evidently absurd.

      The all too human agency evident during Saddam’s execution included one of the executioners declaring “long live Muqtada al-Sadr”.

      Not encouraging.

      Posted by C.L. on 2006 12 30 at 12:03 PM • permalink

 

    1. From the angle of the neck in that link above it looks like they did it quick and clean. Neck broken by the drop so minimal suffering.
      Nothing turned me off the Nuremberg trials moer than finding out the American hangman used what he called the “democratic” method of execution. They all got the same short drop and strangled slowly.
      Much as Saddam and those Nazis deserved to suffer nothing says justice (not revenge) like quick and painless.

      Posted by thefrollickingmole on 2006 12 30 at 12:03 PM • permalink

 

    1. I hope Andrea won’t mind if I reproduce a comment written by the brilliant Guy Herbert, my co-blogger at Samizdata in the relevant thread there. He’s as insightful as ever:

      Quite apart from the problem with capital punishment, where I agree with James, there are two other problems with this rejoicing.

      1. The mode of trial if anything serves to reinforce notions of law that are common in the Middle East and inimical to a genuine rule of law, viz – that trial and punishment exist to confirm who has the power, that defending is dishonourable and unsafe, and the result is not in doubt. (That’s also why those who would go further down Julian’s road and support public execution, humiliation or very brutal methods of killing as justified by the crime are wrong: it confirms the culture of torture and vendetta.)

      2. Killing a dictator after he’s been deposed doesn’t really solve anything. This is not MAR’s point (though I think it is valid), but a broader one: there’ll be another one along in a minute. Most dictators are killed by their successors, with some pretense of trial. It is the dictatorial political culture that needs to be killed, and that’s a lot more difficult. It seems to be thriving everywhere. (Often dressed up in illiberal democracy.)

      I particularly appreciate the last three sentences.

      Posted by James Waterton on 2006 12 30 at 12:10 PM • permalink

 

    1. The all too human agency evident during Saddam’s execution included one of the executioners declaring “long live Muqtada al-Sadr”.

      Not encouraging.

      Wow. Indeed.

      Posted by James Waterton on 2006 12 30 at 12:13 PM • permalink

 

    1. It feels creepy to celebrate the death of a human being, even one who abandoned his humanity so thoroughly as did Saddam.  But his execution was necessary, IMO, to bring closure to the Iraqi people (his enemies andhis supporters), and to remove any possibility that he could be a rallying point for the execrable Baathist party or the Islamists.  To drag out trial after trial for his crimes would have done more damage than good, and would have made a mockery of the very justice his death served.  The world is well rid of Saddam Hussein, and you can bet there are now some other dictators out there (and we all know who they are) who are feeling distinctly uneasy today.

      Posted by RebeccaH on 2006 12 30 at 12:13 PM • permalink

 

    1. Having said what I said, I do not support James and CL’s opposition to capital punishment.  My only objection to it in my society is the inconsistent and unfair way in which it has been applied.  I believe a civil society not only has the right, but the duty, to permanently remove those citizens who murder without provocation, often for the sheer pleasure of killing.  There are some people who cannot be redeemed, no matter how much we might like to believe otherwise, because they have, as I said before, abandoned their humanity.

      Posted by RebeccaH on 2006 12 30 at 12:19 PM • permalink

 

    1. What about permanently removing them from society by imprisoning them?

      By killing those that we decide cannot be redeemed, we abandon our own humanity.

      Also, the state cannot be trusted with the power of life or death over its citizens.

      Posted by James Waterton on 2006 12 30 at 12:26 PM • permalink

 

    1. From James’s link:

      That’s also why those who would go further down Julian’s road and support public execution, humiliation…

      Well, the Iraqi state officials in situ danced a jig in the presence of Saddam’s body after he was dead. Saddam hangs while an official praises the local facilitator of the Iranian exterminationists who want to destroy Israel and kill as many Westerners as possible. Then they all have a boogie. If anyone’s telling me this death sentence has moved Iraq forward into a new, more serious era of modernity I’m almost prepared to call bullshit on that notion on the basis of these details alone.

      Posted by C.L. on 2006 12 30 at 12:37 PM • permalink

 

    1. C.L. and James, you both sound too much like those of our opposition who seem to want our side to be perfect in all ways—thought, behavior, belief, lifestyle—before being allowed to defend ourselves in any way from evil. Well good luck with that.

      As for the “brilliant Guy Herbert,” of whom I have never heard (not that that means anything—there are a lot of people I have never heard of), this statement—“Killing a dictator after he’s been deposed doesn’t really solve anything”—doesn’t exactly kick off my “brilliant!” meter. It sounds like the same mealy-mouthed, mediocre truisms that plain old average people emit when asked for their opinions on matters above their heads. And it can be easily countered with the fact that it certainly did solve the problem of the continued existence of the dictator. But then maybe I’m hard to please.

      (PS: I’m not sure why your or anyone else’s “courtesy” to me, James, means I should meekly accept everything the courteous one says. If someone comes out with an opinion I think is wrong, I am going to say so. If that hurts someone’s feelings, as my stepmother used to say, tough titty.)

      Posted by Andrea Harris, Administrator on 2006 12 30 at 12:48 PM • permalink

 

    1. I’m not one who would have packed up a picnic lunch and the kids for a hanging in the old West, but, damn, this one I would have happily witnessed. Have a nice trip to Hell, you POS; your evil spawn await.

      Posted by Kyda Sylvester on 2006 12 30 at 12:57 PM • permalink

 

    1. What about permanently removing them from society by imprisoning them?

      I knew this point would be raised, and I submit that imprisoning someone does not actually remove them from society.  They still have outside contact (check out the many letter-writing fans that serial killers like Ted Bundy had), and they still are a danger to the people who must guard and care for them.

      As for abandoning our humanity by killing someone like that, that’s where I disagree.  I believe those who are charged with that onerous duty are people who have been forced to examine their own humanity in a way most of us never have to do.  I believe they can make the hard choices because their duty is dictated by the rule of law (egads, a consensus of the people, if you will) in a civil society, not by the whim of a dictator.  And because, by doing this necessary evil (your words), they are protecting other human lives.

      Posted by RebeccaH on 2006 12 30 at 12:58 PM • permalink

 

    1. Sorry James, but the only way to guarantee that he is permanently removed from society is by killing him.  Especially if there really is a full on civil war in Iraq and the winner could be Sunni.  As someone mentioned, see Napoleon.

      Doesn’t mean there are not other problems that may arise from this execution, but on balance, I’m more than ok with this.

      Posted by Not My Problem on 2006 12 30 at 12:59 PM • permalink

 

    1. I suppose we will have to agree to disagree on the subject of capital punishment, James, because we can.  But I think we both agree that the world is better off with Saddam dead, no matter whether he was executed or he died of sheer bile.

      Posted by RebeccaH on 2006 12 30 at 01:02 PM • permalink

 

    1. you both sound too much like those of our opposition who seem to want our side to be perfect in all ways

      I guess we’re deviating from the party hymn book again, Andrea, sorry about that!

      of whom I have never heard (not that that means anything—there are a lot of people I have never heard of)

      Why even mention it, then?

      “Killing a dictator after he’s been deposed doesn’t really solve anything”—doesn’t exactly kick off my “brilliant!” meter.

      Yeah, but it’s the stuff he said after your selective quote that’s the kicker.

      And it can be easily countered with the fact that it certainly did solve the problem of the continued existence of the dictator.

      Not really, because he ceased being a dictator long before he was executed.

      means I should meekly accept everything the courteous one says.

      Andrea, I never expected you to meekly accept everything I say simply because I was being polite, and if you read my comments above, I cannot see how you could possibly consider that that was my expectation. We don’t agree on this issue – that much is obvious. For my part, you haven’t convinced me in the slightest with the thrust of your arguments so far – for the record, I’m disagreeing with you – but I’m not paying out on you or calling you a namby pamby, wet, leftist, apologist for terror, etc. which is pretty much what you said to me above when you made it clear that you don’t agree with me.

      I’ve been polite throughout this debate. You may think my position on this issue is ridiculous, but do you think your opinion is so superior to my own that I deserve the kind of treatment you dished out earlier?

      Posted by James Waterton on 2006 12 30 at 01:19 PM • permalink

 

    1. To the great debate I’ll simply add an obvious point. It makes sense that Europeans are opposed to the death penalty, as European governments have repeatedly shown that they will engage in mass murder of their own people strictly for reasons of political convenience. If I were a European I don’t think I’d want my government representatives to have the power to kill me, either.

      Americans and Australians do not have that kind of history, and I doubt Europeans can even understand our experience—that a government can in fact exist that will not launch genocide on its very own people every couple of decades.

      Posted by Shaky Barnes on 2006 12 30 at 01:26 PM • permalink

 

    1. Shaky Barnes – do you include the British experience in your description of ‘European governments’? Britain was, after all, the cradle – and a major beneficiary – of modern liberalism*.

      *Note to unaware American readers – your leftists co-opted this term in the early 20th century. Liberalism historically pertains to individual freedom, not collectivism.

      Posted by James Waterton on 2006 12 30 at 01:33 PM • permalink

 

    1. Well then, James, you probably won’t care for this haiku I particularly liked:

      The twitching has stopped
      A figure swings in the breeze
      Let’s go for ice cream!

      (MerylYourish.com)

      Posted by Kyda Sylvester on 2006 12 30 at 01:46 PM • permalink

 

    1. “Also, the state cannot be trusted with the power of life or death over its citizens.”

      Again:

      All states have the power of life and death over their citizens (hint: this is why ALL states have police and soldiers armed with guns).

      There is no such thing as a state which doesn’t kill people (and there never will be…never), and therefore the concept of not having “capital punishment”, or being against it, is an absurdity.

      Posted by Dave Surls on 2006 12 30 at 02:04 PM • permalink

 

    1. No, Dave, your position is an absurdity.

      The state (as envisaged by the Founding Fathers and other liberal luminaries, anyway) should not have the power of life or death over its law-abiding citizens. The state’s apparatus – the government and its agencies – are subject to the rule of law, as each individual is. Agents of the state should be prevented from killing illegally, like all other citizens are.

      If someone wants to remove your rights by killing you, an agent of the state is completely justified legally and morally to kill or incapacitate them before they violate your right to live. That’s why cops carry guns.  If that same person who wished to kill you in the town square trespassed on to your property with the same intention, then you are legally and morally justified in killing them before they kill you. If an agent of the state – or any citizen – kills someone illegally, then they should be prosecuted for murder.

      Again:

      “All states have the power of life and death over their citizens”

      That’s not a liberal democracy that enshrines the rights of the individual you’re describing – that is a tyranny.

      Posted by James Waterton on 2006 12 30 at 02:20 PM • permalink

 

    1. #152, Nilknarf:  I moseyed on over there and was grateful for your sanity.  I am amazed by the level of anti-Americanism on the Herald Sun blog.  It is reminiscent of the booing that accompanied our athletes in Sydney for the Olympics.  Very disheartening, indeed.  And what’s up with posting over there?  I posted two hours ago and they haven’t updated their comments since you linked to the site.

      Ah well.  There were several pro-American posters and the usual American anti-Americans.

      Posted by Kathy from Austin on 2006 12 30 at 02:26 PM • permalink

 

    1. “No, Dave, your position is an absurdity.”

      No it isn’t, my position is called reality.  Your position is the absurd one, because you believe in something that does not, and cannot exist.  There is no such thing as a state that does not kill.  Wishing for it, is like wishing for (liquid) water that isn’t wet.

      “If someone wants to remove your rights by killing you, an agent of the state is completely justified legally and morally to kill or incapacitate them before they violate your right to live.”

      Like I said…ALL states kill, always have…always will.  Thanks for illustrating my point.

      “That’s not a liberal democracy that enshrines the rights of the individual you’re describing – that is a tyranny.”

      No, once again, what I’m describing is EVERY state which ever has existed and ever will exist.  The state of California has the power of life and death over its citizens, and exercises that power from time to time, but it’s hardly a tyranny…although I’ll grant you that they can be irritating little bastards at times.

      Posted by Dave Surls on 2006 12 30 at 02:36 PM • permalink

 

    1. I’m conflicted on the death penalty.  It has a lot of room for mischief and human error.  That said, in the case of Saddam, I believe—as others have posted more eloquently—that it was important for him to die.

      1.  The Iraqi people and their enemies know he can never come back to exact revenge.
      2.  He will never have the chance to be “sprung” from prison if more chaos ensues.
      3.  He is a lesson for other murderous thugs that eventually justice will and must prevail.

      No, allowing this monster to live would have been a wrong decision.  I respect you James, and your opinions but as Rebecca said, on this we will have to agree to disagree.  I do honor your right to eloquently state your point.

      Posted by Kathy from Austin on 2006 12 30 at 02:46 PM • permalink

 

    1. “What about permanently removing them from society by imprisoning them?”

      James, in my home town of Chicago, we once had two mass murderers.

      One was a guy named Richard Speck. He invaded an apartment which was shared by eight student nurses, mostly Filipinas. He raped and murdered them one after another. He was caught only because one nurse had hidden under a bed and witnesses his crime – and his identifying tattoo, ‘Born To Raise Hell’.

      The other was a guy named John Wayne Gacy. Over a period of several years, he murdered teenaged boys. His MO was to handcuff them, then strangle them slowly while he raped them. One of his victims was the son of a neighbor of mine.

      Both were condemned to death. Speck was let off when the US Supreme Court voided all state capital-punishment laws. He spent the rest of his life in prison. According to news reports, prison was a bowl of cherries for him – he enjoyed frequent sex and even had cocaine smuggled in. He died a few years ago of a heart attack.

      Gacy was condemned after a lengthy trial. There was no question of his guilt – the bodies were found buried in his home’s crawlspace: he was guilty even beyond an unreasonable doubt. He appealed his sentence for nearly ten years, then was put down with a lethal injection. I won’t presume to speak for my neighbor, but reports of interviews with victims’ families suggested that some, at least, felt catharsis with his execution.

      So, which situation was more just? Which more dignified? Which was more respectful of the human person? I believe the treatment meted out to Gacy in fact was more dignified, and more respectful of all parties affected by his crimes.

      My principal objection to the death penalty is not that it’s unjust, but that far too many innocent men have wound up on death row: I can imagine no fate more horrible than to be executed for a crime you didn’t commit. But that doesn’t apply here: the man was egregiously guilty, and now he’s paid for his crime.

      Posted by Urbs in Horto on 2006 12 30 at 02:46 PM • permalink

 

    1. In due course the state of California, with my blessing, with be executing this skanky piece of shit, and when they do, it will be justice, not tyranny.

      Scumbag child-murderer

      Posted by Dave Surls on 2006 12 30 at 02:53 PM • permalink

 

    1. Dave, did you read my post at all? Jeez. Missed a fair bit of the nuance, eh.

      The state has a legitimate role in society; to protect the rights of the citizens that provide for its existence.

      HOWEVER the state SHOULD NOT have the power of life or death over its citizenry – it should have the capacity to curtail the actions of those who choose to remove the rights of others. And concerned individuals should also have the capacity to curtail the actions of those same malevolents who infringe upon others’ rights.

      According to the venerable creed of those exceedingly wise men who founded the American Republic, mankind is subject to a natural law that is far older, and surpasses the aegis of, the state – a law that guarantees the life, liberty and property of the individual. This natural law – which provides the basis of the American Republic – suggests to me that the state absolutely must not have the power of life and death over its citizens. State action must be constrained by law, and all law must respect the aforementioned natural law.

      Any claim to the contrary would make Saddam very proud indeed.

      Right, I’m going to bed.

      Posted by James Waterton on 2006 12 30 at 02:57 PM • permalink

 

    1. #17 James Waterton
      …I’m deeply opposed to the death penalty, but I believe executing Saddam is a necessary evil.

      Most people who support the death penalty in the Western world don’t love the idea of executing people but see it a necessary evil, too.

      I’m deeply opposed to locking people in cages as well, unless they deserve it. Since the state also has the power to put people in jail none of us is safe from this fate either.  Once again, it’s the lesser of two evils – less drastic than capital punishment – but still not pleasant.

      There’s also somewhat of a parallel with war as others have pointed out. It’s all very well to hate war, after all war, huh, what is it good for? absolutly nothing! (As the song so simplistically says.) But there’s a time for war all the same. It’s going to be imperfectly waged and capital punishment will be imperfectly applied, as will prison sentences, but all of the above are necessary evils.

      Posted by Newman on 2006 12 30 at 03:01 PM • permalink

 

    1. “My principal objection to the death penalty is not that it’s unjust, but that far too many innocent men have wound up on death row: I can imagine no fate more horrible than to be executed for a crime you didn’t commit.”

      My guess would be that far more innocent people have been killed by our armed forces in Iraq than are wrongly executed (like orders of magnitude more).

      If you can live with one and not the other…then you’re not thinking rationally, IMO.

      Posted by Dave Surls on 2006 12 30 at 03:04 PM • permalink

 

    1. James & C. L.

      Don’t think of it as the state killing a citizen. Think of it as the citizens killing the old state.

      Posted by paulris on 2006 12 30 at 03:07 PM • permalink

 

    1. #17
      And just how deep is your opposition to the death penalty anyway since you have accepted it in Saddam’s case? We must also be able to include Hitler then, and Pol Pot, Stalin, Idi Amin, … the list goes on and on. So it seems you may not really be so opposed capital punishment after all.

      Posted by Newman on 2006 12 30 at 03:10 PM • permalink

 

    1. “Dave, did you read my post at all? Jeez. Missed a fair bit of the nuance, eh.”

      I read and understood.

      What you don’t understand is is that the state DOES have the power of life and death over those subject to its rule, and will continue to do so, whether you like it or not.

      Posted by Dave Surls on 2006 12 30 at 03:10 PM • permalink

 

    1. James posts Guy’s opinion: “2. Killing a dictator after he’s been deposed doesn’t really solve anything. This is not MAR’s point (though I think it is valid), but a broader one: there’ll be another one along in a minute. Most dictators are killed by their successors, with some pretense of trial. It is the dictatorial political culture that needs to be killed, and that’s a lot more difficult. It seems to be thriving everywhere. (Often dressed up in illiberal democracy.)”

      Mussolini.  Ceauseau (sp). That’s just 2 off the top of my head that were executed with extreme prejudice by the people they tyrannized and were NOT replaced.

      Sure, yes, I do believe in redemption.  But I also believe in the existence of evil.  Some people willingly give themselves over and commit as much evil as possible—serial killers, tyrants, etc.  Come on, is there any proof whatsoever in the entirety of Saddam’s personal history of murdering, torturing, genociding, and raping that could possibly lead even the most idealistic person alive today to say, “Oh, but if we just imprisoned him for life, well, some good may have come of it.  Perhaps God, in that Saul/Paul way, would have whacked Saddam with the sudden realization of His existence, and then Saddam would have become a force for good, baptizing his fellow prisoners, or turning into an Imam, or performing miracles.”

      Right.  Much more likely would be that Saddam would ride Treacher’s unicorn over the rainbow bridge to the Land of Candy Canes.

      I have some champagne in the fridge.  I’ll be opening it and toasting that bastard’s dancing in the flames of hell for his Satanic lover in a few minutes.

      Posted by ushie on 2006 12 30 at 03:25 PM • permalink

 

    1. #180—Both were condemned to death. Speck was let off when the US Supreme Court voided all state capital-punishment laws. He spent the rest of his life in prison. According to news reports, prison was a bowl of cherries for him – he enjoyed frequent sex and even had cocaine smuggled in. He died a few years ago of a heart attack.

      He also received female hormone injections in prison. He once gave an interview shirtless (the one where he told of the perpetual party that life in prison was for him). The image is permanently burned on my retina.

      My principal objection to the death penalty is not that it’s unjust, but that far too many innocent men have wound up on death row: I can imagine no fate more horrible than to be executed for a crime you didn’t commit.

      Can you cite any cases where a person innocent of the crime was executed for it? I’m curious because, off-hand, I don’t know of any. Which is not to say it hasn’t happened.

      My favorite comment over at moonbat central:

      The reason Saddam invaded Kuwait
      Was because Daddy Bush sold the Kuwait government equipment that enabled them to drill “sideways” into the oil fields of Iraq.  All told, the government of Kuwait stole several billion dollars worth of Iraq’s oil before Saddam found out.
      When this “side drilling” equipment is used in Texas, the oil thief would be shot.  Daddy Bush started this thing. Tonight, Jr carried it to the end.
      They didn’t want Saddam to talk. He knew too much, he would have blown their “sweet crude deal.”

      And, no celebration would be complete without hearing from our old friend Bob Fisk: A dictator created then destroyed by America

      …what about the other guilty men?

      No, Tony Blair is not Saddam. We don’t gas our enemies. George W Bush is not Saddam. He didn’t invade Iran or Kuwait. He only invaded Iraq. But hundreds of thousands of Iraqi civilians are dead – and thousands of Western troops are dead – because Messrs Bush and Blair and the Spanish Prime Minister and the Italian Prime Minister and the Australian Prime Minister went to war in 2003 on a potage of lies and mendacity and, given the weapons we used, with great brutality.

      Posted by Kyda Sylvester on 2006 12 30 at 03:46 PM • permalink

 

    1. What about permanently removing them from society by imprisoning them?

      Like the Blind Sheik? The guy who issued the fatwa Osama cited as justification for 9/11 AFTER he was in prison on a life sentence for inciting earlier terrorist attacks?

      Easier—safer—to kill them. If you don’t like it, turn aside so you don’t have to watch.

      Posted by Rob Crawford on 2006 12 30 at 04:00 PM • permalink

 

    1. “Easier—safer—to kill them. If you don’t like it, turn aside so you don’t have to watch.”

      My sentiments exactly.

      Posted by Dave Surls on 2006 12 30 at 04:27 PM • permalink

 

    1. “Saddam to the gallows. It was an easy equation. Who could be more deserving of that last walk to the scaffold – that crack of the neck at the end of a rope – than the Beast of Baghdad, the Hitler of the Tigris, the man who murdered untold hundreds of thousands of innocent Iraqis while spraying chemical weapons over his enemies?”—Fisktard

      Holy Christ!  Bob Fisk actually told the truth about something.  This is a great day, indeed.

      Posted by Dave Surls on 2006 12 30 at 04:33 PM • permalink

 

    1. “Can you cite any cases where a person innocent of the crime was executed for it?” No, Kyda, I can’t. But I can site several cases here in Illnois where men were put on death row who were later proved to be innocent.

      Posted by Urbs in Horto on 2006 12 30 at 05:31 PM • permalink

 

    1. i’m against capital punishment in general but i think there are some crimes so heinous, that place the criminal so far beyond the possibility of redemption, that execution is the only appropriate course of action.

      Richard Speck and John Wayne Gacy mentioned above are examples, as are Martin Bryant, Saddam Hussein and any terrorist (including David Hichs Mohammed Dagwood)

      I think in such cases it becomes the duty of the state to assure the public the monster is dead.

      it should go without saying that guilt must be absolutely certain and execution quick and merciful (ie relatively painless)

      it used to be said ‘may as well hang for a sheep as a lamb’ – the absense of the death penalty encourages certain rare and sick individuals to take the whole flock

      Posted by eeniemeenie on 2006 12 30 at 06:50 PM • permalink

 

    1. eeniemeenie, I’m with you on this. Life is so precious, a gift we did nothing to deserve. But some individuals really are Evil. Such monsters, like rabid animals, must be destroyed…not just locked away, destroyed. Speck, Gacy, Bundy, Eileen & Karla, all continued their evil ways even when locked away. Not to mention Saddam & his ilk. How many innocents have died when some PLO demanded his friends be released from an Israeli prison. How many family members are still frightened knowing the person who harmed them or their loved ones will one day be pardoned or paroled, or maybe one of his followers will show up. When (if) released, they continue their sick, murderous ways. And others copy them, knowing the worst that can happen is the notoriety they get behind bars. Their Maker can redeem them, it’s not possible for some here on Earth.

      I’m a nobody, but Saddam’s friends would think nothing of killing me if it would make a point & get them some press. One good reason why he needed to be executed for the horrible, depraved crimes he committed against Humanity was now he can’t be used as a weapon.

      Posted by KC on 2006 12 30 at 07:54 PM • permalink

 

    1. #‘s 190 & 191

      “Life without the possability of parole” is only as good as the last legislative session and the latest “theories of punishment” by “respected psychologists”

      “Citizen of Paris” is just a signature away.

      Posted by yojimbo on 2006 12 30 at 08:02 PM • permalink

 

    1. “possibility”  Geez!

      Posted by yojimbo on 2006 12 30 at 08:04 PM • permalink

 

    1. But I can site several cases here in Illnois where men were put on death row who were later proved to be innocent.

      Yes, I remember when Gov. Ryan commuted all Illinois death sentences in response. Then the inmate pissing and moaning started when they realized they’d be doing the remainder of their time with the general population. Seems life on The Row was pretty cushy in comparison. I aways wondered, did all their appeal processes then come to a screeching halt? One advantage to facing death is the seemingly endless series of appeals.

      Remember Robert Stroud, the celebrated folk hero Birdman of Alcatraz? He only landed on The Rock because he killed a prison guard while serving time in Leavenworth for manslaughter.

      Posted by Kyda Sylvester on 2006 12 30 at 09:14 PM • permalink

 

    1. No state apparatus should have the power, judicially, to take a human life.  That said, Saddam’s hanging is one one of the strongest cases against the proposition.

      Posted by Inurbanus on 2006 12 30 at 10:23 PM • permalink

 

    1. There’s a lonely unicorn out there waiting for a friend, James. Don’t let him wait too long! That rainbow’s not gonna last forever.

      Posted by Andrea Harris, Administrator on 2006 12 31 at 12:07 AM • permalink

 

    1. Moonbats on three continents, led by David Corn, are in fine fiddle over at the GuardianBecka from Australiasez:

      655,000 – dead
      2 million gone out of the country
      1 million displaced inside Iraq

      That is on top of the 4 million who previously fled and the 1.3 million we in the west starved to death.

      Interesting isn’t it that 1.3 million is the number of Palestinians in Gaza we self-righteous fucking hypocrites in the west are now starving to death – why? Because we don’t like that their government thinks for itself instead of selling out like Fatah has over the years.

      Israel slaughtered 300% more Gazans after they claimed they had pulled out yet not a word is said.

      No condemnation, no nothing. I think I will gag and gag if I hear any more of the cant from the trio of the killers who started this hell.

      Was this the price to see one old man hanged?

      Posted by Kyda Sylvester on 2006 12 31 at 01:22 AM • permalink

 

    1. Er…right. Happy new year to you, too, Andrea. Nice talking to ya.

      Posted by James Waterton on 2006 12 31 at 01:39 AM • permalink

 

    1. I simply don’t acknowledge any State right to kill people. 
      So, at #149, C.L., it’s ok for the State to kill (presumably foreign) enemies. That’s a fair enough distinction, but goes against your prohibition in italics above, which is unequivocal, and it is that which I had a problem with. I still have a problem with distinguishing between enemies within our society and those without. Terrorists who have lucked it in by having Australian citizenship should get the bullet. Murderers of the calibre of Saddam are way beyond the common “Serial Killer” sort – who I believe should also be killed – particularly in cases where the proof is beyond doubt, such as Martin Bryant.

      Posted by blogstrop on 2006 12 31 at 02:35 AM • permalink

 

    1. The state has no right to kill people. It does have a right to defend itself and its citizens. There is no contradiction at all.

      Posted by C.L. on 2006 12 31 at 05:51 AM • permalink

 

    1. “The state has no right to kill people.”

      Under the American theory of governent the state has no right to ANYTHING.  Only people have rights.  States have only powers delegated to them with the consent of the people, like the power to execute murderers, for example.

      Posted by Dave Surls on 2006 12 31 at 07:29 PM • permalink

 

    1. America isn’t the world, Dave – “World Series” notwithstanding.

      Posted by C.L. on 2006 12 31 at 10:57 PM • permalink

 

Page 1 of 1 pages

Commenting is not available in this weblog entry.