Have a great weekend y'all, and be good!
Recipients of this Baathist largesse appeared to include a former managing director of the influential Qatar-based government-subsidized satellite network Al Jazeera, Mohammed Jassem al-Ali. The videotaped meeting between Uday and al-Ali occurred on March 13, 2000, when al-Ali still worked as Al Jazeera's managing director. [...]Oh dear Naanaa, have you no shame?
Uday goes on in his videotaped conversation with al-Ali to mention that some people have relayed to him al-Ali's comment that Al Jazeera is the station of Iraq's Baathist regime "both literally and figuratively." Thus, Uday says, "It is important that I share with you my observations about the station."
In response, al-Ali never denies saying that Al Jazeera was Saddam's station. Instead, his cloying remarks provide Uday every reason to believe that this is so. Al-Ali gives Uday his "unequivocal thanks for the precious trust that you put in me so that I was able to play a role at Al Jazeera; indeed I can even say that without your kind cooperation with us and your support my mission would have failed." Al-Ali also tells Uday that, in his mission at Al Jazeera to serve Iraq, "the lion's share of the credit goes to you personally sir, yet we would be remiss not to mention our colleagues here who constantly strive to implement your directive."
Al Jazeera isn't the only Arab media outlet implicated in the Al Hurra tapes. It was recently discovered that Hamida Naanaa, a Syrian writer based in France who was known for her pro-Saddam slant, had received coupons under the Oil-for-Food program in exchange for her favorable coverage. [...]
[...] After Uday greets Naanaa, she gushes, "Hello to you, the dear son of the dear and the precious son of the precious. Hello, is kissing allowed?" Kissing was indeed allowed.
Our extraordinary photos yesterday of Saddam in jail got the whole world talking and woolly-minded liberals into a predictable lather.Apparently! But how sad?!
They bleated on about infringing his RIGHTS apparently forgetting who this depraved monster is.
How sad for Saddam if he feels humiliated. The fact is these images are simply the most striking demonstration of exactly how much Iraq has changed in the last two years.Does he? And we are suppose to feel sorry for him? Why? Didn't he feel humiliated by the images of Iraqis slapping his toppled statue and his portraits with their slippers and spitting on his face? Or when he was captured in the spider hole? Or when he didn't have the courage to shot himself?
A bloody tyrant who forced 20 million people to grovel at his feet has finally been humbled and what better way to illustrate that.I would say there are many ways, Iraqis are full of ideas if you know what I mean; nevertheless, this is a good one, so thank you for publishing the pictures.
The man who showed no mercy is jailed in humane conditions. Unlike his tragic victims, he will face a fair trial by a legitimate Iraqi court.Absolutely.
But make no mistake, this man is hardly entitled to a single human courtesy.
All the Iraqi people I know or have met on the streets of Basra or Baghdad will give you the same answer.What can I say, you said it all!
The evil brute - and his cruel henchmen - deserve no ones sympathy for anything.
The US military has condemned the Sun for publishing photographs of a captive Saddam Hussein and said it was "aggressively" investigating who took them.Okay, maybe it's a violation of Geneva convention; but I know that I am happy to see these pictures, aren't you? Don't you like to see Saddam washing his clothes? I know I do, and I also know that most Iraqis do too.
Today's paper carries a series of photographs showing the former Iraqi dictator in his cell, including one on the front page showing him in his underwear. Another shows him washing clothes under the headline "Tyrant? He's washed up".
The Sun says it obtained the photos from "US military sources" who handed them over "in the hope of dealing a body blow to the resistance in Iraq".
"Saddam is not superman or God, he is now just an ageing and humble old man," the paper quotes its source as saying. "It's important that the people of Iraq see him like that to destroy the myth."
But in a statement issued today, the American military in Baghdad said the photos violated military guidelines "and possibly Geneva convention guidelines for the humane treatment of detained individuals".
"The source of those photos is unknown at this time. It is believed the photos were taken over a year ago."
Mr Galloway denied being an apologist for the former Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein.Very funny Mr Galloway, you almost had me there!
He said he had been a long-term opponent of Saddam, and had a much better record of opposition to the Iraqi leader than members of the American or British governments.
At a news conference in the Defense Ministry, his first public appearance, Mr. Dulaimi said the order extended to college campuses and Christian churches, and applied to Shiite as well as Sunni religious sites. He said raids had been "terrifying worshipers," adding, "The holy places must not be violated by the security forces, nor religious leaders arrested, and that will not happen anymore."Scores of mosques have been raided in the past 18 months, arresting dozens of clerics and often carrying away large hauls of weapons and ammunition, including bomb-making equipment and antitank rockets.
He said that the security agencies under Mr. Hussein had spread "terror" among Iraqis in the name of protecting Iraq, and that the new government was determined not to do the same by attacking places that Iraqis had the right to consider immune to violence. "A sense of public security cannot be achieved by spreading fear," he said.
Dr. Jaafari told reporters that Ayatollah Sistani "insisted on the need for brotherhood between Shiites and Sunnis, and the need to include our Sunni brothers in the constitution-drafting process."Of course this is good news which happened after US pressed the government to boarden the role of Sunnis. Condoleezza Rice urged the government to keep up the momentum and continue to forge a democracy that represents all ethnic and religious groups.
"The next step and the next challenge is to have a constitution that is written by people that are broadly representative," Ms. Rice told Fox News in an interview from Baghdad.Spot on Ms. Rice, my sentiment exactly!
"And so we've been talking about the constitutional drafting process that's about to take place here. It is true that Sunnis did not participate in large numbers in the elections and therefore are underrepresented in the national assembly," she said.
"But I found an openness to the idea - which is really an Iraqi idea - that Sunnis must be represented in this constitutional process because this has to be an Iraq that works for all Iraqis. That's the only way that everyone is going to see the political path as a way to a better future."
“I was reading about Sayyid Qutb and his writings and found some real irony in the present situation with the Patriot Act that I would like your opinion on.And my answered was:
What I was reading said when he came to America in 1950 he grew to hate America for it's permissiveness especially when it came to teenagers and Qutb cited Alfred Kinsey's report on sexuality, as well as Darwin, Marx, and Freud, as degrading influences on American life. He feared the same influences would invade Egypt.
All of those things he hated were leftist ways of thinking and now it is the leftist organizations such as the ACLU that are trying to block the punishments (you are recommending), and trying to undermine the Patriot Act, etc. What do you think about so much of the leftist thought in today's situation? Don't you find it ironic?”
“It is ironic! But I believe its all about fear and control! The liberal is afraid of control and Sayyid Qutb is afraid of losing it!Today, Islamists are the enemy, but tomorrow you might have a different enemy. Some of those radical Muslims attack by suicide bombs; others infiltrate western societies and abuse the freedom and rights given to them by these liberal societies. They attack the society’s way of life, incite followers against those who tolerated them, recruit people to attack the country that harboured them, change the culture of that society, etc.
They are both somehow radical in their thinking. The leftists are liberal; therefore, have less control over people's lives. And that's the first reason why Sayyid Qutb and many other radical clerics were - and those living are – afraid. Having less control means people can do what they like, within reason, without being punished. So, not only they are afraid that they cannot apply Islamic laws with such liberal thinking, but they are also afraid that more people will ignore the Islamic teachings.
Second, if people known about this liberal world, how people in the west are living and how attractive it looks, they are afraid that people would choose the liberal world. So, they want to control people's lives by telling people what they can and can't do, which is the complete opposite of the liberal world.
Now if a liberal advocates his ideology in a religious state, the liberal will be easily defeated because he has no rights and the religious leader can decide his fate / punishment for breaking the rules easily and therefore protecting that world
However, if a religious person advocates his ideas in a liberal state, then the religious person will use all the rights that liberal state has provided him with to continue his fight. Therefore, the religious person take advantage of the rights given to him by the liberal; and the liberal will argue that if we reduce these right that means we lost, but in fact without reducing them you make losses and by reducing these rights you can make winning so much easier!”