Canada still mum on the Saddam execution

[Catchme]

Interesting, just as was said Saddam is now a martyre, and the trial was a sham, and shame on the Harper government!

BEIRUT, Lebanon, Jan. 5 — In the week since Saddam Hussein was hanged in an execution steeped in sectarian overtones, his public image in the Arab world, formerly that of a convicted dictator, has undergone a resurgence of admiration and awe.

On the streets, in newspapers and over the Internet, Mr. Hussein has emerged as a Sunni Arab hero who stood calm and composed as his Shiite executioners tormented and abused him.

“No one will ever forget the way in which Saddam was executed,” President Hosni Mubarak of Egypt remarked in an interview with the Israeli newspaper Yediot Aharonot published Friday and distributed by the official Egyptian news agency. “They turned him into a martyr.”

Saddam a Martyre, Harper a fool!

[White Doors]

Interesting, just as was said Saddam is now a martyre, and the trial was a sham, and shame on the Harper government!

That's weird - Harper was responsible for Saddam's execution? Neat how that works!

[Catchme]

Oh, and Canadian Blue, never think I don't have back ups. And wiki is not solid info back up, anyone can write anything they want there and then link it The link that goes to this Saddam USA proof, is extensive and it has many other offical links to it as well.

...The U.S., having decided that an Iranian victory would not serve its interests, began supporting Iraq: measures already underway to upgrade U.S.-Iraq relations were accelerated, high-level officials exchanged visits, and in February 1982 the State Department removed Iraq from its list of states supporting international terrorism. (It had been included several years earlier because of ties with several Palestinian nationalist groups, not Islamicists sharing the worldview of al-Qaeda. Activism by Iraq's main Shiite Islamicist opposition group, al-Dawa, was a major factor precipitating the war -- stirred by Iran's Islamic revolution, its endeavors included the attempted assassination of Iraqi Foreign Minister Tariq Aziz.)

Prolonging the war was phenomenally expensive. Iraq received massive external financial support from the Gulf states, and assistance through loan programs from the U.S. The White House and State Department pressured the Export-Import Bank to provide Iraq with financing, to enhance its credit standing and enable it to obtain loans from other international financial institutions. The U.S. Agriculture Department provided taxpayer-guaranteed loans for purchases of American commodities, to the satisfaction of U.S. grain exporters.

The U.S. restored formal relations with Iraq in November 1984, but the U.S. had begun, several years earlier, to provide it with intelligence and military support (in secret and contrary to this country's official neutrality) in accordance with policy directives from President Ronald Reagan. These were prepared pursuant to his March 1982 National Security Study Memorandum (NSSM 4-82) asking for a review of U.S. policy toward the Middle East......

...A State Department background paper dated November 16, 1984 said that Iraq had stopped using chemical weapons after a November 1983 demarche from the U.S., but had resumed their use in February 1984. On November 26, 1984, Iraq and the U.S. restored diplomatic relations. Deputy Prime Minister Tariq Aziz, in Washington for the formal resumption of ties, met with Secretary of State George Shultz. When their discussion turned to the Iran-Iraq war, Aziz said that his country was satisfied that "the U.S. analysis of the war's threat to regional stability is 'in agreement in principle' with Iraq's," and expressed thanks for U.S. efforts to cut off international arms sales to Iran. He said that "Iraq's superiority in weaponry" assured Iraq's defense. Shultz, with presumed sardonic intent, "remarked that superior intelligence must also be an important factor in Iraq's defense;" Tariq Aziz had to agree [Document 60].

Saddam the USA's boy

[Catchme]

Harper embarassed Canada yet again by keeping his mouth shut against more USA culpability in IRAQ regarding the hanging of Saddam.

9) The Reagan administration not only gave significant aid to Saddam, it attempted to recruit other friends for him.

' Teicher adds that the CIA had knowledge of, and U.S. officials encouraged, the provisioning of Iraq with high-powered weaponry by U.S. allies. He adds: “For example, in 1984, the Israelis concluded that Iran was more dangerous than Iraq to Israel’s existence due to the growing Iranian influence and presence in Lebanon. The Israelis approached the United States in a meeting in Jerusalem that I attended with Donald Rumsfeld. Israeli Foreign Minister Ytizhak Shamir asked Rumsfeld if the United States would deliver a secret offer of Israeli assistance to Iraq. The United States agreed. I traveled with Rumsfeld to Baghdad and was present at the meeting in which Rumsfeld told Iraqi Foreign Minister Tariq Aziz about Israel’s offer of assistance. Aziz refused even to accept the Israelis’ letter to Hussein.” It might have been hoped that a country that arose in part in response to Nazi uses of poison gas would have been more sensitive about attempting to ally with a regime then actively deploying such a weapon, even against its own people (some gassing of Kurds had already begun). '

10) After the Gulf War of 1991, when Shiites and Kurds rose up against Saddam Hussein, the Bush senior administration sat back and allowed the Baathists to fly helicopter gunships and to massively repress the uprising. President GHW Bush had called on Iraqis to rise up against their dictator, but when they did so he left them in the lurch. This inaction, deriving from a fear that a Shiite-dominated Iraq would ally with Tehran, allowed Saddam to remain in power until 2003.

USA The Creator of Saddam

[Canadian Blue]

Saddam a Martyre, Harper a fool!

Saddam Hussein is now an album released by the band Saturnus?

Or are you talking about Martyr? As well, how is Harper a fool, considering Canada isn't even in Iraq, and we have no say in how their judiciary is suppose to be run. We can perhap's put on diplomatic pressure, but regimes have done much, much, much, worse then what Iraq has done with regards to Saddam. Remember what happened to a certain Romanian despot when his people got a hold of him.

Harper embarassed Canada yet again by keeping his mouth shut against more USA culpability in IRAQ regarding the hanging of Saddam.

Once again do you have proof that only the US is soley to blame for Iraq's WMD's. Once again the evidence seem's to show that the Warsaw Pact countries, as well as others were more responsible for the arming of Saddam Hussein.

Oh, and Canadian Blue, never think I don't have back ups. And wiki is not solid info back up, anyone can write anything they want there and then link it The link that goes to this Saddam USA proof, is extensive and it has many other offical links to it as well.

The general population uses wikipedia all the time, which is why it has been so successful. Blacklistednews on the other hand, isn't really trusted. Once again I can understand why you seem to be so out of touch with the world if you get all of your news from blacklisted, and rotten.com, personally I like to read Time, CNN, BBC, CTV, Maclean's etc.

As well I noticed 9/11 revisionists are rampant on blacklistednews, which really doesn't surprise me all that much.

Harper embarassed Canada yet again by keeping his mouth shut against more USA culpability in IRAQ regarding the hanging of Saddam.

So, are you saying we should shut down all relation's with the United States.

Allright here's another source from answers.com, a respectable site to back up an argument.

In the early 1970s, Saddam Hussein ordered the creation of a clandestine nuclear weapons program.[2] Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction programs were assisted by a wide variety of firms and governments in the 1970s and 1980s. [3][4][5][6][7] As part of Project 922, German firms such as Karl Kobe helped build Iraqi chemical weapons facilities such as laboratories, bunkers, an administrative building, and first production buildings in the early 1980s under the cover of a pesticide plant. Other German firms sent 1,027 tons of precursors of mustard gas, sarin, tabun, and tear gasses in all. This work allowed Iraq to produce 150 tons of mustard agent and 60 tons of Tabun in 1983 and 1984 respectively, continuing throughout the decade. Five other German firms supplied equipment to manfacture botulin toxin and mycotoxin for germ warfare. In 1988, German engineers presented centrifuge data that helped Iraq expand its nuclear weapons program. Laboratory equipment and other information was provided, involving many German engineers. All told, 52% of Iraq's international chemical weapon equipment was of German origin. The State Establishment for Pesticide Production (SEPP) ordered culture media and incubators from Germany's Water Engineering Trading.[8]

France built Iraq’s Osirak nuclear reactor in the late 1970s. Israel claimed that Iraq was getting close to building nuclear weapons, and so bombed it in 1981. Later, a French company built a turnkey factory which helped make nuclear fuel. France also provided glass-lined reactors, tanks, vessels, and columns used for the production of chemical weapons. Around 21% of Iraq’s international chemical weapon equipment was French. Strains of dual-use biological material also helped advance Iraq’s biological warfare program.

Italy gave Iraq plutonium extraction facilities that advanced Iraq’s nuclear weapon program. 75,000 shells and rockets designed for chemical weapon use also came from Italy. Between 1979 and 1982 Italy gave depleted, natural, and low-enriched uranium. Swiss companies aided in Iraq’s nuclear weapons development in the form of specialized presses, milling machines, grinding machines, electrical discharge machines, and equipment for processing uranium to nuclear weapon grade. Brazil secretly aided the Iraqi nuclear weapon program by supplying natural uranium dioxide between 1981 and 1982 without notifying the IAEA. About 100 tons of mustard gas also came from Brazil.

The United States exported $500 million of dual use exports to Iraq that were approved by the Commerce department. Among them were advanced computers, some of which were used in Iraq’s nuclear program. The non-profit American Type Culture Collection and the Centers for Disease Control sold or sent biological samples to Iraq under Saddam Hussein up until 1989, which Iraq claimed it needed for medical research. These materials included anthrax, West Nile virus and botulism, as well as Brucella melitensis, which damages major organs, and clostridium perfringens, which causes gas gangrene. Some of these materials were used for Iraq's biological weapons research program, while others were used for vaccine development.[9]

The United Kingdom paid for a chlorine factory that was intended to be used for manufacturing mustard gas.[10] The government secretly gave the arms company Matrix Churchill permission to supply parts for the Iraqi supergun, precipitating the Arms-to-Iraq affair when it became known.

Many other countries contributed as well; since Iraq's nuclear program in the early 1980s was officially viewed internationally as for power production, not weapons, there were no UN prohibitions against it. An Austrian company gave Iraq calutrons for enriching uranium. The nation also provided heat exchangers, tanks, condensers, and columns for the Iraqi chemical weapons infrastructure, 16% of the international sales. Singapore gave 4,515 tons of precursors for VX, sarin, tabun, and mustard gasses to Iraq. The Dutch gave 4,261 tons of precursors for sarin, tabun, mustard, and tear gasses to Iraq. Egypt gave 2,400 tons of tabun and sarin precursors to Iraq and 28,500 tons of weapons designed for carrying chemical munitions. India gave 2,343 tons of precursors to VX, tabun, Sarin, and mustard gasses. Luxembourg gave Iraq 650 tons of mustard gas precursors. Spain gave Iraq 57,500 munitions designed for carrying chemical weapons. In addition, they provided reactors, condensers, columns and tanks for Iraq’s chemical warfare program, 4.4% of the international sales. China provided 45,000 munitions designed for chemical warfare. Portugal provided yellowcake between 1980 and 1982. Niger provided yellowcake in 1981.[11]

Once again the evidence shows the French and German's were more involved than the American's were. If you want to argue what I'm saying than give me a link to a credible website, not some website made up of conspiracy nuts, and paranoid subjects.

The USA didn't create Saddam, wouldn't it be more accurate to say that Saddam Hussein was a product of the west?

Once again I don't like to use opinion pieces, I prefer to base truths on facts.

That's weird - Harper was responsible for Saddam's execution? Neat how that works!

White Doors, this is about as weird as the argument about Lucifarian's that Polynewbie goes on about.

[Catchme]

Oh, Canadian Blue, I notice how you skipped over the fine and very accurate quoted article from the NATIONAL SECURITY ARCHIVE about USA's cupability and where Iraq/Saddam got the money to buy the guns etc from the other countries, as I figured you would. Here some more about the money Iraq used and who set it for them please do read the link, you might learn something..

Initially, Iraq advanced far into Iranian territory, but was driven back within months. By mid-1982, Iraq was on the defensive against Iranian human-wave attacks. The U.S., having decided that an Iranian victory would not serve its interests, began supporting Iraq: measures already underway to upgrade U.S.-Iraq relations were accelerated, high-level officials exchanged visits, and in February 1982 the State Department removed Iraq from its list of states supporting international terrorism. (It had been included several years earlier because of ties with several Palestinian nationalist groups, not Islamicists sharing the worldview of al-Qaeda. Activism by Iraq's main Shiite Islamicist opposition group, al-Dawa, was a major factor precipitating the war -- stirred by Iran's Islamic revolution, its endeavors included the attempted assassination of Iraqi Foreign Minister Tariq Aziz.)

Prolonging the war was phenomenally expensive. Iraq received massive external financial support from the Gulf states, and assistance through loan programs from the U.S. The White House and State Department pressured the Export-Import Bank to provide Iraq with financing, to enhance its credit standing and enable it to obtain loans from other international financial institutions. The U.S. Agriculture Department provided taxpayer-guaranteed loans for purchases of American commodities, to the satisfaction of U.S. grain exporters.

National Security Archive

The only thing Harper is culpable for is not saying a word about the hanging! We are a country that does not believe in the death sentence. And talk of mine regarding Harper is on topic, to ascribe another meaning is just pure propaganda deflection away from topic. As is speaking about anything else, that is not about the topic, at any other site given for reference.

Also, I see you have nothing to say about the post I put from the CBC, concerning the ugly esculating violence that has occured in Iraq because of the USA's latest foolishness in martyring Saddam, all you were is critical of a typo or spelling error in order to deflect away. But of course the Bush admin had to get rid of the link that tied this administration to Saddam from the get go, so they could not let him stand trial for the Kurds and testify implicating them further now could they. And yes my links given, all more than prove USA's involvement in creating and supporting Saddam. Even the infamous picture of Rumsfield shaking Saddam's hand back in the 80's is enough.

Interesting that Italy, where Harper is buying our planes, is really taking action about the wrongful hanging of Saddam.

Rome has lit up the arches of the Colosseum to highlight Italy's support for a global ban on the death penalty.

Italy launched its campaign in the wake of former Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein's execution, which sparked widespread protest among Italians.

Rome's Mayor Walter Veltroni said: "The Colosseum originally was a place of persecution and unspeakable violence. But now it is a symbol of peace and reconciliation."

He said the lighting of the Colosseum would be a sign of encouragement for Prime Minister Romano Prodi's government, which this week began a diplomatic push to have the issue taken up by the UN General Assembly.

Mr Prodi has said no crime can justify one person killing another.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/6238131.stm

[Canadian Blue]

Tisk, tisk...

Oh, Canadian Blue, I notice how you skipped over the fine and very accurate quoted article from the NATIONAL SECURITY ARCHIVE about USA's cupability and where Iraq/Saddam got the money to buy the guns etc from the other countries, as I figured you would. Here some more about the money Iraq used and who set it for them please do read the link, you might learn something..

Prolonging the war was phenomenally expensive. Iraq received massive external financial support from the Gulf states, and assistance through loan programs from the U.S. The White House and State Department pressured the Export-Import Bank to provide Iraq with financing, to enhance its credit standing and enable it to obtain loans from other international financial institutions. The U.S. Agriculture Department provided taxpayer-guaranteed loans for purchases of American commodities, to the satisfaction of U.S. grain exporters.

Here is what I posted.

The United States exported $500 million of dual use exports to Iraq that were approved by the Commerce department. Among them were advanced computers, some of which were used in Iraq’s nuclear program. The non-profit American Type Culture Collection and the Centers for Disease Control sold or sent biological samples to Iraq under Saddam Hussein up until 1989, which Iraq claimed it needed for medical research. These materials included anthrax, West Nile virus and botulism, as well as Brucella melitensis, which damages major organs, and clostridium perfringens, which causes gas gangrene. Some of these materials were used for Iraq's biological weapons research program, while others were used for vaccine development.[9]

Once again I already know about it. What I have stated is that if you are to find the USA guilty on all charges, then why not charge the German's, British, French, Russian's, Czech's, Dutch, Italian's, Chinese, etc.

Also, I see you have nothing to say about the post I put from the CBC, concerning the ugly esculating violence that has occured in Iraq because of the USA's latest foolishness in martyring Saddam, all you were is critical of a typo or spelling error in order to deflect away. But of course the Bush admin had to get rid of the link that tied this administration to Saddam from the get go, so they could not let him stand trial for the Kurds and testify implicating them further now could they. And yes my links given, all more than prove USA's involvement in creating and supporting Saddam. Even the infamous picture of Rumsfield shaking Saddam's hand back in the 80's is enough.

I'll respond to the portion's in bold.

The US didn't martyr Saddam, the Iraqi court's did. If you read the news you'll find this out. Once again other dictators haven't even had a fair trial, look at Mussolini, Ceauşescu, etc.

So your saying that their is a conspiracy, and the Bush administration is covering up their involvement. Listen, everybody know's about the western world's involvement with Iraq, and when I say the west I include much of Europe and the United States. If you think I'm trying to be a revisionist, I'm not, more or less I'm pointing to the fact's which clearly show the US involvement isn't as severe as you make it out to be, and many other nation's were also involved with Iraq.

How many world leader's shook hands with Hitler, Mao, Stalin, and Idi Amin. Have you ever seen the picture of Stalin, Churchill, and Roosevelt, all sitting together, should we have implicated Roosevelt and Churchill in the crimes that were commited by the USSR in the 1930's? Once again, that's a fundamentally flawed argument.

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/amex/goebbels/peop...hurchill_01.jpg

I was simply pointing out your typo, because it was obvious that you didn't actualy know what Martyr mean's, and you made the same mistake. By the way, that link saying "Saddam a martyr, Harper a fool", it kind of sounds like your saying Saddam Hussein is holier than Harper. Just a thought.

The only thing Harper is culpable for is not saying a word about the hanging! We are a country that does not believe in the death sentence. And talk of mine regarding Harper is on topic, to ascribe another meaning is just pure propaganda deflection away from topic. As is speaking about anything else, that is not about the topic, at any other site given for reference.

Yes, however we didn't live under the rule of Saddam Hussein.

I don't believe in the death penalty, however Saddam had it coming. As well look at the other European countries response to Saddam Hussein's hanging.

UK FOREIGN OFFICE SPOKESMAN

As the prime minister has made clear, it [saddam's execution] is entirely a matter for the independent Iraqi tribunal.

Our position is unchanged. We are opposed to the death penalty as a matter of principle but the decision is one for the Iraqi authorities.

GERMAN GOVERNMENT DEPUTY SPOKESMAN THOMAS STEG

The government, like other countries in the European Union, is not only sceptical about the death penalty, it is categorically opposed to the death penalty... but it is allowed under Iraqi law.

There is nothing to indicate that the trial, including the appeals process, did not take place in accordance with the rule of law and legal principles in operation in Iraq.

I don't see the need for a comment, since it won't do much. As well, Iraq is already doing an investigation into the hanging.

Interesting that Italy, where Harper is buying our planes, is really taking action about the wrongful hanging of Saddam.

Sure we can give ourselves a pat on the back for trying to save a despot, but why do you want us to focus all of our attention on Saddam Hussein, when people are being put to death in China for having different political view's. I wouldn't call it a wrongful hanging, since, everyone is pretty sure Saddam Hussein was a genocidal maniac.

[Catchme]

Oh lookie here, even Britian has made comments about the unrighteous, and nasty hanging of Saddam.

Saddam hanging deplorable - Brown

..Mr Brown told BBC One's Sunday AM show the manner of the former Iraqi leader's hanging was "completely unacceptable".

The chancellor said he was personally against the death penalty, and he hoped lessons would be learnt from the mistakes made in Saddam's execution.

..."It is something, of course, which the Iraqi Government has now expressed its anxiety and shame at.

"It has done nothing to lessen tensions between the Shia and Sunni communities."

He added: "Even those people unlike me who are in favour of capital punishment found this completely unacceptable and I am pleased that there is now an inquiry into this and I hope lessons in this area will be learnt, as we learn other lessons about Iraq."

BBC reports Britians Stance on Saddam Hanging

[Canadian Blue]

That was more about the way the hanging took place, which was completely unacceptable. However the Iraqi's have said an investigation is going to done.

Oh lookie here, even Britian has made comments about the unrighteous, and nasty hanging of Saddam.

I'm more concerned about the human right's activist in Burma, than Saddam Hussein who was actually given a trial, something he rarely gave those whom he executed.

As well reading the article, I found a little bit more substance.

Last week Deputy Prime Minister John Prescott, in charge of the country while the prime minister was on holiday, also described the filming of the execution as "deplorable".

Mr Blair has said he will speak about the 30 December execution next week, although Downing Street said the PM supported an Iraqi investigation into the hanging.

Education Secretary and deputy leadership candidate Alan Johnson told the Observer he also had concerns about the way the execution was carried out.

"I agree with John Prescott's remarks about the way it was handled and I am an opponent of the death penalty.

"But it was a matter for the Iraqi people to make that judgment.

"What happened at the end shouldn't detract from the terrible crimes that Saddam committed."

Initial Iraqi government film showed Saddam being executed in a relatively dignified manner, however mobile phone footage emerged showing Saddam - a Sunni - being taunted with Shia slogans.

Following Mr Brown's remarks, Liberal Democrat leader Sir Menzies Campbell said: "The prime minister's continuing silence is deafening.

"His unwillingness to condemn the shameful scenes surrounding Saddam Hussein's execution does him no credit."

Once again if the Iraqi's are doing an investigation, why should we protest about a matter which is going to be investigated.

[jacobhelliwell]

I bet, even though so many people are saying Harper has embarressed Canada yet again for not speaking out against the hanging of Hussein, that an extemely small portion of people outside Canada even cared if Harper said anything. People aren't going to remember whether or not Canada had anythign to say about the hanging, they are simply going to remember the hanging and that it happened.

And now, with the execution over, civil war on the door step and a Sunni/Shiite war around the corner, the states and their allies have much more to worry about then who said what when Saddam was hanged.

[Catchme]

Well, it may not matter to you if Harper said anything or not, but it does matter on the world stage, and it does matter to Canadians just perhaps not those who supported the mess in Iraq in the first place though, but seeing as how that was a minority well.....

Robert Fisk: He takes his secrets to the grave. Our complicity dies with him

We've shut him up. The moment Saddam's hooded executioner pulled the lever of the trapdoor in Baghdad yesterday morning, Washington's secrets were safe. The shameless, outrageous, covert military support which the United States - and Britain - gave to Saddam for more than a decade remains the one terrible story which our presidents and prime ministers do not want the world to remember. And now Saddam, who knew the full extent of that Western support - given to him while he was perpetrating some of the worst atrocities since the Second World War - is dead.

Gone is the man who personally received the CIA's help in destroying the Iraqi communist party. After Saddam seized power, US intelligence gave his minions the home addresses of communists in Baghdad and other cities in an effort to destroy the Soviet Union's influence in Iraq. Saddam's mukhabarat visited every home, arrested the occupants and their families, and butchered the lot. Public hanging was for plotters; the communists, their wives and children, were given special treatment - extreme torture before execution at Abu Ghraib...But a largely unreported document, "United States Chemical and Biological Warfare-related Dual-use exports to Iraq and their possible impact on the Health Consequences of the Persian Gulf War", stated that prior to 1985 and afterwards, US companies had sent government-approved shipments of biological agents to Iraq. These included Bacillus anthracis, which produces anthrax, andEscherichia coli (E. coli). That Senate report concluded that: "The United States provided the Government of Iraq with 'dual use' licensed materials which assisted in the development of Iraqi chemical, biological and missile-systems programs, including ... chemical warfare agent production facility plant and technical drawings, chemical warfare filling equipment."

Nice Cover up and yet Canada remains silent.

[Argus]

Harper embarassed Canada yet again by keeping his mouth shut against more USA culpability in IRAQ regarding the hanging of Saddam.

Twaddle

[Argus]

Oh, and Canadian Blue, never think I don't have back ups. And wiki is not solid info back up, anyone can write anything they want there and then link it The link that goes to this Saddam USA proof, is extensive and it has many other offical links to it as well.

The thing I've noticed about the internet, is it represents a great forum for nut cases, for fanatics, and loonies, and those who are zealots about whatever issue. Thus the internet is full of nutty web sites, or web sites run by nuts, tortuously twisting legitimate facts, or simply making up their own, in order to support their own bizarre world view. One thus has to be careful about what sites one cites (pun intended).

Your arguments are entirely familiar and entirely unconvincing. Yes, the US did indeed support Iraq against Iran. It's called realpolitik, or used to be. You support the enemy of your enemy. And, of course, even before then, there were legitimate interests at stake in the middle east, and with a large oil exporter. All nations dealt with Saddam's government from time to time. There was no nation I'm aware of which turned up their nose at dealing with Saddam. Including us. That does not imply they were supporters of his. Oil money gets lots of support, with or without government aid or disinterest. Saddam built his weapons by waving money at foreign companies all-too eager to provide him with whatever he wanted. Some were American, though most, apparently, were German and French. The French, in particular, had very warm relations with Saddam. Oddly, no one seems to care about that these days.

As for Saddam being executed: so what? Good riddance. It wasn't done with much dignity, but then, the executions of his enemies wasn't either. I doubt many Canadians are upset over his demise - except, of course, those like yourself who see in it nothing more than an opportunity to trash those you hate: Conservatives and Americans.

[Argus]

Well, it may not matter to you if Harper said anything or not, but it does matter on the world stage, and it does matter to Canadians just perhaps not those who supported the mess in Iraq in the first place though, but seeing as how that was a minority well.....

The only people that care are people who are so filled with hate, bigotry and venom towards Harper and conservatives in general that nothing would ever induce them to vote for them anyway. So your wishes are completely unimportant.

[Catchme]

Well, it may not matter to you if Harper said anything or not, but it does matter on the world stage, and it does matter to Canadians just perhaps not those who supported the mess in Iraq in the first place though, but seeing as how that was a minority well.....

The only people that care are people who are so filled with hate, bigotry and venom towards Harper and conservatives in general that nothing would ever induce them to vote for them anyway. So your wishes are completely unimportant.

What wishes are you speaking of? And why would they be unimportant anyway?

It has nothing to do with hatred and bigotry and venom towards Harper and the Conservatives in general.

Why? because you can't be bigoted about a political party and criticizing them is NOT vernom or hate.

It's weird how some think criticism of the CPC government is those things. But when they themselves criticize, it's not a problem, it's their right to speak out against the governments actions.

If criticism about your government is not allowed what do you have?

[Canadian Blue]

The thing I've noticed about the internet, is it represents a great forum for nut cases, for fanatics, and loonies, and those who are zealots about whatever issue. Thus the internet is full of nutty web sites, or web sites run by nuts, tortuously twisting legitimate facts, or simply making up their own, in order to support their own bizarre world view. One thus has to be careful about what sites one cites (pun intended).

Your arguments are entirely familiar and entirely unconvincing. Yes, the US did indeed support Iraq against Iran. It's called realpolitik, or used to be. You support the enemy of your enemy. And, of course, even before then, there were legitimate interests at stake in the middle east, and with a large oil exporter. All nations dealt with Saddam's government from time to time. There was no nation I'm aware of which turned up their nose at dealing with Saddam. Including us. That does not imply they were supporters of his. Oil money gets lots of support, with or without government aid or disinterest. Saddam built his weapons by waving money at foreign companies all-too eager to provide him with whatever he wanted. Some were American, though most, apparently, were German and French. The French, in particular, had very warm relations with Saddam. Oddly, no one seems to care about that these days.

As for Saddam being executed: so what? Good riddance. It wasn't done with much dignity, but then, the executions of his enemies wasn't either. I doubt many Canadians are upset over his demise - except, of course, those like yourself who see in it nothing more than an opportunity to trash those you hate: Conservatives and Americans.

To add on to that, the allies also included Stalin in order to fight the war against Nazism, despite Stalin's well known brutality.

What wishes are you speaking of? And why would they be unimportant anyway?

Because most people will see the massive irrationality behind them. You put the blame on the USA alone despite the fact its well know many European countries and the some Asian countries did more than the US with regards to bringing about Saddam.

Well, it may not matter to you if Harper said anything or not, but it does matter on the world stage, and it does matter to Canadians just perhaps not those who supported the mess in Iraq in the first place though, but seeing as how that was a minority well.....

Once again, I doubt most Canadian's are really getting up in arm's over Saddam's death, same with the much of the western world.

It's weird how some think criticism of the CPC government is those things. But when they themselves criticize, it's not a problem, it's their right to speak out against the governments actions.

Well, so far you have said that most of Europe had nothing to do with Saddam Hussein being brought about and getting arm's, and have laid blame on the United State for everything disregarding other nation's who had done much worse in Iraq. As well you have called Harper a fool, a Liar, Liar, Pant's on Fire, and attacked Canada for remaining silent on the issue of the wests involvement in Iraq.

Once again, as it has been pointed out many times before the West, and I mean the whole Western World, was involved with Saddam Hussein in giving him weapon's, aid, nuclear technology, intelligence, etc. You have ignored all of this, and continue to attack Harper who really wasn't involved with Iraq.

Catchme what your doing is partisanship, its not criticism of the government, it's simply you ranting incessantly while not backing up your arguments because they are "common public knowledge".

I will thank you though for finally giving actual new's articles, they've been an interesting read.

[Catchme]

catchme said:What wishes are you speaking of? And why would they be unimportant anyway?

Because most people will see the massive irrationality behind them. You put the blame on the USA alone despite the fact its well know many European countries and the some Asian countries did more than the US with regards to bringing about Saddam.

You did not answer my question "what wishes are you speaking of?"

I have provided you with more than enough to proof to show that the uSA gave Iraq the money to buy what they needed from other countries, plus selling directly to Saddam. In that proof was also the proof that the USA brokered those deals with other countries for Iraq. And I have also proved that indeed the USA did more than any country to support Saddam.

But heh, at least now you're admitting the USA had cupability, as before I provided indisputable proof, that really was for common knowledge, you said the USA had none, and that Jesse Jackson did not know what he was saying.

canadian blue said: Once again, I doubt most Canadian's are really getting up in arm's over Saddam's death, same with the much of the western world.

Well, again you would be wrong. Even the Vatican spoke out against it! Plus the examples I have already given, and do not forget USA's alley Britian even spoke out against it. It is not just me, and saying so in the face of much evidence to the contrary is pretty partisan.

Fox News Headlines were: FOXNews.com - European Leaders Speak Out Against Saddam's Death ...

New Zealand

Green Party foreign affairs spokesman Keith Locke is adamant Saddam's death will not improve the situation in Iraq. He says despite Saddam's reign of evil he should imprisoned for life, not executed.

Brazil foreign ministry

(Brazil) does not believe carrying out this sentence will contribute to bringing peace to Iraq.

University of Chicago political science professor Charles Lipson

This will be a public accounting for the crimes that he and his regime undertook systematically over many years, but sadly it won't do much, I think, to set Iraq on a path to stability.

The nature of the internal divisions are too deep. Saddam's execution won't be able to set right the problems that we allowed to take root.

Larry Cox, executive director, Amnesty International USA

The rushed execution of Saddam Hussein is simply wrong. It signifies justice denied for countless victims who endured unspeakable suffering during his regime, and now have been denied their right to see justice served.

Richard Dicker, director of Human Rights Watch

The test of a government's commitment to human rights is measured by the way it treats its worst offenders ... History will judge the deeply flawed Dujail trial and this execution harshly.

Come on Harper could have made a comment like that of France or New Zealand, and I would have been more than happy with that. As below:

NZ: Duty minister Trevor Mallard

Mallard says the New Zealand government does not support the death penalty but acknowledges Saddam Hussein's death occurred within the framework of Iraqi law. He says New Zealand regarded the guilty verdict as appropriate and the task now is for the people of Iraq to look forward and work for a stable unified nation. Mallard says Hussein's death ends a chapter in Iraq's troubled history.

French foreign ministry

France, which advocates like all its European partners the universal abolition of the death penalty, takes note of Saddam Hussein's execution. That decision belongs to the Iraqi people and to the Iraqi sovereign authorities. France calls on to all Iraqis to look forward and to work for reconciliation and national unity. More than ever the aim must be a return to the full sovereignty and stability of Iraq.

canadian blue said: Well, so far you have said that most of Europe had nothing to do with Saddam Hussein being brought about and getting arm's, and have laid blame on the United State for everything disregarding other nation's who had done much worse in Iraq.

that was covered above blue, the uSA is the MOST culpable end of story, no other nations did worse. The links I provided had you bothered to read them more than prove it, especially the National Archives link.

As well you have called Harper a fool, a Liar, Liar, Pant's on Fire, and attacked Canada for remaining silent on the issue of the wests involvement in Iraq.

No, I have attacked Harper on remaining silent NOT Canada. And Harper is a fool and liar, so whats your point?

Once again, as it has been pointed out many times before the West, and I mean the whole Western World, was involved with Saddam Hussein in giving him weapon's, aid, nuclear technology, intelligence, etc. You have ignored all of this, and continue to attack Harper who really wasn't involved with Iraq.

And again you are wrong, it was pointed out to you many times that the whole of the western world was NOT as culpable as the USA, the USA alone was the driving force. Please read the National Archives link, before you comment further, as your stance has been proven to have no credibility.

And I have only attacked Harper on: his lack of commentary on the world stage about Saddam's hanging, and for his wrong and misleading commentary in the USA media, when Canadians chose not to be involved with the USA and their illegal attack upon Iraq. Again, Harper had no right speaking on behalf of Canadians they way he did. He lied and had no legitimate right to speak FOR Canadians to the USA media, as such he misrepresented himself and Canada to the US public. I know you would like people to forget he did this, but it won't be forgotten.

Catchme what your doing is partisanship, its not criticism of the government, it's simply you ranting incessantly while not backing up your arguments because they are "common public knowledge".

I will thank you though for finally giving actual new's articles, they've been an interesting read

.

No, it is/was criticism of Harper's historical actions and his government's current inactions, and again it is NOT partisanship to criticize the government. Besides so what if it is? Your support would then also be partisanship.

canadian blue quite frankly, everything I evidenced, which indeed finally made you fess up to the fact the the USA had some (though they have at least 90%) cupability was/is for common public knowledge.

Did you not notice how I provided post after post of linked evidence that grew stronger each time you questioned/denied? That was because I was showing you it was and is for common public knowledge. The facts are out there everywhere, at every level of society, from tabloid types of references to articles in news clips and government documents. One would have to literally be avoiding it, or deliberating ignoring it not to know. Why you chose not to admit USA cupability until you had no other option is unknown to me.

[newbie]

Well, it may not matter to you if Harper said anything or not, but it does matter on the world stage, and it does matter to Canadians just perhaps not those who supported the mess in Iraq in the first place though, but seeing as how that was a minority well.....

The only people that care are people who are so filled with hate, bigotry and venom towards Harper and conservatives in general that nothing would ever induce them to vote for them anyway. So your wishes are completely unimportant.

And Argus lies yet once again. I care and I certainly don't hate conservatives or Harper. The cons seem to think though that ANY criticism of this government is to be viewed as hateful and bigoted, and to some unpatriotic. Poppycock! Harper missed the opportunity to make a statement. And that shows his true colours as a leader.

[Canadian Blue]

canadian blue quite frankly, everything I evidenced, which indeed finally made you fess up to the fact the the USA had some (though they have at least 90%) cupability was/is for common public knowledge.

The links provided were from opinion pieces, and left wing peace sites. As well I allready replied to your hatred of America by pointing out were you are wrong.

Well, again you would be wrong. Even the Vatican spoke out against it! Plus the examples I have already given, and do not forget USA's alley Britian even spoke out against it. It is not just me, and saying so in the face of much evidence to the contrary is pretty partisan.

Most of the quotes given were from either parties not in power, or lobby groups.

I have provided you with more than enough to proof to show that the uSA gave Iraq the money to buy what they needed from other countries, plus selling directly to Saddam. In that proof was also the proof that the USA brokered those deals with other countries for Iraq. And I have also proved that indeed the USA did more than any country to support Saddam.

But heh, at least now you're admitting the USA had cupability, as before I provided indisputable proof, that really was for common knowledge, you said the USA had none, and that Jesse Jackson did not know what he was saying.

You haven't provided any unbiased substantial proof. Once again OPINION pieces are just that, OPINION's.

Jesse Jackson is a radical left wing politician down in the United States. Personally I prefer to form my own opinion's based on facts instead of what Jesse Jackson says, since Jesse Jackson isn't the ultimate bastion of truth.

And Argus lies yet once again. I care and I certainly don't hate conservatives or Harper. The cons seem to think though that ANY criticism of this government is to be viewed as hateful and bigoted, and to some unpatriotic. Poppycock! Harper missed the opportunity to make a statement. And that shows his true colours as a leader.

How does it reflect on the left wing when they are more outraged over the death of Saddam Hussein, than the death's of thousands of others in Cuba and China?

Well, again you would be wrong. Even the Vatican spoke out against it! Plus the examples I have already given, and do not forget USA's alley Britian even spoke out against it. It is not just me, and saying so in the face of much evidence to the contrary is pretty partisan.

You have only provided the headlines, and not the actual story. So once again I can't substantiate what was said by other leaders. Many of whom have stated that it was up to the Iraqi's on what to do with Saddam Hussein.

Come on Harper could have made a comment like that of France or New Zealand, and I would have been more than happy with that. As below:

New Zealand's Green Party is not in power.

that was covered above blue, the uSA is the MOST culpable end of story, no other nations did worse. The links I provided had you bothered to read them more than prove it, especially the National Archives link.

What is this based on, the opinion of some left wing radicals???

You haven't backed anything up with fact yet, if you follow my links you will find other nation's have done much worse.

Since you can substantiate your claim's, and are reduced to using either Jesse Jackson, or an opinion piece from a left wing radical. I like to use facts, as shown from the links I have given.

Did you not notice how I provided post after post of linked evidence that grew stronger each time you questioned/denied? That was because I was showing you it was and is for common public knowledge. The facts are out there everywhere, at every level of society, from tabloid types of references to articles in news clips and government documents. One would have to literally be avoiding it, or deliberating ignoring it not to know. Why you chose not to admit USA cupability until you had no other option is unknown to me.

Actually, your case hasn't grown stronger, since some of the articles had facts which I had posted earlier.

Gone is the man who personally received the CIA's help in destroying the Iraqi communist party. After Saddam seized power, US intelligence gave his minions the home addresses of communists in Baghdad and other cities in an effort to destroy the Soviet Union's influence in Iraq. Saddam's mukhabarat visited every home, arrested the occupants and their families, and butchered the lot. Public hanging was for plotters; the communists, their wives and children, were given special treatment - extreme torture before execution at Abu Ghraib...But a largely unreported document, "United States Chemical and Biological Warfare-related Dual-use exports to Iraq and their possible impact on the Health Consequences of the Persian Gulf War", stated that prior to 1985 and afterwards, US companies had sent government-approved shipments of biological agents to Iraq. These included Bacillus anthracis, which produces anthrax, andEscherichia coli (E. coli). That Senate report concluded that: "The United States provided the Government of Iraq with 'dual use' licensed materials which assisted in the development of Iraqi chemical, biological and missile-systems programs, including ... chemical warfare agent production facility plant and technical drawings, chemical warfare filling equipment."

I posted this earlier on in the debate.

The United States exported $500 million of dual use exports to Iraq that were approved by the Commerce department. Among them were advanced computers, some of which were used in Iraq’s nuclear program. The non-profit American Type Culture Collection and the Centers for Disease Control sold or sent biological samples to Iraq under Saddam Hussein up until 1989, which Iraq claimed it needed for medical research. These materials included anthrax, West Nile virus and botulism, as well as Brucella melitensis, which damages major organs, and clostridium perfringens, which causes gas gangrene. Some of these materials were used for Iraq's biological weapons research program, while others were used for vaccine development.[9]

I posted this along with nation's who also had involvement in Iraq. Once again you never really read what I posted because apparently rotten.com is more reliable than wikipedia.

Another quote, which I responded to in regards to your idea of the truth based on Jesse Jackson rather than facts.

Also, I see you have nothing to say about the post I put from the CBC, concerning the ugly esculating violence that has occured in Iraq because of the USA's latest foolishness in martyring Saddam, all you were is critical of a typo or spelling error in order to deflect away. But of course the Bush admin had to get rid of the link that tied this administration to Saddam from the get go, so they could not let him stand trial for the Kurds and testify implicating them further now could they. And yes my links given, all more than prove USA's involvement in creating and supporting Saddam. Even the infamous picture of Rumsfield shaking Saddam's hand back in the 80's is enough.

I responded.

I'll respond to the portion's in bold.

The US didn't martyr Saddam, the Iraqi court's did. If you read the news you'll find this out. Once again other dictators haven't even had a fair trial, look at Mussolini, Ceauşescu, etc.

So your saying that their is a conspiracy, and the Bush administration is covering up their involvement. Listen, everybody know's about the western world's involvement with Iraq, and when I say the west I include much of Europe and the United States. If you think I'm trying to be a revisionist, I'm not, more or less I'm pointing to the fact's which clearly show the US involvement isn't as severe as you make it out to be, and many other nation's were also involved with Iraq.

How many world leader's shook hands with Hitler, Mao, Stalin, and Idi Amin. Have you ever seen the picture of Stalin, Churchill, and Roosevelt, all sitting together, should we have implicated Roosevelt and Churchill in the crimes that were commited by the USSR in the 1930's? Once again, that's a fundamentally flawed argument.

But heh, at least now you're admitting the USA had cupability, as before I provided indisputable proof, that really was for common knowledge, you said the USA had none, and that Jesse Jackson did not know what he was saying.

I've always said the US had some involvement. However irrational remarks saying Bush should be hanged is what really sparked my interest in the fact that you can't seem to figure out other countries in fact did more in Iraq.

[Catchme]

canadian Blue, The USA National Archives are NOT opinion pieces please refrain from suggesting they are.

Nor are the news clips that you admitted reading opinion pieces nor are the 100's, yes 100's, of links to offical documents that are linked to in my posts opinions.

And it is not my hatred of the USA, it is fact. I suppose the Vatican hates the USA too as they spoke out against it?

And your comments about other nations having human autrocities DO NOT factor into this discussion, you are throwing up a red herrings to try and deflect away from the USA's culpability with Saddam.

At any rate I am done with this nonsense, the fact remains Harper SAID nothing and he should have.

[Canadian Blue]

canadian Blue, The USA National Archives are NOT opinion pieces please refrain from suggesting they are.

I never said they were, I had said that blacklistednew, unknownnews, and many of the sites given were simply opinion pieces.

Nor are the news clips that you admitted reading opinion pieces nor are the 100's, yes 100's, of links to offical documents that are linked to in my posts opinions.

The new's headlines you gave didn't give us the actual link, so we can't make much of a judgement.

Their are hundreds and hundreds of links supporting the arguments I have given as well, based on fact and not on opinion.

And it is not my hatred of the USA, it is fact. I suppose the Vatican hates the USA too as they spoke out against it?

No, its the fact that you ignore the fact that nation's like France, Singapore, Russia, China, Germany, and even the Netherland's, were also involved in Iraq. I said the whole western world is to blame, wereas you should all the blame on America based on what Jesse Jackson says.

And your comments about other nations having human autrocities DO NOT factor into this discussion, you are throwing up a red herrings to try and deflect away from the USA's culpability with Saddam.

Actually they do, since throughout history world leaders have sided with the enemy of an enemy in order to survive. You posted the picture of Rumsfeld shaking hands with Saddam was enough proof, so I showed the picture of Roosevelt, Churchill, and Stalin, sitting together.

At any rate I am done with this nonsense, the fact remains Harper SAID nothing and he should have.

Yeah, well maybe we can talk about it when you can actually set up an argument instead of having a one liner stating your hatred and dislike of Harper. I'm open to debate, but you called Harper a liar and a fool based on something he didn't even say. Not sure how that make's him a liar, or is even relevant to the topic, but ah well.

I think your done because you argument has run dry.

[fellowtraveller]

Catchme said:

Well, again you would be wrong. Even the Vatican spoke out against it! Plus the examples I have already given, and do not forget USA's alley Britian even spoke out against it. It is not just me, and saying so in the face of much evidence to the contrary is pretty partisan.

That is incorrect. The Britsh PM Blair has only condemned the methodology of the execution, not the act. Others have said differently, but Blair is the PM.

You can read about it here:

current story on Blair and Saddam

[Argus]

Well, it may not matter to you if Harper said anything or not, but it does matter on the world stage, and it does matter to Canadians just perhaps not those who supported the mess in Iraq in the first place though, but seeing as how that was a minority well.....

The only people that care are people who are so filled with hate, bigotry and venom towards Harper and conservatives in general that nothing would ever induce them to vote for them anyway. So your wishes are completely unimportant.

And Argus lies yet once again. I care and I certainly don't hate conservatives or Harper.

Yes, of course. You're always saying such nice things about them, too.

[newbie]

Well, it may not matter to you if Harper said anything or not, but it does matter on the world stage, and it does matter to Canadians just perhaps not those who supported the mess in Iraq in the first place though, but seeing as how that was a minority well.....

The only people that care are people who are so filled with hate, bigotry and venom towards Harper and conservatives in general that nothing would ever induce them to vote for them anyway. So your wishes are completely unimportant.

And Argus lies yet once again. I care and I certainly don't hate conservatives or Harper.

Yes, of course. You're always saying such nice things about them, too.

When they do nice things they'll get nice comments. I'm still waiting.