Of course not. Maybe you should check again the news, because before diying he has called resistence to kick off all butt soldiers from Irak and sure they'll do. You can say this is nothing, but is a start.

Additional Spam:
It can't be offensive 'cos is the truth, loud and fair. Maybe I should put in context what we live here on Spain, but it's still presents nowadays the idea of recovering the reign of Al-Andalus and I can watch it on TV almost everyday. Specially from people of Al-Qaeda, wich leave their ideas quite fair.

Most of muslims who come here to Spain don't integrate with rest of people. They live their own habits even if they go against law of the country they are. Even more, and this is the funniest part, the country MUST change their laws to fix with them. Does it make sense? You can see proofs of provocation on wearing veil on schools, some years ago with occupation of Perejil or, the last one this week, praying on a cristian church that was mosque on IX century.

The worst part of this, is the new xenophobist feeling that is growing on society, who can't trust them after all.

You're only perpetuating that xenophobic feeling, if you can barely distinguish "Muslim" with "terrorist". I mean, c'mon, let's be reasonable. If I was Muslim, I would be disturbed by Christians who sought my death, too. And I'm not here trying to say, "Muslims have a beautiful faith that has nothing to do with warfare!" Much like Christians, their faith requires religious warfare. However, if you want to make a case for Islam making someone terrorist-prone, be my guest. An everyday Muslim, much like an everday Christian, probably could care less about what his or her religion dictates.I think you're looking into my comment a bit too much. I wasn't advocating anything.

A start of what? People were already blowing up trucks and shrines without Saddam's command. Why would they start caring now?

"Butt soldiers"? Is that codeword for fags?

You didn't have to advocate anything. When it came to issues of death and killing, your first reaction was to justify the actions of men in the field, more than likely a conditioned response due to the patriotic impulse to "support the troops." It's of nobody's particular fault, it's just interesting to see how propaganda shows up.

That picture isn't as graphic as the terrorists chopping that hostage's head off or when there were pictures of Abu Musai Al-Zarkawi (whatever his name is) after he died from the air strike.

It's called "subtle segregation." It perpetrates itself automatically because people prefer to interact with people of their own demographic instead of interacting with those outside of them. It's what causes the sense of "other" within societies based on whatever lines. In High School it was social, and as you move up the scale, it becomes racially or habitually-related.

Illegals don't conform for a number of reasons, not the least of which being that it's impossible for them to conform because they have no legal status.

In the case of Muslim immigrants in Europe, Pakis and such don't operate outside of social circles that are comfortable to them, and this is what causes subtle segregation, because those circles are more often than not based on ethnic lines. When a minority segregates itself from larger society, it by a rule becomes disadvantaged, and because the segregation is perpetuated, so does the poverty. It's how you have 3rd Generation French Moroccans who feel like second class citizens because all parties involved worked to keep each other segregated.

Immigrant minorities are not welcome in countries because they do not make themselves welcome. That is what causes resentment amongst natural-citizens who feel entitled to the native culture.

This isn't like language with Mexicans, though, in the case of Muslims in Europe it comes along much more sobering issues such as child abuse and terrorism.

Europeans have a right to be pissed about Islamism snaking its way into politics, but they also have to understand that they're as much a part of the problem.

Trouble is, these nasty little things called 'opinions' get all muddled up in a whole lot of those distinctions we've made up.

I don't want to sit here and say, "Yes, they're EXACTLY the same," because obviously they aren't. But damnit, if people and their gods are allowing for gray areas when humans kill eachother, then there sure as shit needs to be some more thought on the word "justice".

And what the fuck are you talking about? If the words 'killing' and 'murdering' aren't considered taking life then what do they mean? Has it meant "having a tea party" all this time and I didn't know?

When a country enters a conflict under false pretenses or for reasons that a great deal of it's people feel are unfounded, when many believe there is no justice in the war itself, does that mean all the (religious) individuals in the millitary, the ones actually committing the killing for an unjustified reason are still somehow in the clear with their god? I know you aren't exactly saying that, but you're certainly leaving room for someone else to say it.

If it was true that Jews were poisoning wells and hoarding money, then I can most assuredly see a justification for war. You gotta protect your neck man. Defending oneself is the most valid reason for killing that I can think of. But it seems there are A LOT of other reasons that in my opinion (and hopefully a handful of others) are completely asinine.

I suppose that's all justice is, though... an opinion. I hope my point isn't lost in that. Fuck it, it probably is. But like you said, people should know better.

kill - to deprive of life in any manner; cause the death of; slay.
murder - to kill or slaughter inhumanly or barbarously.

First off, don't be a bastard. I know it's the rule around here and whatnot, but I was just pointing out what I thought was obvious. Anyway.

I agree that if we use religious justice as a defining force of our actions, it's pretty disturbing. I'm using simple English, here. To be more specific, killing is 'taking life', murder being more specifically taking life 'inhumanly or barbarously'. Stepping on an ant while on a walk is hardly murder. Keep your definitions in check.

Which completely refutes thousands of years of written and spoken language. Ok.

There's actually no room to say it. Soldiers in the field are justified in killing an enemy combatant because it comes down to simple matters of self-defense. The exception comes in the case of war crimes, which not every US soldier commits, but which should ultimately fall on the shoulders of their superiors, all the way to the top.

First of all, there was never any kind of "war" against the Jews, and second you know that's not true at all. My point is that reason is determined by perspective, and whether what one has done is right or wrong ultimately depends on personal and majority opinion. Nowadays we have a different opinion of Jews, so we think it's wrong to up and kill them for being Jewish.

I don't really get your point at all. Unless you're trying to say that Justice is subjective, and therefore you're right. Which would be retarded.

And why shouldn't they be ignored? If they've conformed to the dominant culture, then they're about as visible as the guy who runs the pumping station.

I'm not sure how they managed to do it, but somehow after no doubt months of preperation into the execution they managed to make Saddam look far more dignified than the thugs in balaclavas taking him to the gallows or the Iraqi government ministers jeering him from the crowd.

It's the beard.

I'm not English, m0ron, so don't fack me up with that sh!t. It's quite understable what I wrote. So, if you can't undetstand it, buy a brain.

Well, back to the topic --> http://observer.guardian.co.uk/world...846511,00.html

It's so hard to remember if The Guardian is a tabloid or not. Can't trust any British publication, it seems.

I'm still not quite understanding why you used "butt soldiers". Your insistence, that you're an illiterate cretin from Spain that doesn't even have the balls to type out "moron", doesn't help my understanding.

Your article is from five years ago and isn't related to the matter at hand. If you're trying to divert attention away from yourself, you're not doing very well.

Nah, I wasn't trying to refute anything, I was just trying to make it a 'grain of salt' kinda thing.

But whatever, I lost my point somewhere in the haze between yesterday and today, so let's say I was merely pointing out that justice is subjective.

In which case... yeah, I'm mildly retarded.

I was hoping somebody wouldn't bring up The Economist. Thanks a lot, Minion. =/

Always a pleasure.

I don't know if this has been posted earlier, but Saddam's execution was caught on tape via camera phone:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6tVG5_F5Ado

I find it kind of disturbing that I can easily find an uncensored video of this man being killed. He sure deserved it though...

SADDAM: "Oh my God!"

NUMEROUS PERSONS start praying aloud: "May God protect those who pray for Muhammad and his descendants. Peace be with Muhammad and his followers. Further the arrival of the Mahdi and condemn his enemies!"

A SINGLE MAN shouts: "Muktada! Muktada! Muktada!"

(addressing Shiite leader Muktada al-Sadr)

SADDAM (surprised): "Muktada? This is how you show your bravery as men?"

A SINGLE MAN: "To hell with you!"

SADDAM: "Is this the pride of us Arabs?"

A SINGLE MAN: "Go to hell!"

SADDAM: "The hell that has become of Iraq?"

ANOTHER MAN (probably attourney Munkith a-Farun): "Please, this man is going to be executed. Show some respect, if you please ..."

ANOTHER MAN: "Long live Muhammad Bakir al-Sadr!"

(A relative of Muktada al-Sadr executed in 1980 by the Saddam regime)

SADDAM starts praying the Muslim creed: "I acknowledge that there is no God but God and Muhammad is his ..."

(he can't speak the last word because the executioner has already pulled the lever)

A SINGLE MAN: "The tyrant has fallen! May he rot in hell!"

NUMEROUS PERSONS: "Muhammad be praised!"

ANOTHER MAN: "Let him hang for three minutes!"

ANOTHER MAN: "No, no, step back! Let him hang for eight minutes, don't take him off!"

ANOTHER MAN is starting to pray, but is being interrupted by ANOTHER MAN yelling: "You don't pray for him!"


I translated this from a transcript posted by German news magazine "Der Spiegel" which was construced from witnesses' reports and the inofficial video.

Source: http://www.spiegel.de/politik/auslan...457586,00.html

The latest news is that the execution of Saddam Hussein was being "hijacked" by Shiite radicals.

Have to agree with this. Shameful is the one word that springs to mind regarding the general behaviour of the executioners and observers, but I guess this is what happens.

speaking obviously like a n00b, I would think the big question is what type of retaliation is his death going to bring? Bush said probably the most intelligent thing I've heard him say when he said that this will not bring an end to terrorism. yeah, give him a fuckin miller for that one. it's just going to result in worse terrorist leaders than saddam coming out of the woodwork now

I don't see what they expect; this man led their country like this. I mean, I'm sure it's "undignified" or whatever, but I wonder if they thought that the crowd wasn't going to jeer him at all. I like how they picked the most random numbers they could.