"Angel" wrote:

Inna lillaahi wa inna ilayhi rajiun

Normally my reaction would be good riddance but after coming to know the Ahadith on the man that murdered 100 people yet intended to repent but died before and was still granted heaven,I have no words other than Allah (swt) only knows Saddam Hussain's fate and He alone is the best of Judge

:")

It will not happen within 5 years, most likely 10.

The man in charge of Afghanistan is a Shiite, Hamed Kharzai. He was once a high ranking individual of the Northern Alliance.

The people in charge of Iraq are Shiite.

These two factions of the relevant countries were in opposition of the previous rulers. Civil war was always afoot with the two.

To me it seems that this could erupt into a civil war on a wider footing. A civil war within the Ummah. Shiite vs. Sunni.

Hamed Khazai’s rhetoric towards Pakistan is alarming. Continuously accusing Musharraf of being directly involved in terrorism.

The ongoing civil war in Iraq will frustrate the Shiite and Sunni across the globe for a long time. The persecution looming over the heads of Afghanis by the Shiite government will aggravate Pakistani Sunnis and every other Sunni. This will turn into a war.

I met an old English man many years ago and he said ‘the next world war will be between the Christians and Muslims’. I now disagree the next world war will be between Muslims and Muslims. It will be Iran, Iraqi and Afghani Shiite vs. the Sunni world.

This must not happen. The majority of Shiite practise Islam slightly differently. Let this difference become you then you risk all. Let this difference overcome you and you may as well wage war on every other sect of Islam. Wahabi, Sunni etc.

The biggest so called threat is Iran now. Remember this, the Afghanis were never and will never be defeated by America, Northern Alliance Afghanis defeated Afghanis. Shiite Iraqis defeated Iraqis. Sunni Muslims will defeat Shiite Muslims or vice versa.

In my view that’s the bigger picture.

"Sirus" wrote:

thing is Lilsis

he killed many people, which is wrong no doubt

but in politics, which leader hasnt? everyone in politics is dirty

difference is, unlike bush blair putin etc, he doesnt cover it up so well

but why go after him? plenty of leaders kill....dont them countries need to be liberated? no, because their is no oil interest. plus, it wont cause unrest amongst the muslims.

.

start a thread about bush

start one about blair

start one about bushharaf

i dont have anything positive to say about any of them

just cos other politicians are bad

this dont lessen saddams crime

we shudnt bog ourselves with comparing his crimes with others

Quote:

[b]Saddam 'taunts not humiliating'[/b]

The Iraqi national security adviser has denied accusations that Saddam Hussein, the former Iraqi president, was humiliated in his final moments, contrary to what a leaked video of his execution showed.

Mowaffaq al-Rubaie, asked in an interview on CNN, said: "Where was the humiliation? The shouting of the crowd?"

"This is the tradition of the Iraqis - when they do something, they dance around the body and they express their feelings," al-Rubaie said.

"Basically they were doing their congregational prayers and supplications, and they mentioned at the end of their supplication the name of Muqtada," he said.

"And [Saddam] replied to them. I can't see where is the humiliation, to be quite honest. Muqtada, Muqtada, Muqtada is not a dirty word, not an obscene word, they were not cursing."

[url=http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/261A596E-CDEE-4C3F-842C-98256B040...

I reckon there's some mix up involving a comedian.

I can't believe this is still going on.

The media are pretty focussed on this issue.

Probably more so than the people who feel 'offended'.

I did not like how things happened, but guess what? I got over it. Pretty quickly.

He got a quick painless death, and that's not nothing. It's a kindness that he died while reading the shahadah.

[img]http://img129.imageshack.us/img129/2985/captjrl11501031811mideahn8.jpg[/...

A Christian Orthodox priest participates with other Palestinian Muslims and Christians at a memorial for late Iraqi President Saddam Hussein, in the West Bank city of Ramallah, Wednesday, Jan. 3, 2007. (AP Photo/Muhammed Muheisen)

Yahoo News Photos

Figures, Christian Arabs tend to read those adjectives backwards (maybe its because that is how words are read in arabic?) and prioritize the "Arab" aspect. That's how you get "Pope" Shenouda III anathematizing copt Christians who make pilgrimages to the Church of the Holy Sepulchre. - Try explaining that in theological terms, your holiness.

Now can I have a translation?

I am sure all that means something, but let's say I am not tall enough.

Saalaams All

Please click on the link below, and then add your comments inshAllah.

http://www.uruknet.de/?p=m29511&s1=h1

This makes a mockery of claims by the USA that Saddam received justice and that the people involved in his trial and execution were neutral and impartial.

Allah is the most Mercifull; I pray to Allah that he Grants Saddam forgiveness and grant his mercy. Though Saddam have done many wrong, surely he also has done many good in his life. Let us all as muslim ummah look at the good things he has left behind such as the Saddam Hussain Mosque and the support he gave to the Palestinian nation. May Allah forgive him and errase all his past sins and convert those sins into good deeds. Ameen

[b]
Saddam Hussain: Tyrant or martyr?

by GEORGE GALLOWAY[/b]

NOTHING became the Saddam Hussein era like his leaving of the stage. If he had died the day he was dug up from a hole, the collective memory of the Arabs — the only audience that ever mattered to him — would have been different. Instead, they will recall his astonishing sangfroid before a kangaroo court. The first judge resigned in protest at American interference. The second one was sacked by the US-installed puppet regime for refusing to obey orders.
A 20-minute time delay had to be introduced into the televising of the proceedings so the censor’s scissors could trim back the ever more effective sallies against the claque on the bench opposite the accused.
Saddam’s riposte to the jeering of the prosecution lawyers: ‘Let the monkeys laugh in their trees, the lion walks on,’ was cheered in every coffee house in Arabia. It is this Saddam whose memory will live on.
When the extrajudicial murder of Che Guevara took place in 1967, the authorities made the fatal error of photographing the cadaver of a man who until then had been in world terms a relatively small thorn in their side.
The image of the slain Guevara would encourage others to take up the sword in the decades to come. Saddam Hussein is no Che Guevara, but the foolishly videotaped pictures of Saddam twisting on a rope fashioned by the illegal occupiers who overthrew him will return to haunt those who directed them. Of course, there are those for whom even to mention such points is tantamount to apologia.
I well remember the fury directed at my Mail on Sunday interview with Saddam in August of 2002, in particular, my observation that he exuded an ‘almost Zen-like calm’. It is with that calm that he faced his accusers.
For Saddam’s captors, it wasn’t supposed to be like this. When he was caught we were told this was a turning point in the occupation (remember those?). He was supposed to collapse into a pitiful wreck, rave dementedly, play the pantomime villain our government desperately needed him to be.
But the cliches of Saddam as ‘evil’, ‘mad’ and ‘a monster’ fail to explain anything of his motivation.
He fervently maintained that he had been treated unjustly by the West. A baseless delusion? Well, not entirely. I recall in 2002 appealing to Saddam to invite in Hans Blix and the weapons inspectors who had been withdrawn at the behest of Bill Clinton in 1998.
He looked me directly in the eye and said: ‘We don’t have any weapons of mass destruction. I am telling you in all honesty — we don’t have any.’ It turns out that the ‘evil despot’ was telling the truth about that and he felt betrayed.
Now, in the determined demonisation of the man, there is little time devoted to rehearsing what he brought to Iraq as a leader and achieved as a statesman. But in the Seventies, Saddam framed himself as a father to the nation. At a time of high energy prices and with the oil industry nationalised, such paternalism meant genuine advances in Iraqi society.
By the standards of dictatorships, Iraq in the Seventies was a modernising society. The electricity grid brought power to 4,000 villages. The state distributed free fridges and televisions. There was a minimum wage, women entered the workforce in record numbers and he tried to eradicate illiteracy. Looming ever greater was Saddam’s desire to be seen as a hero of the Arab world. When he rose within the Ba’ath Party in the late Sixties, that dream could still take the form of seeking pan-Arab unity. By 1990, it had become sadly threadbare. Now it was Saddam the Arab hero acting against ‘the Persians’, but as a cat’s paw for American interests.
Those who knew him say that he was convinced that he had, if not the support, then at least the declared neutrality of America when he occupied Kuwait in August 1990. The invasion turned out to be a colossal error of judgment. But it came after he had enjoyed US and British support for invading Iran in 1980 and at critical moments throughout the eight-year war.
In March 1988, his forces used chemical weapons against the Kurdish village of Halabja. The victims came, after the 1991 war, to symbolise his crimes: the man who gassed his own people. Yet at the time there was no international outcry over Halabja.
It was the militarisation of Iraq that threw Saddam’s authoritarian features into sharp relief. His ruthlessness was turned against Iraq society. At the same time, his family’s riches reached Croesus-like proportions, while sanctions threw the country back decades.
It is testimony to the calamitous Bush/Blair policy that they have succeeded in awakening among so many Iraqis warm memories of life under Saddam compared with the hell that is Iraq today. With each day that passes, the full magnitude of the Iraq folly will become clear. Already it has brought about what Ayatollah Khomeini could not in the Eighties: a pivotal role for Iran in the south of Iraq and, by extension, into the rest of the region. Could it possibly achieve what Saddam so dismally failed to in life — his status as an Arab hero?
The images of his final hours look so ordinary, as ordinary as he did on the two occasions that I met him.
But the fact that he was executed at the start of the festival commemorating the deliverance of Ismael from sacrifice at the hands of Abraham will fuel the perception of Saddam as something more than ordinary: a martyr, killed at the behest of Washington.
I had imagined it would be only hardened opponents of the war such as myself who would feel a deep sense of foreboding on news of the execution. But — in the hours since that final drop — that already seems to be a much more general sentiment.
Yes, a man who ended up squandering his country lies dead. But he was never the heart of the matter.

George Galloway is a British MP for Bethnal Green and Bow who had visited Iraq before the invasion.

http://respectuk. blogspot. com
http://www.georgega lloway.com
http://www.respectc oalition. org