This story makes me want to do violent things to journalists. I guess that since I'm a communications major, that could cause problems in the near future. But in any case...
The person who wrote this article apparently decided that he should focus on all the people who saw Saddam Hussein in a positive light after his television appearance. I will now analyze said article, pointing out examples of both positive and negative reactions they presented. First, the positive ones:
"This is a theater," said Mr. Hassan, a 47-year-old ex-member of the Baath Party, mimicking the words of his former boss on the day that he appeared in court. "When I turned on the television I did not believe it was Saddam Hussein at first. I thought it was one of his doubles.
"You cannot put Saddam Hussein on trial — he is the people's representative, the symbol of the Arab nation," said Mr. Nassar, a 56-year-old Sunni Arab, his eyes welling up. "When I saw him on the television, it hurt me so much. Right now, I want to cry."
(The above quote is followed by no less than 8 paragraphs detailing the guy's reasons for supporting Saddam)
Even those who hated Mr. Hussein found his appearance full of mysteries. Farid Shakuri, a 62-year-old retired engineer, said the generous treatment afforded Mr. Hussein at his arraignment — the smart clothes, the opportunity to speak — had strengthened his conviction that Mr. Hussein and the Americans were secret allies.
For all the hardship Mr. Hussein caused here, some Iraqis said they were unable to summon any bitter feelings. In that way, they said, Mr. Hussein looms like a father over an abused son. He may be a brutal man, the Iraqis said, but he is a father still.
Haidar Abdul Azim, a 34-year-old pharmacist, spent seven years in Mr. Hussein's jails, for reasons he did not want to discuss.But when Mr. Hussein's visage appeared on the television of his shop, Mr. Azim shook his head and came to the defense of his former master.
"I feel disappointed," Mr. Azim said, who then referred to the Americans. "He may have put me in jail for seven years, but still it's not right for the enemy to sit as his judge."
Now, the negative reactions:
"The happiest day of my life was when they found him in that dirty hole, but this was very exciting," said Mr. Muhammad, a Shiite. "I watched the whole thing. Saddam was trying to act proud, but in his eyes he was very weak."
"I thought the Americans gave him a status today that he didn't deserve," Mr. Shakuri said. "Over 30 years, he never gave anyone the chance at a fair trial.""I think it is connected to the poison gas," he said.
Still, Mr. Shakuri said he took great joy in watching Mr. Hussein's court appearance.
For a man who surrendered to the Americans without a fight last December, he said, Mr. Hussein seemed almost comical in trying to frighten the Iraqis now.
When Rafa al-Dulaimi saw Mr. Hussein's face on television, he quickly switched off the set, not because he found Mr. Hussein's arraignment objectionable, he said, but because he felt like the past needed to be forgotten."The Iraqi people have a new government now, and we are trying to turn the page," Mr. Dulaimi said. "The past is going to cause too much trouble."
"Saddam?" Mr. Dulaimi said. "Send him someplace very far."
So, let's review: They interviewed a former Ba'ath Party member and tried to pass him off as an average Iraqi citizen, they spent about half the article outlining the reasons for supporting Saddam, and most of the quotes from people who are against Saddam still include criticisms of America or disclaimers about Saddam's former authority.
I especially like the Ba'ath guy. Isn't that kind of like interviewing a former Nazi after WWII and then using him to prove that the average "man in the street" still has warm feelings for Hitler?
Oh, that liberal media. What is it with you guys and dictators, anyway? I mean..."Mr. Hussein?" I know you're trying to be fair and all, but come on! Don't give that piece of sh!t any respect. He doesn't even deserve to be alive right now.
(And don't try to tell me that "they're only repeating what people said." I refuse to believe that most of the Iraqis they talked to shared their biases unless they were very selective about who they interviewed. Besides, do you really think the majority of Iraqis would say these things?)
Posted by CD on July 2, 2004 06:55 PMIt's a shame to see that people can't yet see through stereotypes the reality of a situation. The truth is, regardless of whether it's in the interests of a supporter of an 'anti war' sentiment, that large numbers will suffer as a direct result of forces entering Iraq under our own legislations. This argument is shunned by pro-war'ers with the opinion that ('if its not us doing he killing, it is instead a murderous dictator'). ANY killing of innocents is wrong. I take it, when you're walking to the cinema on your fathers advice or in a supermarket getting some milk, you don't expect 3 american fighter jets to scream above you and then drop a bunch of bombs and shedding a few limbs?
These are well known arguments, but they are easily put aside - especialy in the comfort of your home - a quiet, still 'rational' place undisturbed.
No, thr truth is that there were better ways to go about doing such a mamoth-job. First of all, Bush isn't of the right disposition to be 'freeing a country'. It was a bad choice from the American government to let such a bad and overtly manipulative public speaker to do such a delicate and sensitive job.
P.S
(I can guess, somewhat, as to what is going to happen to this post)
It's a shame to see that people can't yet see through stereotypes the reality of a situation. The truth is, regardless of whether it's in the interests of a supporter of an 'anti war' sentiment, that large numbers will suffer as a direct result of forces entering Iraq under our own legislations
Um...Okay. Are you saying that the war is wrong because people suffered? Show me one war that hasn't had negative effects. I'm sorry, but this argument doesn't really prove anything.
This argument is shunned by pro-war'ers with the opinion that ('if its not us doing he killing, it is instead a murderous dictator').
No, that's not true. The difference is that Hussein intentionally killed his own people. The U.S. makes more efforts than any other nation in the history of civilization to avoid civilian casualties, and we clearly aren't targeting innocent people like the "insurgents" have been doing. That's where the moral superiority comes from. Again, show me ONE SINGLE WAR where no civilians died. It's a part of reality, as horrible as that seems.
ANY killing of innocents is wrong.
I agree. That's why we take every possible measure not to kill innocents.
I take it, when you're walking to the cinema on your fathers advice or in a supermarket getting some milk, you don't expect 3 american fighter jets to scream above you and then drop a bunch of bombs and shedding a few limbs?
No, and hopefully, neither do the Iraqis. When we were bombing them, we targeted Saddam's palaces, communications facilities, and intelligence centers. We didn't actively look for people going to the supermarket. Once again, that's the difference between the U.S. and the Saddamites.
These are well known arguments, but they are easily put aside - especialy in the comfort of your home - a quiet, still 'rational' place undisturbed.
I'm not sure what you're trying to say here. Are you pretending that we weren't attacked in 2001? I'm confused.
No, thr truth is that there were better ways to go about doing such a mamoth-job.
Such as...?
First of all, Bush isn't of the right disposition to be 'freeing a country'.
How does Bush's personality have any bearing on the war effort?
It was a bad choice from the American government to let such a bad and overtly manipulative public speaker to do such a delicate and sensitive job.
I notice you played both the "Bush is a horrible speaker" and the "Bush is a crafty and manipulative speaker" angles on that one. Once you've decided which one you agree with, we can continue the discussion. Until then, please stop emulating John Kerry.
P.S
(I can guess, somewhat, as to what is going to happen to this post)
If you thought I was going to "crush your dissent," you're wrong. You provided what seems to be a valid e-mail address, you didn't resort to ad-hominem, and you made your arguments in a respectful manner. I wish there were more anti-war types like you.
Posted by: CD at July 2, 2004 08:49 PMWell, I was going to ask Marwood what the sam hill he's talking about, but CD beat me to it. So I'll just address one point. No, from the comfort of one's home, one does not generally think about aerial bombardment. But from the ground in Afghanistan, when I saw jets flying overhead with bombs, I knew those bombs weren't going to hit a supermarket. There weren't any there anyway. Those bombs were going to kill some Taliban, (read: psychos with guns trying to kill me) and get me home safe. Just a thought.
Moving right along, I want to steal a quote from Dave Barry. "If you try, you can find something nice to say about anybody. (Mr. Hitler always kept his uniform very clean.)" Just like Saddam. He, um, he... uhh... He doesn't have a problem with his self-esteem! There, that's it. Yeah.
And about respecting him, CD, the one that gets me is "Former Iraqi President". PRESIDENT? That used to piss me off before the war, when they referred to him as "Saddam Hussein, President of Iraq". Pansy media puke!!! Use the term "dictator", that's what the word is there for! Every time they call Saddam a president it insults democracies everywhere.
"But... but... but... he was ELECTED! At least he said he was!!!"
Sure, moron. I want to see the exit polls from the '88 Iraqi elections.
WINNER: S. Hussein
RUNNERUP: None
# OF DISTRICTS REPORTING: 1
TOTAL POPULAR VOTE: 1
It was a landslide, I tells ya!
Posted by: Army NCO Guy at July 2, 2004 10:41 PMjobs computer peripheral medical jobs at home pharmacy jobs 9 9 9 9 education higher in job houston real estate job engineering in industrial job job search san antonio usa jobs opm government fighter fire illinois in job business education jobs early childhood education jobs it job search ct education in job wisconsin.gov job search engine nursing jobs in uk accounting jobs in arkansas employer tax animal hospital job jobs on long island new york attorney jobs california oregon employment aviation hawaii job banking description free job human resource job search colorado employment radio station jobs clerical jobs in houston employment agency pharmacist jobs illinois jobs in san jose california it job in toronto alabama employment teaching job search
Posted by: Ralph at November 5, 2004 11:51 PM recently I wanna buy some jewelry,I found a lot site sellingg Omega Watches,and Tag Heuer watches.They are so cheap and they are so nice they are replica watches! Some one know about that? what about the quality?