To pardon Saddam Hussein.

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&rls= ... in&spell=1

So I need a private Email address for the President Talabani.n3rf

He needs to die like Mussallini, Hitler, and Tojo did for their crimes against humanity.

Yes - but I wasn't there to suggest a better solution. Satan Hussey can be more useful to Iraq - right now - ALIVE than being DEAD. So there You have it.

N3RF

Sadam's execution should be reminder to all those tin horn dictators that their actions agains their own people can be punisished. He is responsible for the deaths of tens of thousands of his own countrymen. He should die.

suffocate the bastard in a vat of camel dung.....

So - suppose he gets a PARDON in return tor assisting the world to improve the situation in Iraq and the surrounding region, how would You do it and what TASKS would he be worthy of or skilled with so we know the capability is there and the jobs are completed ?? You figure it out and then we all have something to work on, work out and make it happen. I guess NAPOLEON didn't do much after he was shipped to this island. Hittler didn't do much for us either after his demise. To suppose that HANGING is the most HUMANE method. Well working it out in the saltmine might be worse. What is he capable of doing - work for humanity - wise ?? n3rf

Interestingly, if you read the news about the verdict from sources around the world, only those in the U.S. seem to strongly support Saddam's execution. Here's an article from a conservative (and usually level-headed) newspaper in Britain:

Victor's justice will deepen rifts that threaten Iraqi unity

Bronwen Maddox: World Briefing

The rapid confirmation of the death sentence against Saddam Hussein is a long step backwards for Iraq. It is a brutal, if inevitable, display of victor’s justice that offends the principles that the US said it sought to uphold in toppling Iraq’s dictator. It will deepen the rifts between Shias and Sunnis, perhaps already fatal to Iraq’s unity.

The loud welcome that the US gave yesterday to the Iraqi court’s ruling was ugly. It sounded like an attempt to extract some proof of success, for want of any other. But if Iraq achieves stability, it may well now be under a Shia “strongman”, not quite the contrast to Saddam that the US intended.

When Saddam’s trial began, there seemed justification for it, if fragile. One hope was that, when Sunnis saw that he was dead, the insurgency would lose heart. But the vitality of that movement has shown that there are more where he came from. A second hope was that Sunnis could be convinced that the trial was fair, and would be reassured about their prospects as a minority. But the trial shed the appearance of fairness, and the past months of sectarian killing have been the worst since the invasion.

The proceedings were not, at the start, as flawed as many had feared. Witnesses did appear, despite intimidation; evidence (of a kind) was presented; Saddam did keep a defence team despite the killings of his lawyers. But rules for presenting evidence changed, and the defence was not given a proper chance to confront the storm of rumours hurled at the former dictator.

Most important, the court failed to maintain an appearance of independence from the Shia-led Government; the chief trial judge resigned this year, citing unbearable interference. Nouri al-Maliki, the Prime Minister, predicted a guilty verdict weeks before it came. Sunday’s confirmation of the death sentence came from Mr al-Maliki’s national security adviser, not the appeals court.

By announcing the sentence after this first trial on the killings at Dujail, the court decided that other charges were redundant. Yet those might have better established that the chain of command ran all the way to Saddam. They would also have supplied a longer record of Saddam’s atrocities, part of any value of such a trial.

At this point of turmoil, the death sentence is particularly regrettable. Tony Blair has hidden behind the clumsy formula that he opposes it, but that Iraqis are free to run their country. He had good grounds to say that this is a bad way to do so. The European Union is against the death penalty on principle, and Paul Bremer, the first US administrator of Iraq, scrapped it, fearing it would inflame the country. Britain still helps Mr al-Maliki to control Iraq and Mr Blair had every right to ask for a reprieve, even if he was bound to be rebuffed.

The Iraqi Government should have spared Saddam the death penalty. When it did not, Mr Blair should have condemned it: first, on principle, for adding to the brutality of a country already awash in blood; and secondly, on the pragmatic grounds that it will inflame Iraq’s sectarian wars even further.

The Times (UK)

Thursday, December 28, 2006

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0, ... 74,00.html

Putting Saddam back in power would not solve Iraq's problems. Then, he had an army and could use force to suppress the Shiites. Now, they have weapons and power. Put Saddam back in power and look out. If you think there's civil war in Iraq now, you ain't seen nothing yet, as the civil war you would have with Saddam leading the Sunni. Can't turn back the clock. Saddam has had his day.

Well - who said anything about putting him back in the throne. I was more thinking about having him help "clean the streets" or monitor the roads for those bad things that BLOW UP and kill our soldiers etc. You guys --- have the power of thinking and writing and the pro and the cons go by, but how do I find his Private Email address ?? The "king or Iraq" who supposedly can issue that PARDON ?? N3RF

I agree with Jesus, hanging him is wrong, it will make him a martyr to those that followed him. The best thing is a life sentence in some obscure prison where he gets a one hour visit once a month with who ever, just so people will still know he is alive. This is a much worse punishment then death as it can go on for years.

River