The past week has been an intriguing one regarding the interests of justice. Quite often in today’s world we observe the common criminal literally getting away with murder all in the name of human rights and dignities allotted to them by the bleeding hearts of delusional sympathiser’s. Today’s common criminal, rather then be sentenced with a punishment fitting for the offence caused, are quite often instead rewarded with conjugal visit’s, smoking privileges (even though smoking is against the law in any Canadian Federal building), voting “Rights” (only in Canada), and should they so desire can “re-habilitate” themselves with a University education paid for by Joe Canada. Nothing like doing time on the taxpayer’s dime.
It can leave anyone who is frustrated by this continued practice of criminal coddling begging the question, “When will justice ever be served?”
As I perused the news reports on Saddam Hussein’s final execution I realised that there is still justice in the world. Although in Canada we have a “Legal” system as opposed to a true justice system where the punishment actually fits the crime, elsewhere in of all places Iraq, justice was being meted out fairly in accordance with the crimes. What made it all the more ironic was how the scriptures foretell these types of scenarios playing out. Often when we are dealing with tyrannical dictators who are vicious and unrelenting in their pursuit of absolute power the masses lose hope in their freedom ever being restored. More then anything I believe, as we all most likely do, that justice can be painfully slow in coming. BUT eventually it does come.
Take for example the story found in the Book of Esther. It is 10 chapters in length and found in the Old Testament. I will do my best to brief you about it.
It is a story about justice. About reaping what one sows. How God can orchestrate circumstances to bring deserved justice. It begins with Queen Esther’s uncle Mordecai. A man who raised her as his own when her parents passed. We discover that he was a man loyal to the King.
” 21 One day as Mordecai was on duty at the king’s gate, two of the king’s eunuchs, Bigthana and Teresh—who were guards at the door of the king’s private quarters—became angry at King Xerxes and plotted to assassinate him. 22 But Mordecai heard about the plot and gave the information to Queen Esther. She then told the king about it and gave Mordecai credit for the report.” Esther 2:21-22
Yet there were those who plotted evil against him (Mordecai) by wanting him (and ALL the Jew’s) dead. Introducing…Haman! The Prime Minister over all the nobles making him the most powerful official under the King. Because of Jewish custom and law Mordecai would only give reverence to the King not his officials. So we have the ground work laid out for Haman’s abuse of power by manipulating his position.
”5 When Haman saw that Mordecai would not bow down or show him respect, he was filled with rage. 6 He had learned of Mordecai’s nationality, so he decided it was not enough to lay hands on Mordecai alone. Instead, he looked for a way to destroy all the Jews throughout the entire empire of Xerxes.” 3:5-6
Mordecai simply became Haman’s “in” or rationale for justifying the persecution of all the Jewish people in the Persian Kingdom. Haman headed directly for an audience with the King in order to hatch his plans and put them into motion.
”8 Then Haman approached King Xerxes and said, “There is a certain race of people scattered through all the provinces of your empire who keep themselves separate from everyone else. Their laws are different from those of any other people, and they refuse to obey the laws of the king. So it is not in the king’s interest to let them live. 9 If it please the king, issue a decree that they be destroyed,… “ 3:8-9
The story continues to unfold as Mordecai sends word to his niece, Queen Esther, requesting her assistance in the matter. She begins by approaching the King, who was very fond of his Queen, by granting her any request she ask’s. Even up to half his kingdom. Her request was simple. A banquet dinner that she would prepare for him and his Prime Minister, Haman. The gloating continues…
” 9 Haman was a happy man as he left the banquet! But when he saw Mordecai sitting at the palace gate, not standing up or trembling nervously before him, Haman became furious. 10 However, he restrained himself and went on home.
Then Haman gathered together his friends and Zeresh, his wife, 11 and boasted to them about his great wealth and his many children. He bragged about the honors the king had given him and how he had been promoted over all the other nobles and officials.
12 Then Haman added, “And that’s not all! Queen Esther invited only me and the king himself to the banquet she prepared for us. And she has invited me to dine with her and the king again tomorrow!” 13 Then he added, “But this is all worth nothing as long as I see Mordecai the Jew just sitting there at the palace gate.”
14 So Haman’s wife, Zeresh, and all his friends suggested, “Set up a sharpened pole that stands seventy-five feet[a] tall, and in the morning ask the king to impale Mordecai on it. When this is done, you can go on your merry way to the banquet with the king.” This pleased Haman, and he ordered the pole set up. 5:9-14
Later that evening as the King experienced trouble sleeping he felt the strong desire to look up the history of his reign (Can we say, God inspired?) where he was reminded of the plot to assassinate him and the man, Mordecai, who exposed the plot. The King asked the question:
” 3 “What reward or recognition did we ever give Mordecai for this?” the king asked.
His attendants replied, “Nothing has been done for him.”
4 “Who is that in the outer court?” the king inquired. As it happened, Haman had just arrived in the outer court of the palace to ask the king to impale Mordecai on the pole he had prepared.
5 So the attendants replied to the king, “Haman is out in the court.”
“Bring him in,” the king ordered. 6 So Haman came in, and the king said, “What should I do to honor a man who truly pleases me?”
Haman thought to himself, “Whom would the king wish to honor more than me?” 7 So he replied, “If the king wishes to honor someone, 8 he should bring out one of the king’s own royal robes, as well as a horse that the king himself has ridden—one with a royal emblem on its head. 9 Let the robes and the horse be handed over to one of the king’s most noble officials. And let him see that the man whom the king wishes to honor is dressed in the king’s robes and led through the city square on the king’s horse. Have the official shout as they go, ‘This is what the king does for someone he wishes to honor!’”
10 “Excellent!” the king said to Haman. “Quick! Take the robes and my horse, and do just as you have said for Mordecai the Jew, who sits at the gate of the palace. Leave out nothing you have suggested!” 6:3-10
Yikes! Talk about taking your lumps in a heavy form of true humility. After Hman’s embarrassing parade thru town he now had to head over to the King’s for the banquet. The King once again made his request to Esther to make her desires known to him. The lumps were not over yet. Read on…
” 3 Queen Esther replied, “If I have found favor with the king, and if it pleases the king to grant my request, I ask that my life and the lives of my people will be spared. 4 For my people and I have been sold to those who would kill, slaughter, and annihilate us. If we had merely been sold as slaves, I could remain quiet, for that would be too trivial a matter to warrant disturbing the king.”
5 “Who would do such a thing?” King Xerxes demanded. “Who would be so presumptuous as to touch you?”
6 Esther replied, “This wicked Haman is our adversary and our enemy.” Haman grew pale with fright before the king and queen.” 7:3-6
It turns out that in order for ALL the Jews to be eradicated from the land that would also have to include Queen Esther who also happened to be a Jew herself. With Haman’s wicked plot now exposed the King executed justice swiftly and immediately.
” 9 Then Harbona, one of the eunuchs attending the king, said, "A gallows seventy-five feet high stands by Haman's house. He had it made for Mordecai, who spoke up to help the king."
The king said, "Hang him on it!" 10 So they hanged Haman on the gallows he had prepared for Mordecai.” 7:9-10 (NIV)
By the very gallows that Haman built to hang Mordecai on, he himself hung from. Justice in it’s truest form. As it is written, Haman reaped that which he planted.
And so it was with Saddam. A man, a tyrant, and brutal dictator who for almost 3 decades tormented, tortured, and murdered his own country men and any with in his reach who opposed him or his Presidency. This did not exclude family members.
On Saturday, December 30, 2006, Saddam hung from the jail house complex he once used to house over 15,000 political prisoners who simply "Voiced" opposition to his regime. It was there they suffered vicious and brutal torture's and were often killed. Many were even used as guinea pigs in chemical weapons test's.
It was a long time coming. Especially to the Iraqi people who lived in fear of his iron fist. All though Saddam requested to be executed by firing squad (this is viewed as dying with dignity), it was refused and rightfully so. He died as the common criminal that he was. Justice has been served!
Until next time...
31 comments:
So what was saddam finally hung for? Being a tyrant and murdering his own folk in which case can we look forward to a mopping up of evil tyrants across the globe? Or was he hung for not having the WMD's that we said he had but turned out he never? Don't get me wrong, nobody should lose any sleep over the loss of this evil, nasty man but what is the official reason and what do we say when asked by future generations why Saddam and not any of the other many much more dangerous tyrants striding the globe unmolested at this time?
Hey TIO!
It's a red-letter day...
I agree with you about Saddam!
Not about your opening bible verse, but Saddam's hanging, yessiree.
Lucy,
I thought for a former journalist you would have doen your homework a little better.
"So what was saddam finally hung for? Being a tyrant and murdering his own folk...?"
Not JUST his own folk. One of the items on the jury docket was his Reprisal Against Dujail. July 8, 1982 after being shot at by Dawa militant's during a visit to the region he punished the entire town by bulldozing the homes and destroying the orchards. As well as rounding up 140 "fighting age" men who were never heard from again. On top of that 1,500 (approx.) other townspeople, including children, were rounded up and taken to prison, where many were tortured.
" Or was he hung for not having the WMD's...?"
Actually, yes he was. Next up on the jury docket was his use of those "imaginary" Chemical Weapons Against Kurds. Remember April 1987 and into 1988 the Iraqis used chemical weapons to remove Kurds from their villages in northern Iraq during the Anfal campaign? (The campaign was also another one of the charges against him BTW)
Those "imaginary" WMD with a lethal combination of mustard gas and nerve agents rained down on almost 40 villages with the immediate effects causing blindness, vomiting, blisters, convulsions, and asphyxiation. Approx. 5,000 men, women, and children died within days of those attacks. The estimated 10,000 who surivived still suffer from the long term effects of permanent blindness, cancer, birth defects, disfigurement, and sicknesses. All the result of the chemical weapons he apparently never possessed.
"why Saddam and not any of the other many much more dangerous tyrants...?"
Hmmm Saddam "The Butcher of Baghdad" was responsible for the death of approx. 1,000,0000 people over 3 decades. Is there someone around today who tops that? Can only tackle them one at a time Lucy.
He was certainly not tried over nothing.
Karen,
"It's a red-letter day...
I agree with you about Saddam!"
Well that is a good way to start the New year off. Persuading a "lefty" from the dark side of the force (LOL)
Hey TIO,
I have to be honest - i didn't really click with the Biblical story you mentioned, though i understood the "justice" punchline. I suppose it is because i am not so familiar with it.
However it does remind me of a story that i know we are both familiar with (and i think there is little difference in the narration) - that of Prophet Joseph (the son of Prophet Jacob). How he was betrayed by his brothers and was sold as a slave in Egypt. However through a long process of many events, he eventually rose to the position of leader with his brothers unknowingly having to beg him for food rations during the seven years of famine.
But they all made up in the end, so the ending is not as bleak as your story!
TC
Hi iM,
Yes, I am quite familiar with the story of Jacob and Joseph. It is recognised in the Book of Genesis in the bible.
Although, as you say, it ends on a happier note it would not have illustrated my point as well as Esther did.
I used the Book of Esther to illustrate a parallel between what happened then and what happened now.
Haman built gallows to hang other's from and ended up hanging from them himself. Likewise, Saddam was hanged from the very same jails (Gallows if you will) that he committed his acts of brutality.
In the scriptures it tells us not to concern ourselves when we see evil flourish.(Not to mean we should nothing) Because God has decreed that the unrepentant will have their day. Saddam was defiant right to the end demonstrating absolutley no remorse for his wickdness.
Thru planning continous evil both Haman and Saddam had a part in orchestrating their own demise.
BTW iM, Saddam's hanging was the happy ending :)
Yes, the story you related was more fitting to Saddam's case.
As Lucy says (or implies), bring on the next evil dude.
TIO
Well that is a good way to start the New year off. Persuading a "lefty" from the dark side of the force (LOL)
Yeah, heh heh. No persuasion involved, tho. I'm pro-death penalty, which is an aberration for a lefty. I just have to swim against the tide at some points.
Next in line...GWB?
TIO -I will double check my homework but everything i have read/seen/heard cites Saddam Hussein was found guilty of killing 148 Shias in Dujail in 1982. The consensus in the media is that he SHOULD of been tried for the Anfal sluaghter but they have gone for the less sensitive option of trying him for Dujail.
The Anfal trial is a seperate entity that began after the Dujail trial but as he has already been executed, under Iraqi law, his name is dropped from the charge sheet.
We all knew he had chemical weapons in the 80s. There are pictures of Donald Rumsfeld shaking hands with him after agreeing to sell him the stuff.
TIO:
I fail to see the difference in whether he was hung or shot. Dead is dead.
So nowadays, no 1 honors the last request of a dying man? How the times, they have changed.
Those "imaginary" WMD with a lethal combination of mustard gas and nerve agents rained down on almost 40 villages with the immediate effects causing blindness, vomiting, blisters, convulsions, and asphyxiation.
Wait: are you talking about Hubuljra? I thought that was established as done by the Iranians, in the Iran-Iraqi war? Poisoned by sarin, if I'm not off. At the time, all Iraq had was mustard gas. 'Imaginary'? Thought that was all settled?
While the monster had it coming, I don't think that an execution of anyone is cause for celebration.
Besides which, doesn't Acts talk about a certain someone getting 'hung from a tree'? Hmmmm?
TIO,
You've got a great blog here, good stuff.
As for Mr. Hussein, he reaped what he sowed. His blood in on his own hands.
This is about Saddam, what he did. Trying to blame Bush or Rumsfeld for his actions simply won't cut it.
Patrick
Karen,
"Next in line...GWB? "
Here is a thought to ponder. GWB will let you get away with a statement like that because he supports your inherent right and freedom to say so. Saddam would have executed you under his regime just for typing it!
Count your blessings.
Lucy,
"Saddam Hussein was found guilty of killing 148 Shias in Dujail in 1982.
That alone should be enough to justify his execution. Although it was terribly long overdue considering this was one of his lesser crimes.
"We all knew he had chemical weapons in the 80s. There are pictures of Donald Rumsfeld shaking hands with him after agreeing to sell him the stuff."
This goes back to the old adage that "Guns don't kill people, people kill people". Did Donald fire the missles or Saddam? Your blaming Donald for Saddams actions. Saddam and Saddam alone needed to be held accountable for his choices.
KA,
"I fail to see the difference in whether he was hung or shot."
Actually so do I but in Iraq it is a bigger deal to them on how you are executed. One is considered honorable and the other disgraceful.
" I don't think that an execution of anyone is cause for celebration."
I not sure where you may feel I am "rejoicing" over this. I simply stated that Justice had been served.
Patrick,
Thanks for stopping in and the compliment. Appreciate it!
Please continue to visit.
TIO -
My question was, what was he actually hung for? I clearly remember him being offered the deal prior to invasion of being left to run his country if he scrapped all the WMD's which it turns out he never had anyway so the killing of 148 he was hung for (and not the greater crimes as i originally pointed out) were willing to be forgotten.
I would venture the conclusion that he was tried for the lesser crime and executed was as to avoid embaressment and awkward questions for the West that would of come with him being tried for the Anfal slaughter.
Ooooh, I remember reading the story of Queen Esther somewhere... it wasn't in much detail, though, so I learned something from your post :)
I totally agree with you on the whole justice/Saddam thing... in both this world and in the Next, God is the Greatest of Judges and He will cause justice to be served!
TIO
Here is a thought to ponder. GWB will let you get away with a statement like that because he supports your inherent right and freedom to say so. Saddam would have executed you under his regime just for typing it!
GWB has to let me get away with saying it, whether he supports my right to say it or not. That's what's so great about this country.
Saddam may have had me killed for it. GWB will just put me on a list and put a tap on my phone, my computer...
Karen,
Here here! I agree.
Karen,
Sorry for the delayed response. I have been on the road for the last two days.
"GWB has to let me get away with saying it"
No he does not. If he truly wanted to manipulate his position to the degree of a tyrannical dictator he could have done that. Just like any leader who holds the reign of power can attempt to do. However, in your country, I do not know how successful he would have been.
"GWB will just put me on a list and put a tap on my phone, my computer... "
But you still get to keep your head, right? Seriously though, the FBI, secret service, CIA, local law enforcement, the Hells Angels, the Italian mafia, the Jamican mob, the Asian gangs, etc. all do it now anyway. AND if "Hilarious" Clinton ever becomes your President you can bet she would find "justifiable cause" to do likewise.
Big brother is not a new or foreign concept.
TIO:
Actually so do I but in Iraq it is a bigger deal to them on how you are executed. One is considered honorable and the other disgraceful.
I understood all that. You did however, say 'it was refused, and rightfully so.'
Those who treat their enemies ungraciously in victory, bear close scrutiny.
I simply stated that Justice had been served.
In big bold letters.
Mind you, the man was an utter shitbag, pardon my french.
AND if "Hilarious" Clinton ever becomes your President you can bet she would find "justifiable cause" to do likewise.
Say whaaaat?
You are kidding, are you not?
Did Donald fire the missles or Saddam? Your blaming Donald for Saddams actions. Saddam and Saddam alone needed to be held accountable for his choices.
Oh, really? So by that logic, if someone sells drugs to a junkie, it's the junkie's fault, and only the druggee gets held accountable? Get real. There is a time & a place for guilt by association, & that's a grand example of it. So if a Pali blows his/herself up, we don't blame the Iman who persuaded them?
You were in the military, no? So if (hypothetically) your CO orders you to slaughter an entire village, is it the soldiers' fault, or does the CO carry the blame?
If a nation handed Syria or Iran a thermonuclear warhead, would we just gloss over that, or should we be outraged?
The latter, I think.
karen:
GWB has to let me get away with saying it, whether he supports my right to say it or not.
In all actuality, it's a federal offense to threaten the president.
KA
Nice job on the guilt by association stuff.
In all actuality, it's a federal offense to threaten the president.
A serious threat, yeah. But what I said was not a threat. All I said was "Next in line, GWB" implying that if he was found guilty of war crimes as Saddam was, he should be hanged. I wasn't threatening his life; I was threatening him with the justice system, to which even he is bound.
TIO
However, in your country, I do not know how successful he would have been. That would depend on how secretive he was about it and how adept his henchmen were. If he wanted to be a public tyrant, to say deliver a message, I don't think it would work. But if he just quietly had some guys visit my home and silence me, he could be very successful.
As for my head, I might still have it attached, but it would be useless.
I don't know why you pick out Hillary Clinton as someone who'd also bend or break the law to get what she wants. I have no particular investment in her, and don't think I've ever stated any.
I'll wait to see how you answer KA's query as to that point.
An Iraqi girl's perspective.
Ka,
"Those who treat their enemies ungraciously in victory, bear close scrutiny."
Are you suggesting he was deserving of an "honorable" death? He was not a prize POW, he was tried as the common criminal.
"In big bold letters."
Annnnd...your point is? I did have a chuckle on your "French" follow up. (LOL)
"You are kidding, are you not?"
Are you suggesting it is beyond her or any other Democrat?
"You were in the military, no?"
Uhmm nope! Not sure where that came from.
"if (hypothetically) your CO orders you to slaughter an entire village, is it the soldiers' fault, or does the CO carry the blame?"
By that analogy you are suggesting that your government, that did in fact, sell those weapons to Saddam (we both agree up to this point) then "Told" him to use them against his own people.
"Here Saddam! We are going to make a pile of money off of you. Your job is to fire those weapons at who WE tell you too. Oh, what's that you say? Your people are not submitting to your tyrannical terror. We (U.S. Government) hereby order you too gas them."
I am somehow not convinced that is how it all went down.
Here is my (I know, lame) analogy. If I sell my neighbor a gun for the protection of his own home and too have the ability to exercise self defense, this not only benefits him but me. As, hopefully, "would be" bandits would think twice about terrorizing my neighborhood and my interests. If on the other hand my neighbor decides that the weapon I sold him grants him a lot of power that goes to his head and decides to use that gun to rob, rape, murder, and pillage....is it my fault for his actions? That is, IF I am not telling him what to do with the weapons I sold him.
Guilty by association means there is one higher up the pole issuing, first the means, and then the orders. Not just the "means".
Karen,
"I don't know why you pick out Hillary Clinton as someone who'd also bend or break the law to get what she wants. I have no particular investment in her, and don't think I've ever stated any."
I was not suggesting that you did have any "investment" in her. As a democrat (I assume you are by your past renunciations of your current Republican government) I wanted to point out that manipulation of power, unfortunately, does not know political stripes. All politicians are still human and susceptible to the temptation it can wield. No exceptions. I picked Hillary just because she is one of the most recognized Democrat's up here.
No implication was intended.
iM,
Like your new logo.
Alright, let's begin with this interesting post you have linked. For the record, up front, any reference I make here after regarding acts of terrorism in the name of Islam/ Allah are not personally directed towards yourself or other Muslims who live out their faith in peace.
Here are just a few quotes I took from this angry girl's site.
"This really is a new low. It's outrageous- an execution during Eid. Muslims all over the world (with the exception of Iran) are outraged. Eid is a time of peace, of putting aside quarrels and anger- at least for the duration of Eid."
"No one imagined the madmen would actually do it during a religious holiday. It is religiously unacceptable and before, ....We thought we'd at least get a few days of peace and some time to enjoy the Eid holiday,"
(My response to the writer) Well so did the rest of Christendom during Christmas but apparently respect for our celebration of peace and goodwill towards man does not appear to warrant "a few days of peace" because the radicals of Islam (your religion BTW) have decided that cowardly acts of terrorism are the primary focus of such a day. Ironic how peace is to be expected during their time of Eid but no problem crapping on other's. Here are just a few examples of Islamic "low's" during my time of celebratory peace:
12/25/06 Iraq, Baghdad 10 killed 15 injured. Sunnis detonate a car bomb in a commercial center, killing ten innocents.
12/25/06 Iraq, Baghdad 3 killed 20 injured. A suicide bomber sends three others to Allah, and injures nearly two dozen people sitting on a crowded bus.
12/25/06 Iraq, Baghdad 3 killed 1 injured. Jihadis kill three U.S. military police with a roadside bomb.
12/25/06 India, Chingam 1 killed. A civilian is shot to death by the Mujahideen.
12/25/06 Thailand, Pattani 1 killed. A 36-year-old civilian is murdered by Muslim terrorists.
12/25/06 Pakistan, Dera Murad Jamali 3 killed. Three people, including a woman, are shot to death by a Muslim concerned about illicit sexual relations.
12/25/06 Iraq, Baqubah 6 killed. Six people are kidnapped, bound and executed by Islamic rivals.
She goes on near the end of the article,
"Who hangs for the hundreds of thousands who've died as a direct result of this war and occupation?"
16,791(to date) Iraqi civilians were killed last year by ISLAMIC Terrorists
I would have to say the Islamic radicals!
Here is another Iraqi's thought's on the "Tyrant"!
Hey TIO,
Don't mean to be rude but i think you missed the point of her article (plus i linked to it just to give another perspective, not to say i completely agree).
For a start, you should know full well that two wrongs do not make a right. The deporable acts you listed here, were carried out by terrorists - are governments now meant to stoop to the same low?
Saddam was not going anywhere. He could have been hung three days later (after Eid) or even in the new year.
I haven't read the entire blog, just the first two entries, but it is obvious that the author of the blog has no love loss for Saddam; she is just very disappointed in the behaviour of her government, who is supposed to be setting a good example to the people - if the government cannot hold onto to the moral higher ground, what do we expect from anyone else?
Also, the blog you linked to was not very happy with the puppet government of Iraq:
"The end of him can have several different meanings, I think today’s end was a bitter disappointment for me because it proved to me once in for all that the government and people in charge of Iraq are jokers."
Btw, this girl still lives in Iraq, whereas the author of the blog you linked to is an ex-pat:
"I am not a neutral person when it comes to Saddam Hussein. Ever since I was a child I was raised to hate the man, for making my parents leave their own country and live as foreigners in other countries are whole lives. I have lived in the United Arab Emirates, Canada and the UK and I am 25."
This does not mean he has any less right to comment on the horrors of this war, but his perspective is different to those living in the thick of it.
Best wishes,
iM
TIO
Yes, I am a registered democrat, with many libertarian leanings, but I don't vote by the party. I have even voted for (gasp) republicans when the person and their platform seemed the best choice.
I totally agree that "manipulation of power, unfortunately, does not know political stripes. All politicians are still human and susceptible to the temptation it can wield. No exceptions. So no argument there.
Another agreement! We should have a drink!
TIO:
Are you suggesting he was deserving of an "honorable" death? He was not a prize POW, he was tried as the common criminal.
I’m suggesting it makes no difference. His crimes against humanity outweigh the ‘dignity’ of his execution.
Are you suggesting it is beyond her or any other Democrat?
No, but you inferred that she was more LIKELY to do so, no? That's what I got from it. You addressed that in a prior post, so no big whoop.
Uhmm nope! Not sure where that came from.
I thought you mentioned Desert Storm, mos. ago.
By that analogy you are suggesting that your government, that did in fact, sell those weapons to Saddam (we both agree up to this point) then "Told" him to use them against his own people.
No, I’m not.
I am somehow not convinced that is how it all went down.
I’m not saying it was.
Here is my (I know, lame) analogy. If I sell my neighbor a gun for the protection of his own home and too have the ability to exercise self defense, this not only benefits him but me. As, hopefully, "would be" bandits would think twice about terrorizing my neighborhood and my interests. If on the other hand my neighbor decides that the weapon I sold him grants him a lot of power that goes to his head and decides to use that gun to rob, rape, murder, and pillage....is it my fault for his actions? That is, IF I am not telling him what to do with the weapons I sold him.
No: however, if you’ve observed some really OUTRE behavior, say, wearing tinfoil hats, or suspicious characters going in & out of his house at all hours, ranting & raving on his lawn about the govt. conspiracies, you get the gist. In short, said neighbor acts like a loon/junkie/drug dealer/wackadoo, wouldn’t you bear some culpability?
Guilty by association means there is one higher up the pole issuing, first the means, and then the orders. Not just the "means".
In actuality:
”Meaning #1: the attribution of guilt (without proof) to individuals because the people they associate with are guilty”
So let me ask this: if a dealer sells life-threatening substances, which result in people’s deaths, is there any guilt (partial or otherwise) on the part of the seller? After all, he didn’t TELL those people to shoot up, right?
Q-TIP,
My comment comes late,I was on little vacation.Even though I always choose to stand for life(especially when I smell politics and personal wars/paybacks are behind),I somehow see the point of eradicating Saddam from earth surface.However,there are countless fellows like Saddam still scouting our corridors.We call them our leaders,we name our streets after them,we chant and shout for them in parades etc.What do we do with them or even ourselves?Are we going to pretend that we do not know them and feel the world is safer without Saddam Hussein as the "preacher" preaches?What is it that blinds people to even fail to see that we,as people, have completely failed to know the word "peace"?Are we offended by our failures to the extent that we pretend to be blind,deaf and dumb?Is that what makes us masters of the universe? How many are on the death row list?
Post a Comment