Saddam has been dead for a week; yet, the “Times” is still Ranting about his execution!
What is wrong with the New York Times? Don’t they have other stories they can cover? Are the writers at the Times determined to make a martyr out of Saddam Hussein? Does the Times not care that such irresponsible journalism is causing more violence throughout the Muslim world? What about the lives of the American forces and the lives of the other Coalition and UN forces in Iraq and Afghanistan? What about the lives of the innocent civilians who will be killed?
Saddam was convicted in an Iraqi Court. Saddam went through an appeal process. That was far more than he gave his victims!
Saddam was a mass murderer found guilty for “one” of his crimes against humanity! To refresh the memory of the Times staff:
REMEMBER SADDAM HUSSEIN’S ATROCITIES
moreorless : heroes & killers of the 20th century
Atrocities attributed to Saddam Hussein and his regime
The War Crimes of Saddam Hussein
After seventeen years people of Halabja are still waiting for justice
I could add more until the list runs off the page. But, I won’t. So how about it, can’t the Times write about something other than Saddam’s execution like maybe the people he “killed?”
“What is wrong with the New York Times?”
They sold their souls to the Lefties.
“Are the writers at the Times determined to make a martyr out of Saddam Hussein?”
Yes, after all, he was a friend.
“Does the Times not care that such irresponsible journalism is causing more violence throughout the Muslim world?”
No, they see it as opportunity.
“What about the lives of the American forces and the lives of the other Coalition and UN forces in Iraq and Afghanistan? What about the lives of the innocent civilians who will be killed?”
It makes good copy.
I thought I was as disgusted as I could be with the media, but they just keep outdoing themselves…
YM, you have said it all very well as usual. I simply do not understand those people. It makes me sick.