Saddam's Hanging - Lights, Camera, Action

Newsday, my local paper, ran an editorial that condemned the video of Saddam’s hanging. Here’s part of that editorial:

“The grotesque video of the hanging, with the barbaric taunts hurled at a condemned man facing his last moments of life, showed the execution for what it truly was - a raw and shameful exercise in sectarian vengeance. It exposed the ineptitude and crudeness of Iraq’s current government. It threw into serious doubt the leadership’s ability to bring unity to that nation, let alone heal its wounds. And it leads us to wonder whether Iraq’s tragedy can ever be resolved without a bloodbath” (Newsday, 1/5/07).

I’m suspect Newsday reflects the views of papers across the country. Strange isn’t it? In our society, we look for closure and healing on every death. Well, perhaps Iraqis feel the same way. Depending on what they had to gain or lose, many Iraqis both hoped and feared that some day, Saddam would return to power. Those hoping were probably fellow Sunnis. Those fearing were the much larger groups of Shiites and Kurds. Now they’ve seen him at the end of a rope – aren’t they entitled to closure?

Why is proof to the Iraqis and the world that Saddam is dead considered “grotesque”? The estimates I’ve read indicate that he directed the murders of 200,000 to 2,000,000 Iraqis, with most of them above 1,000,000. What is true is that Iraq’s population was 15,000,000 twenty years ago. It is now 13,000,000. Many of those may have left Iraq, but they left under Saddam’s less-than-benevolent rule.

Instead of being condemned as “a raw and shameful exercise in sectarian vengeance”, maybe the video of his hanging should be called insurance. Other tyrants may rise to power in the future, but one of them won’t be Saddam. Those who feared him can be relieved and try to make the most of the opportunity. Those who supported him can resign themselves to his death and join the effort to rebuild the country. What Iraqis make of the opportunity is up to them, but at least they don’t have the specter of Saddam’s return shaping events.

Now I’d like to get back to our American opinion makers. If filming or recording an execution is so “grotesque”, why does the press always want the right to send a reporter to witness executions here in the U.S.A.? Why is it okay for the press to watch the lethal injection or electrocution of a total stranger? Does the presence of the press add dignity to the occasion? The press is there to sell papers and increase ratings. How noble. If that’s okay, why would it be grotesque for Iraqis and the world to be assured that a monster, who has murdered hundreds of thousands and threatened to murder more, is now out of the picture?

By the way, how do our papers know all the details of Saddam’s hanging? They watched the video, a right they would grant only to themselves, but not the Iraqis who suffered from him.

One last, final thought – do you think our press would be so pious if someday they were holding a video of Bin Laden’s execution?

www.xomba.com/xombyte/thewonderer

Technorati Profile