Sometime between 1:07 a.m. and 8:06 p.m. Sunday, it was announced that Saddam Hussein will be hanged for his role in the 1982 killings of 148 people in a single Shiite town after an attempt on his life. Of the eight total people in this particular trial, only one, Mohammed Azawi Ali was acquitted due to lack of evidence. For all of those who believed that this was a crock trial set up by the United States to get Hussein, one has to wonder why all seven weren't convicted.
Interestingly enough, it was brought to my attention that over 650,000 Iraqis have died since Hussein was forced out of power. I was also informed, albeit somewhat erroneously, that the toppling of Hussein was because of oil. Perhaps this is because only a portion of our oil imports comes from Iraq; 5% to be exact. This is behind Venezuela at 10%. But not one single Middle-Eastern country can say it is the number one supplier of oil to the United States.
I won't divulge the name of the country that holds that title. But you can go to  (see end of the article) to find out for yourself. The website is the Energy Information Administration website. The EIA is a part of the Department of Energy and this would be the governmental agency that would tell you all you need to know about the US oil dependency. You might also be surprised to learn that the largest producer of oil in the world is not in the Middle East either nor is it even a member of OPEC!!! AND, of the top 15 countries from which we import oil, this nation is 11th! This website will provide you with the answer to this question: http://www.gravmag.com/oil.html.
So, now that we all know that Iraq is not among the top 5 countries from which we import our oil and that its contribution is only 5% of our total import, can we please stop with the "the war in Iraq is about oil" mantra? We get more oil from Mexico (15%) than we do Iraq and I don't see the President amassing troops along the Rio Grande!
Something else that bothered me about the additional, yet erroneous, information was that the toppling of Hussein was to benefit Halliburton. I find it interesting that Halliburton has managed to retain its status as a government contractor, once even receiving help from a president. You see the one time that Halliburton actually lost a government contract (which it has had many over the years, not just since 2001), the decision was overruled by the president and actually handed to Halliburton. Of course this would be wonderful news for the Democrats on Tuesday if it could be said that this happened under President George W. Bush, but unfortunately for them, it didn't.
The U.S. Army Logistics Civil Augmentation Program (LOGCAP) contract with Halliburton came up for renewal in 1997 (and right now the name of the person who was president in 1997 escapes me) and Halliburton (specifically the Kellogg Brown & Root division of Halliburton) actually lost the contract to Dyncorp. But, the president in 1997 (I wish I could remember his name¦) outright awarded a sole-source contract to Halliburton/KBR effectively vetoing the award to Dyncorp even though this bidding process had been a full-scale competitive bid for LOGCAP!
Read the whole story about the Dyncorp/LOGCAP end-around run. I suggest having a bag of potato chips at hand; the article will take some time to read. My posting of the overview here is for those liberal Democrats who like to believe everything the main-scream media (humble bows to Larry Elder) tells them and doesn'™t want to check out for themselves.
I can hear readers salivating at the prospect of "catching" me on the point that I did not address the weapons of mass destruction. Well, as the saying goes, "get in, sit down, shut up and hang on. It's going to be a wild ride." Again, the main-scream media wants us all to believe that there were no weapons whatsoever once coalition forces went into Iraq. But if I were to mention the name Georges Sada, would that mean anything to you? Probably not. Georges Sada was a general in Saddam's army and a trusted official of the dictator. His book, Saddam's Secrets: How an Iraqi General Defied & Survived Saddam Hussein details not only the fact that the weapons did exist but also the reality of what happened to them.
He has spoken many times across the United States on the subject of Hussein's reign and knows firsthand what went on behind closed doors in Baghdad. In a nutshell, the weapons were smuggled out of Iraq on converted commercial airliners into Syria under the guise of "humanitarian aidâ" to that nation. How ironic. The man guilty of murdering innocent people labels a shipment of weapons of mass destruction under the banner of humanitarian aid.
You see there were 19 resolutions issued by the United Nations ordering Saddam Hussein to comply and cooperate with weapons inspectors and every single one of those resolutions were ignored. The whole thing was becoming like a Marx Brothers movie! The UN was a resolution printing press. All of the resolutions were carrying the message: "Comply, or we'll say "comply" again. The whole time the UN was shouting "Comply", Saddam was doing a little soft-shoe dance to keep us from noticing those planes flying out of Iraq. Of course, with the banner "Humanitarian Aid" flying proudly from the tail of those planes, everyone was thinking, "gee, this guy isn't so bad after all."
I recommend all liberals read Sada's book and just think about what this man is saying. He wasn't exactly a model muslim either. In fact, he was a Christian in a place where Christians were hated and even killed just for standing in the street!
This whole thing is just like"The X-Files" - The truth is out there, you just have to know where to look.