Dear Wikipedia Neutrality guardian Re Saddam Hussein entry no one has yet to answer my question why do the live palestinians deserve mention in the primary intro for a non palestinian leader but the Slaughtered Kurds of Saddam s own countrymen do not You could have Written Some parts of the Arab world admired Saddam for standing up to the west Without mentioning the Palestinians just like you refuse to mention the slaughtered Kurds But you insist on mentioning the Palestinians and further conceal any remnant of opposing POV with the fascist s friend the term human rights situation which you hope anyone can interpret as anything Are you claiming that the horrors both existed and didn t exist depending on who you ask where are all those dead kurds then revive them I m sure they will be glad to read in wikipedia that what was done to them was only a situation A situation is good Elain in Seinfeld has situations comes and goes They can dig up their graves and go home to watch the reruns Never mind the bodies they will soon rot and everyone would have forgotten all about it Shhhhhhh But Only one thing as sure as the Sun existed didn t it The palestinians and their glee that s as solid as Iron who needs proof its the Palestinians Amen Do you have a paraplegic handy by any chance I want to know a rational arumgent of why it is so important and humanitarian to disguise Saddams undisputed DNA proven horrors It must be VERY important there must be some divine logic here beyond my rationality Oh It will upset the palestinians sure don t you think Saddam s other little hobbies other than encouraging palestinians have upset at least the same number of people or largeer why do you stifle their emphasis then Either you stifle ALL non Iraqi effects of Saddam or you mention them NEUTRALLY that means not ONLY the palestinians Are you perhaps saying that 10 000 gassed kurds and their millions of grieving relatives supporters are less important than 2 million live palestinians with no direct contact to Iraqi affairs other than a blushing glee at Saddam s deeds if so how many how many non palestinians does it take to die till that issue becomes important enough to mention if it contrasts the palestinian POV a million 6 million by any chance does this number mean anything to you or do you just file it in you head as Human rights situation and how many palestinians angry that 1 1 2 would it take for you to remove all the henceforth controversial entries on mathematics 3 palestinians 4 perhaps remember how to count women They won t like it unless you count women as 1 2 for men they might cause something to your Human rights situation otherwise And this pargraph an increase in human rights abuses notably acts of genocide against Iraqi Kurds The United States continued to view Saddam with deep suspicion however primarly due to his pursuit of weapons of mass destruction do you have any factual references that dispute any of this supported FACTS not liberal wishful illusions all of it is corroborated in the links And this Thanks for pointing this out I suspect that it was removed because an anon is getting a kick out replacing non controversial matter of fact statements like the above with overtly emotive deliberately provocative ones Are you hinting that this sentence While he remained a popular hero among many disaffected Arabs for standing up to the West and for his unflinching support for the Palestinians is a NPOV what proof do you have of his support of the palestinians are ther any references of this or just hearsay Just call wikipedia the Western Edition of Pravda and be done with it never mind that the Palestinian POV is merely matter of morale and the opposing POV rests on actual crimes of war how in your humane conscience can you condone this state of affairs And I do nt wan t to skewer anyone either If I wante to Skewer Saddam I would have called him a Hitler wannabe Little Stalin the prince of evil and so forth This is skewering Mentioning FACTS is never skewering even if the palestinians don t like them