> I know some people may take that article different ways, but for me it is an inspiration.

To me, it is an insight into the mind of a complex man, who has been - as he says - somewhat universally condemned by western media and leadership. It's a good thing to have an opportunity to hear something substantial directly from him, rather than through our administration.

His reply shows that he is at least an intelligent man, rather than the raving, unthinking butcher he's been portrayed as for the last ten years. Not that I'm exactly an Iraqi sympathizer, But I don't think of them as evil villains, either. And Saddam expresses what I think is the most realistic, honest thing he possibly could. For him to say "oh, I'm so sorry this happened to you. Iraq will be right there for you if you need us!" would be garbage. It would be untrue, and it would be meaningless. But what he did was express condolences to the people - to the families and friends of those who were killed in the attack, which he appears to think was unneccesary and brutal - though not to the country itself. And I think we'd be unjustified in expecting Saddam Hussein to be all broken up that bad things happened to our country.

True, he was very defensive, but he must be accustomed by now to having everything he says used against him by the western media. And, no, I don't take everything Saddam said as the universal truth, either. But it's good to see another perspective.

Altogether, I think Saddam has said exactly what he should have said. Not gushy and insincere, but not mean-spirited and uncaring, either. And the fact that he actually replied to this (personally, I think the bad grammar and poor translation are evidence that he *did* right it - I would expect a statement prepared by his ministry of propaganda to be translated more professionally) is almost amazing. I've sent several letters to the leadership of my own country and/or state, and never received anything other than a form letter saying "thanks for your opinion."