Today, Saddam Hussein was executed after receiving a fair trial — the kind of justice he denied the victims of his brutal regime.
Fair trials were unimaginable under Saddam Hussein’s tyrannical rule. It is a testament to the Iraqi people’s resolve to move forward after decades of oppression that, despite his terrible crimes against his own people, Saddam Hussein received a fair trial. This would not have been possible without the Iraqi people’s determination to create a society governed by the rule of law.
Saddam Hussein’s execution comes at the end of a difficult year for the Iraqi people and for our troops. Bringing Saddam Hussein to justice will not end the violence in Iraq, but it is an important milestone on Iraq’s course to becoming a democracy that can govern, sustain, and defend itself, and be an ally in the War on Terror.
We are reminded today of how far the Iraqi people have come since the end of Saddam Hussein’s rule – and that the progress they have made would not have been possible without the continued service and sacrifice of our men and women in uniform.
Many difficult choices and further sacrifices lie ahead. Yet the safety and security of the American people require that we not relent in ensuring that Iraq’s young democracy continues to progress.
Now confirmed, in Spanish, on El Pais:
Los Bomberos del Ayuntamiento de Madrid y la DYA de San Sebastián han recibido sendas llamadas en las que se alertaba de la colocación de un artefacto, que iba a estallar a las 9.00 en el aparcamiento de la nueva terminal del aeropuerto madrileño de Barajas, la T-4. El artefacto estaba colocado en una furgoneta Renault Traffic. Al menos una persona ha resultado herida leve por la onda expansiva, según han informado a este periódico fuentes policiales de Madrid.
Un comunicante anónimo ha anunciado a la asociación de ayuda en carretera DYA de Guipúzcoa que una furgoneta cargada con un explosivo de gran potencia estallaría en la terminal 4 del aeropuerto de Barajas. Según ha informado la DYA guipuzcoana, la llamada se recibió a las 08.00 de la mañana y anunciaba la explosión para las 09.30.
I know just enough Spanish to make sense of it but Babel Fish’s translation might be safer:
The Firemen of the City council of Madrid and the DYA of San Sebastián have received individual calls in which he alerted myself of the positioning of a device, that was going to explode to 9,00 in the parking of the new terminal of the Madrilenian airport of Barajas, the T-4. The device was placed in a van Renault Traffic. At least one person has been minor wound by the rarefaction wave, according to have informed to this newspaper police sources into Madrid. An anonymous comunicante has announced to the association of aid in highway DYA of Guipúzcoa that a van loaded with an explosive of great power would explode in terminal 4 of the airport of Barajas. According to the Guipuzcoan DYA has informed, the call was received to 08,00 in the morning and announced the explosion for the 09.30.
And now from CNN which reports that there were no injuries:
Samantha Graham, an employee of CNN’s parent company who was in an airport concourse for a flight, said hundreds of people evacuated the terminal through jetways and have gathered outside on the airport tarmac.
The airport is Spain’s busiest, handling more than 40 million passengers a year, according to the airport’s official Web site.
It smells like an ETA attack:
Goodman said that previous explosions preceded by a warning in Spain were attributed to the Basque separtist group ETA, blamed for more than 800 deaths.
ETA earlier this year declared a permanent ceasefire, although this has been hit by tensions in recent weeks, Goodman said.
In March 2004, 191 people were killed by bomb attacks on Madrid commuter trains. The attacks, blamed on al-Qaeda-linked militants, were not preceded by any warning.
But it’s too soon to make the call. There’s more about ETA on Wikipedia.
It looks like ETA is claiming this attack:
La segunda llamada ofrecía similares datos a la realizada a la DYA con la diferencia de que dijo que comunicaba este hecho “en nombre de ETA”.
The second call offered similar data to the made one to the DYA with the difference of which it said that it communicated this fact “in name of ETA”.