Too bad you have formed your opinion on the often wrong hysteria caused by the media.
You have no real knowledge of what really happened in this case, and my speculation was based on the very real bias against men in this society.
And by the way, dearie, even those reports you read in the paper--they are colored by the personal experiences of the reporters, have no doubt about it. You are VERY naive if you think there exists, outside of mathematics, any real, hard facts because most events in this life are subject to interpretation based on the bias of the viewer. So get off your holier-than thou highhorse.
Speculate all you want. It doesn't mean you automatically have some magic insight into this case. You can talk about "bias against men" but that doesn't make the victim (the WIFE) a bitch who probably got what she deserves. Despite the fact that you wish she was. See, that way, it makes sense to you. Men don't hurt anyone until a woman pushes them to it, according to your theory of the world.
So, what did Saddam's first wife do to make him such a lovely person?
Too bad you have formed your opinion on the often wrong hysteria caused by the media.
What hysteria? "Man shoots wife, self in front of kids" sounds like cold hard fact to me. He chose to murder his wife. I guess I'm "biased against men" if I conclude that he's a bad guy.
And by the way, dearie, even those reports you read in the paper--they are colored by the personal experiences of the reporters, have no doubt about it.
Are you saying maybe he didn't shoot his wife? That the report and the facts are "biased"? Yes, reports can be tainted by bias. I am hardly naive and I can spot it. The report in this story appears pretty straightforward. But if I missed a biased comment, please point it out to me.