In an Op-Ed entitled, “A Threat to Iraqi Women,” the New York Times attempts to say that Iraqi women had more freedom with Saddam Hussein than they do now.

“Saddam Hussein’s sadistic and murderous dictatorship was no feminist paradise. But Iraqi women still managed to maintain access to educational, professional and personal opportunities denied to many of their sisters in neighboring Arab and Islamic countries. Now the future of these freedoms is in serious question.”

I fear submitting a defense to the New York Time’s claims gives credence to the argument that Hussein was somehow protective of women’s rights in his own way, but I feel I must address this issue.

The Times fails to mention that, unlike Hussein’s tyrannical regime, the people of Iraq elect the officials in power. If you don’t like the politician or the policies, you do what you would do in America: vote him/her out.

According to Human Rights Watch’s November 2003 report, “Background on Women’s Status in Iraq Prior to the Fall of the Saddam Hussein Government,” things were actually very hard for the women of Iraq.

“In March 1990, a presidential decree was issued exempting men who kill or assault their female relatives in defense of their family’s honor from prosecution and punishment, resulting in a resurgence of a practice that had markedly decreased. Under the decree, a male defendant accused of murder or assault of a female relative may plead as a defense that he was motivated by a real or perceived breach of family honor. In murder cases, this defense can result in the reduction of the minimum prison term from eight years to six months.”

It is true that Iraqi women’s abysmal liberties were more than the non-existant ones of their fellows, but comparison of Iraq’s “women’s rights policies” to that of neighboring countries is like comparing Mussolini with Hitler. While one can argue that Hitler was the greater evil, Mussolini is far from sainthood. Comparing two evils does not validate the lesser evil.

For the New York Times to say that things were better then they are now reveals at best their ignorance or at worse their complete desire to do or say anything to discredit President Bush’s success.