Here's a curious passage from the main New York Times story on Saddam's
hanging:

Finally, he was ousted by an American-led invasion
force in 2003 and the country fell into a new round
of internal violence as THE RULE OF LAW DISINTEGRATED
and the Western invaders proved unable to control
a country in the aftermath of TOTALITARIAN RULE.

Presumably the Times didn't actually mean to equate "the rule of law"
with "totalitarian rule," but it's an interesting case of sloppiness.
Along similar lines is this from the Associated Press:

Hours after Saddam faced THE SAME FATE HE WAS
ACCUSED OF INFLICTING ON COUNTLESS THOUSANDS
during a quarter-century of ruthless power,
Iraqi state television showed grainy video of
what it said was his body, the head uncovered
and the neck twisted at a sharp angle.

"Bush is behind the entire horrid affair. He deliberately falsely
accused Saddam Hussein of being a immediate threat to America, and
when
the president of Iraq denied it and wiser men here and abroad
questioned Bush's motives and arguments, and when the president of
Iraq
even offered to allow foreign inspectors access to anywhere in his
country, including his own residences, to validate this, Bush quickly
launched an attack.
Bush dismantled the government and destroyed the country's
infrastructure, meanwhile making the seizure of the nation's oil
refineries a priority, and began to build the world's largest "embassy
complex" right in the heart of historic Baghdad, while all around the
civilization of Iraq crumbled.
Bush designed and installed a new puppet-regime under his dictatorial
command, and also orchestrated an unjust show trial with Saddam's
enemies in primary roles to kill him. The charges were that Saddam
had
authorized the killing of insurgents against the Iraqi government
without allowing the accused the benefit of legal proceedings (EXACTLY ...