I just had to look (having read the book)

Saddam video

Well I admit it - I watched un cellphone video of Saddam being hanged, because I was curious & I’ve certainly had never seen someone being hanged before. It was desturbing, particularly for someone who doesn’t believe in the death penalty, and I wouldn’t recommend watching it if you are easily desturbed. I woke up in the middle of the night thinking about it.

Although I couldn’t understand what anyone was saying on the video, it did seem to me like an unruly affair, particularly with someone being able to tape w/o being stopped or caught. And now we find out what was really going on today & the Sunni’s are protesting. We also know why the “official” video had no sound, because it would have been embarassing.

Ironically, the butcher of Baghdad came across dignified, well dressed & groomed, and the viewers were like a mob. And today it appears that the execution was rushed through, even illegal? I’m certainly not going to miss Saddam but it will interesting how this all plays out.

<!–QuoteBegin>

Quote
And today it appears that the execution was rushed through, even illegal?

Well, there’s a lot of people thinking the whole thing was a fiasco, from the invasion, to the occupation, to the trial, to the execution.

Willy.

The Execution of Saddam was a good thing, as was the whole Iraq war.

Because, it brings all those people who died on 9/11 back again.

Er…or something like that.

…Wasn’t it? ???

No, that wasn’t it was it?

We killed 600,000 plus 1 Iraqis because Saddam had Weapons of Mass Destruction… like N Korea, and France, and all those ex soviet nations.

Except of course, he didn’t.

But that’s OK, it’s the principle that matters! :)

Former Saddam judge says execution violates Iraqi law

Quote (Guest @ Jan. 02 2007,11:57)
No, that wasn't it was it?

We killed 600,000 plus 1 Iraqis because Saddam had Weapons of Mass Destruction........ like N Korea, and France, and all those ex soviet nations.

Except of course, he didn't.

But that's OK, it's the principle that matters! :)

600,000 now?

Mind providing a link for that?

I’ll do better than that, and give two links: :)

http://www.thelancet.com/webfile…919.pdf

http://web.mit.edu/CIS/pdf/Human_Cost_of_War.pdf

Of course, Bush disagrees, and puts the number of Iraqi casualties at 30,000.

However, despite repeated questioning, he will not give the source for his figures nor how they were estimated.

Divinely given knowledge perhaps?

But it don’t really matter if the real number is 30,000 or 600,000 does it? Either number is horrific.

If you’re the parent of one single child who’s been blown to pieces, then that number of ‘1’ is way too much.

Violence rarely solves anything. In this case what I saw on TV were Iraqi kids perhaps 10 years old, maybe younger, waving guns and cheering the death of another human being. A very evil human being, but a human being none the less. Just think about what values that generation will have.

Good thing all those Christian leaders of ours led us into this. Yep. Good thing. 'Cause I would have thought it unChrisitan otherwise. But George W knows best, and God is in control, now, isn’t he?

The execution was just wrong on so many levels.

Quote (TomS @ Jan. 02 2007,19:51)
Violence rarely solves anything. In this case what I saw on TV were Iraqi kids perhaps 10 years old, maybe younger, waving guns and cheering the death of another human being. A very evil human being, but a human being none the less. Just think about what values that generation will have.

Good thing all those Christian leaders of ours led us into this. Yep. Good thing. 'Cause I would have thought it unChrisitan otherwise. But George W knows best, and God is in control, now, isn’t he?

The execution was just wrong on so many levels.

Yeah agreed Tom,

The teachings of Christ certainly don’t support such actions.

So what teachings are they following?

It seems the term “Christians” is like any other stereotype, and is able to be used to define anyone who follows a religion, wether or not they follow Christ “being the man named Yeshua” or not.
This wouldn’t happen if we gave test to people before they could claim a title, like Dr.
I mean we have whole schools and universities dedicated to supporting the credentials for someone to call themselves a Dr.
And they first must past the test, the many many test.
And then there’s the residency. Lot’s of “practice”, even years, before they can put Dr. on the door.

No such standard to put the title of “Chrisitian” on ones self.

But does not Jesus say we will know His tree by their fruit?
(or something to that effect, since we can’t really be sure he said that, beyond a reasonable doubt.)

So, if He is in fact the source of such a saying, than what does this fruit say of those “Christians” in leadership roles in the US?

keep shinin’

jerm :cool:

Perhaps you don’t agree with me, really, Jeremy.

Deut 32: 36-42 (just as an example)

36 The LORD will judge his people
and have compassion on his servants
when he sees their strength is gone
and no one is left, slave or free.

37 He will say: "Now where are their gods,
the rock they took refuge in,

38 the gods who ate the fat of their sacrifices
and drank the wine of their drink offerings?
Let them rise up to help you!
Let them give you shelter!

39 “See now that I myself am He!
There is no god besides me.
I put to death and I bring to life,
I have wounded and I will heal,
and no one can deliver out of my hand.

40 I lift my hand to heaven and declare:
As surely as I live forever,

41 when I sharpen my flashing sword
and my hand grasps it in judgment,
I will take vengeance on my adversaries
and repay those who hate me.

42 I will make my arrows drunk with blood,
while my sword devours flesh:
the blood of the slain and the captives,
the heads of the enemy leaders.”

What a nice guy he is, Jeremy. :D In any case, the violence practiced in Jesus’ name by Presidetn Bush seems to agree quite nicely with the moral theory of this and similar passages. Onee needn’t claim the special moral authority of the Bible, Qu’ran, Tanak, or what have you, to be against violence, and in fact those sources depict a rather bloodthirsty god or gods. Better off without them, for a rational moral view.

BTW, I wrote a song using your final line, “keep shining.” I’ll post it with your permission. You’ll like it, it is very positive. :)

Quote (TomS @ Jan. 07 2007,18:32)
Perhaps you don’t agree with me, really, Jeremy.

Deut 32: 36-42 (just as an example)

36 The LORD will judge his people
and have compassion on his servants
when he sees their strength is gone
and no one is left, slave or free.

37 He will say: "Now where are their gods,
the rock they took refuge in,

38 the gods who ate the fat of their sacrifices
and drank the wine of their drink offerings?
Let them rise up to help you!
Let them give you shelter!

39 “See now that I myself am He!
There is no god besides me.
I put to death and I bring to life,
I have wounded and I will heal,
and no one can deliver out of my hand.

40 I lift my hand to heaven and declare:
As surely as I live forever,

41 when I sharpen my flashing sword
and my hand grasps it in judgment,
I will take vengeance on my adversaries
and repay those who hate me.

42 I will make my arrows drunk with blood,
while my sword devours flesh:
the blood of the slain and the captives,
the heads of the enemy leaders.”

What a nice guy he is, Jeremy. :D In any case, the violence practiced in Jesus’ name by Presidetn Bush seems to agree quite nicely with the moral theory of this and similar passages. Onee needn’t claim the special moral authority of the Bible, Qu’ran, Tanak, or what have you, to be against violence, and in fact those sources depict a rather bloodthirsty god or gods. Better off without them, for a rational moral view.

BTW, I wrote a song using your final line, “keep shining.” I’ll post it with your permission. You’ll like it, it is very positive. :)

Yeah I’m familar with that song,
"Song of Moses"

It’s possible it was never considered scripture by the Jews, since it is believed to have been added to Deuteronomy by the deuteronomist during the second addition. And may very well not have been part of the original Torah.
In the earlier verses in the chapter it is clear it is written in a time after Moses, the Israelites are settled in Palestine-Verse 13-14 (by all accounts Moses never entered into Canaans land)

When read in context with the rest of the chapter God would be speaking in the prophetic, but the enemy spoken of at some point could be the Jews who do not keep the way of Yahweh.
Even if the poem is speaking of enemies of the Jews, like the Assyrians with such saying as “those which are not a people” that would further support the hypothesis that it was written in the age of Jeremiah and Ezekiel, which would mean it could not have been written by Moses.
Niether does the stylistic format which is more typical of the closing years of Exile, which would place it closer to the period of the second Isaiah.
Even of one were to ignore all the acedemic evidence, and concur that this is a poem of Moses; it would still not be wise to considered it scripture even by the Jewish standard of the days of Jesus.
It would most likely have been contained in the “Writings” section with the Psalms and other such texts, since it certainly would not be considered LAW, but there is the possiblity it would have been classified within the Prophets text.

Context is everything when it comes to scripture, so no reading of this without knowing it’s context is wise discourse.
Quote (TomS @ Jan. 07 2007,18:32)

Perhaps you don’t agree with me, really, Jeremy.

Well let’s see shall we…
Quote (TomS @ Jan. 07 2007,18:32)

Violence rarely solves anything.

Agreed.
Quote (TomS @ Jan. 07 2007,18:32)

In this case what I saw on TV were Iraqi kids perhaps 10 years old, maybe younger, waving guns and cheering the death of another human being. A very evil human being, but a human being none the less. Just think about what values that generation will have.

Agreed. And there are actually scriptures to that effect.
Generational curses…innocent blood being shed on land and this cursing it as well, and so and and so forth.
Quote (TomS @ Jan. 07 2007,18:32)

Good thing all those Christian leaders of ours led us into this. Yep. Good thing. ‘Cause I would have thought it unChrisitan otherwise. But George W knows best, and God is in control, now, isn’t he?

Agreed, I beleive I clarified this agreement in my first reponce.
Quote (TomS @ Jan. 07 2007,18:32)

The execution was just wrong on so many levels.

Agreed.
In the account of the adulterous woman, Jesus cetainly didn’t support capitol punishment. But even if it was the LAW according to Deuteronomy 22:22-24 (which many believe was added by sects of preist, not given to Moses by god) The purpose of this Law even if it was not given by God was to “Put evil from among you”. But In doing so you would have needed “righteous” people to do the stoning. Which Jesus clearly proved there was none there “Let he who is without sin cast the first stone”. And this LAW stipulated that both guilty parties whould be put to death.
And where was the man she was caught with? Was he allowed to discreetly slip away? Was he in the crowd, stone in hand? Did Jesus know that? Was that why he said what he did?
It would seem Jesus was also be speaking about a double standard that the LAW was being used to enforced.
Would he have acted differently if both were there to be stoned?
How about if there had been a few without sin there to properly enact the punishment?
No the matter of hanging. Is that method not illegal in the US?
What of the UN Treaties for muman treatments of prisoners during wartime?
As you say, wrong on so many levels.


As far as the song using my line ‘keep shinin’ go for it, I don’t own it.
It is actually a borrowed term, first The Simpsons “Willy” character borrowed it from Steven Kings "The Shining"
THE boys got ths shinin’–in a thick Welsh accent or was it Scottish? Don’t want to upset any of our foreign fellows by improper cultural linguistic reference.


keep shinin’

jerm :cool:

“The Jews” hmm?

No wonder Jews worry about Christians, Jeremy.

IN any case, aside from that bit of anti-Semitism, I’m really impressed - you surprised me - identifying layers of composition in the text - that’s really a good thing Jeremy!

IN any case, let’s vote against the war mongers, and follow in the footsteps of your jesus freak parents. They seemed like very nice people to me, and on the right track. :D

Quote (TomS @ Jan. 07 2007,21:03)
"The Jews" hmm?

No wonder Jews worry about Christians, Jeremy.

IN any case, aside from that bit of anti-Semitism, I'm really impressed - you surprised me - identifying layers of composition in the text - that's really a good thing Jeremy!

IN any case, let's vote against the war mongers, and follow in the footsteps of your jesus freak parents. They seemed like very nice people to me, and on the right track. :D

I will appologize for any offence my words may have given.

Is there another more politically correct and less offensive name this group prefers to be called by?

Yeah I might even be learning a thing or two about the Bible! lol

It does seem important to me, since at times I seem to share a Spirit that is not anything like my own.
It seems only fitting to find out where this "Spirit" comes from and who else may have had dealings with it.

I would just as soon vote in a communial society simular to the Essenes, if I didn't know for sure that such a handing over of power would eventually result in it being misused.
Vote? Should I vote against war mongers? Then who is left standing?
Please keep me informed on these political matters since I am unable to see any worthy canidates for me to support.
And without that knowledge, it would be foolhardy for me to just go out and cast my lot.

Keep shinin'

jerm :cool:

Shoot, wish I knew scripture or bible talk as well as you guys, but I dont…so wont go there; it was just people like us many years ago that wrote it, and they wrote what they felt like, religious or not, and no matter what you think, they were just people. Prophets? hmmmmn! Dogma to follow?! (just words)

But this thread started out about killing someone, Saddam Hussein for being an atrocious human being.

I find it barbaric that we (US), would back a govmnt there that would resort to this hanging. We just halted the executions in a couple of states because of “botched IV’s” and the USA would never consider hanging a “humane death”. Funny, we look at how to kill someone that does not cause pain, or “undue duress”, whatever that means.

How do you kill someone “humane” ???

Dont know that we should be even asking this question?

Scott

<!–QuoteBegin>

Quote
…and the USA would never consider hanging a “humane death”.

Not so quick there. The State of Washington still does it, but only if the guilty party requests it.

http://www.doc.wa.gov/deathpenalty/deathpnlty.htm

lalala flowers and pretty things lalala … give it up y’all suck

Quote (Guest @ Jan. 10 2007,01:31)
lalala flowers and pretty things lalala ........ give it up y'all suck

You know me, good sir! :)

But only Guiness, only Guiness...