RANIER first :) sorrrrry mate.. I must be a right pain in the rear.
But if you don't have someone to whinge about..what would life be ? :)

Rob, no, it was Rainer not you.. Ranier said "maybe JC was right about forgiveness"

But your point about Jesus cry to the Father on the Cross, 'Father forgive them' I understand to be more of an outpouring of Gods incredible love for mankind, that specific teaching on the subject of forgiveness without repentance. Note Peter in Acts2, speaking to the same people

"23 This man was handed over to you by God's set purpose and foreknowledge; and you, with the help of wicked men,[d] put him to death by nailing him to the cross."

37When the people heard this, they were cut to the heart and said to Peter and the other apostles, "Brothers, what shall we do?"

NOW...we have it.

38Peter replied, "Repent and be baptized, every one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins."

Stephen, while being stoned said:

59While they were stoning him, Stephen prayed, "Lord Jesus, receive my spirit." 60Then he fell on his knees and cried out, "Lord, do not hold this sin against them."

Its a cry of love from the heart. But ultimately, repentance is the key to forgiveness.

Oh that we all would know this love. Sometimes I'm like Moses. God told him SPEAK to the stone and water will come out. But, Moses WHACKED the stone while rebuking the recalcitrant Israelites. (Numbers 20:7-11)
Its so easy to be like that..

C.J. thanx for the promotion :) You should re-phrase it as follows:
"And to the extent Boazy speaks faithfully to Scripture, he is one of Gods messengers". Nothing special about me though, in fact many 'UNspecial' things.
Your assessment of Socialists as the ferals and their hangers on, is spot on, having witnessed them at 2 demonstrations now.

I agree that Saddam was a war criminal but the point of his hanging was purely symbolic. He didn't want to live, he wanted a firing squad as this would be more heroic way to go. They succeeded in humiliating his legacy.

The message from the west was the extent of disgust towards terrorism. This was tokenistic justice for those hundreds that were killed under his regime.

With this aside, the defiance of Saddam represents an idea much like Guy Folks was to England and Ned Kelly was to Australia. Admittedly, neither Guy Folks nor Ned Kelly were mass murderers in their time. Nor were they in positions of power in Government. They all had cult followings that turned their stories into heroic struggles. This is something we cannot deny.

In strategy, his hanging was indelicate and untimely. The human rights activists are more concerned about the reactions to the event rather than the verdict itself.

We really must stop finger pointing to the US when Australia is virtually a twin under John Howard.

The coat hanger at NYE, that is, the night of Saddam Hussein's death, was verging on inciting violence from those in the Islamic community. They may not have agreed with Saddam and his Bath Party, but could see this as dancing on the graves of their "matyrs". Here we are, celebrating under a coat hanger, Saddam hangs. Was that smart?

Islamic culture follows numerology and takes ritual and symbolism very seriously. This is not the time to draw attention to Australia, and have symbols that, by accident, celebrates a death.

Of course it was part of the 75th anniversary of the Harbor Bridge, but do religious fundamentalists believe in coincidence?

saintfletcher said:
The coat hanger at NYE, that is, the night of Saddam Hussein's death, was verging on inciting violence from those in the Islamic community. They may not have agreed with Saddam and his Bath Party, but could see this as dancing on the graves of their "matyrs". Here we are, celebrating under a coat hanger, Saddam hangs. Was that smart?
unquote

What utter nonsense, who cares anyway that Saddam met his end 10,000
miles away on New Years Eve, by our time.
As if we should give away our celebrations just because there was to be
an excecution in another part of the world.
Anyway judging by what was televised from Auburn they were not unhappy
about it all.
For heavens sake (no pun intended) get some perspective on it all.

I'm glad we don't have the death penalty...and that we never lived under the regime of Saddam Hussein or any of the other mad men that get inflicted on innocents across the world.

Saddam's passing is no tragedy, even if the means was. Can't help but think of those Kurdish children who spewed, gurgled and shook to death with the evil impact of nerve agents. There is nothing humane or dignified about Saddam's life or his death.

Saddam ,so many say, was responsible for killing large amounts of people.
But isn't that the way of life[and death] in the Middle East? It is the normal pattern, has been so for ever and unless there is some earth shattering change , it will go on .
The worst bit is that we have permitted the very same people to immigrate here, bringing all their hatreds and violence with them. When their rightful place is the Middle East where the violence belongs.
Saddam was normal, usual.....for the ME. There are plenty more like him.

"To answer a post of Robert's, I don't think it's because Hussein was a celebrity that we're interested in his execution. I think it's because of our attitudes to capital punishment, and also anyone being killed cold-bloodedly. If he'd been blown up during the conflict by a US missile or bomb I think my reaction would have been quite different."
Posted by GrahamY, Tuesday, 2 January 2007 9:10:25 PM

Even if he was killed in a bomb blast he would still have got a lot more press than any unfamiliar innocent killed cold-bloodedly. There is an important principle in life, relationships and propaganda and that is, 'what the eye does not see, the heart does not grieve over.'

Look at the outcry over the death of this one man - there has been no similar outcry about the death of any one of the innocent 'nobodies' who died in Kurdistan or Dujail.

All the issues you raised are true and legitimate - things are rarely just simple but my point is still valid because the fame is still an essential factor, ie when you remove it the result changes.

There has been so much reaction and response to Saddam Hussein's death because we were made more intimate to it and we were made more intimate to it by the coverage of it - and Saddam got the coverage because he was famous.

Boazy - you accept Old Testament references over the word of Jesus? You add fuel to my argument of another thread that modern Christianity is merely Judaism rebranded - with the word of Jesus being ignored if it doesnt suit - remember 'Love thy Enemies, do good works for those who mercilessly use and despise you.' I dont see too many 'Christian' world leaders 'loving their enemies' do you?