Being fluent in English and a 'Christian', Iraq's deputy minister Tariq Aziz somehow gets away with coming across as a sane, moderate voice (as he did when recently interviewed by Canadian news anchor Peter Mansbridge on CBC). In reality, of course, he is second in command to one of the most despicable tyrants in the world. For Aziz to occupy his position for so many years, he would have to be absolutely loyal to Saddam, sharing the same repugnant traits and values.

I'm sure the Pope does not condone the atrocities committed by Iraq's regime, but the news and pictures of him embracing Aziz like an old pal almost made me nauseous, much like I felt when he met with Slobodan Milosevic a few years ago. I realize the Pope has a duty as a religious leader to try to foster peace in the world, but I doubt if anything was accomplished by the meeting other than Aziz scoring a few propaganda points for Iraq.

You don't need to put Christian in quotation marks: he is, most likely, Chaldean.

The Chaldeans are Iraqi Christians.

http://www.chaldeansonline.net/chald.html

"Finally, let us also remember, that the new religion of Christianity (600 years before the coming of Islam to Mesopotamia) was able to mold all the inhabitants of Mesopotamia into one Assyrian/Chaldean/Syriac people. The persecution against the followers of this religion by the then Persian rulers of Mesopotamia baptized that molding and brought the people even closer to each other. That molding impacted the social structure of the people and was able to dissolve their tribal belongings in favor of "religious belonging". A fact that goes in direct collision against this silly notion of "blood purity" to one Mesopotamian group and not the others. Saying that, however, with the Western imperial expansion into our land, that "religious belonging" was again fractured into sectarian belongings with the current sorry affairs of our people i.e. each defining their "identity" with the name of their religious sect and not with that of their Assyrian/Chaldean/Syriac nation."

But according to the Weekly World News, Hussein is now feeding Christians to Lions. I guess he hasn't gotten around to Mr. Aziz yet.

Bluebird wrote:

I think you misunderstood my intention in using quotation marks. It was not meant as a slight against the Chaldean sect. My point was that I have a hard time associating true Christian values with one of the top representatives of such a vile regime as Saddam's Iraq. Sort of like mass murderers who under-go phony 'conversions' in prison in the hope they will be viewed more sympathetically.

Oops, I did not read your post thoroughly enough.

Thanks for the heads-up.

quote: "My point was that I have a hard time associating true Christian values with one of the top representatives of such a vile regime as Saddam's Iraq."

Ever hear of Slobodan Milosevic? He is a Serbian Orthodox Christian!!!

.

Yes, please see my original posting...I compared 'Slobo' with Aziz.

"SloBo, or Slo-Bo": I like!!

Didn't Hitler consider him self a Christian (Catholic) despite the fact that Catholics eventually became one of his targets? Tariq Aziz' behvior has to viewed in the circumstances in which he serves.

Would Colin Powell be beating the war drums as loudly if he were President rather than the Secretary of State who serves at the current President's pleasure?

Jerry Falwell who initially called the WTC attack an act of God is no more enligtened than the British Muslim cleric who recently called the shuttle crash an act of God.

Fundamentalist extremism is not monopolized by any religious sect.

Interestingly the Muslim cleric was removed from office by the British government. Reverend Falwell to my knowledge was not removed by anyone.

I don't know what Mr. Aziz would be supporting if he served an a more responsible regime, but I do think people should be judged in the appropriate context.

Don't forget these other notable "Christian" dictators, some of whom were blessed by the Pope or for whom the Church (and other Christian churches and leaders) looked the other way: Napolean Bonaparte of France and other parts of Europe and the Americas; Francisco Franco of Spain; Ian Smith of Rhodesia; Benito Mussolini of Italy; Alfredo Stroessner of Paraguay; Augusto Pinochet of Chile; Anastazio Somoza Sr. and Anastazio Somoza Jr. of Nicaragua; George Papadopoulos of Greece; Efraín Rios Montt of Guatemala; Manuel Noriega of Panama; Ferdinand Marcos of the Phillipines; François Duvalier and Jean-Claude Duvalier of Haiti; Alfredo Christiani of El Salvador; Rafael Trujillo of the Dominican Republic; and on and on.

When has Christianity EVER led a leader to behave like he or she has good sense? Or even according to that religion's moral or ethical code? Bush himself is not behaving in a Christian manner--there are specific passages in the Old and New Testament about the rich and about mistreatment of the poor and down-trodden, that Bush is obviously ignoring. He's no Saddam by ANY means, but he could really stand to read the BIBLE a bit more carefully, rather than picking and choosing as he sees fit.

Exchange Islam for Christianity, and one could add Hafez El-Assad, Saddam Hussein, Zia Ul-Haq, Pervez Musharaff, Suharto, Sukarno, etc. to the very long list!

Powell is a spineless shill. His job description: Do everything GWB and the Republican Party wish, end of story.

In CP's favor: Powell has never had a platform on which to say what he really thinks. He is doing a great job at keeping himself in the black, given what he has had to work with.

Other than that - CP has no opinions of his own, until further notice.

[ February 19, 2003, 06:52 AM: Message edited by: bluebird48234 ]

last month, Colin Powell spoke out publicly about his disagreement with the president and the administration concerning Affirmative Action.

CP was speaking about race and his career before he got a Bush appointment. That's comparatively safe.

Nevertheless, I guess I admit that that is one thing I can respect him for. He's no Martin Luther King on the subject, but he does make reference to race when asked by the press about his career path.

Mind you, it is still safe. He almost HAS to talk about it. I mean, Clarence Thomas is the only Black man who refuses to talk about race and career, but he is, at least IMO, a freak (as in "whim" - not the sexual meaning), and a joke who is suffering delusions. If you ask CT, he cannot even stomach a claim to be African-American. ("Black-eyed peas? Well, those aren't REALLY peas!" wink )

I am, at least, still willing to hold out for Colin Powell.

I hope for the day when he'll be able to speak openly about his opinions on non-race issues that might, very well, be contrary to the line he is having to peddle for a living today.

Maybe not, but maybe: we will have to see if that day comes to pass.