I wonder how many more of these guys were spawned by the BuSh administration? We've already seen some early results last week in London.

Posted on Mon, Jul. 18, 2005

Lyons

Rudolph

Victims to confront bomber in court

By Jay Reeves

Associated Press

BIRMINGHAM, Ala. – Emily Lyons, critically injured in a 1998 blast outside a Birmingham abortion clinic, has a message for confessed bomber Eric Rudolph: His crimes only made her stronger.

“You did not shut the clinic down. You did not shut me down,” said Lyons, who planned to testify today at Rudolph’s sentencing to the first of four life terms for deadly bombings in Birmingham and Atlanta.

Rudolph, who remained defiant when he admitted setting the bombs and has discussed his reasons for the blasts only in written statements, will have his own chance to speak at today’s sentencing. Defense lawyers didn’t return calls seeking comment on whether Rudolph did plan to speak.

He also faces sentencing later in Atlanta.

Rudolph, 38, pleaded guilty in April to setting off a remote-controlled bomb that maimed Lyons, a nurse, and killed police officer Robert “Sande” Sanderson outside the New Woman All Women clinic on the morning of Jan. 29, 1998.

Sanderson’s wife and son also could make statements at the hearing today.

Under a plea agreement that let Rudolph avoid a possible death penalty, Rudolph confessed to the Alabama bombing and to the bombing at the 1996 Atlanta Olympics that killed one woman and injured more than 100.

He also admitted setting off bombs at an abortion clinic and gay bar in Atlanta in 1997.

He was captured in May 2003 after more than five years as a fugitive in the mountains of western North Carolina.

Under the agreement, federal judges in Birmingham and Atlanta will sentence him to four life terms without parole.

Rudolph’s sentencing in Georgia is set for Aug. 22, and victims of the Atlanta bombings will have a chance to speak then.

In a statement distributed after his guilty pleas, Rudolph portrayed himself as a devout Christian and said the bombings were motivated by his hatred of abortion and a federal government that lets it continue.

“The fact that I have entered an agreement with the government is purely a tactical choice on my part and in no way legitimates the moral authority of the government to judge this matter or to impute guilt,” Rudolph said in the statement.

Lyons was wounded by flying nails and other pieces of shrapnel in the bombing. She has undergone 21 operations, lost her left eye and has visible scars on her arms and legs. She is no longer physically able to work.

Face to face with Rudolph in court, Lyons hopes to get some glimmer of feedback from Rudolph, who rarely betrays any emotion in public.

“I want to see if it registers with him, or to see if it’s just more of that blank look,” Lyons said in an interview in her suburban home last week.

She also planned to release her book about the bombing today, her 49th birthday. In the self-published book she co-wrote with husband Jeff Lyons, titled “Life’s Been a Blast,” Lyons describes how she is moving on now that Rudolph is bound for life behind bars with no chance for parole.

The book concludes: “Our new life started out with a bang, and we intend to make the best of it. We are going to laugh, see movies, dine out, raise grandchildren and watch sunsets instead of fading into them. We will stand tall, and we will be smiling.”


When self-rightous "christianity" goes bad.

Terrorism. Its not just for muslims anymore.

so two wrongs make a right? what exactly is your point?
I have read the Quran and the Bible, so this post does not fool me at all!

to all:
the difference here is that the foundation for christianity (Jesus - the new testament) does not advocate terrorism but peace.
Islam on the other hand is very different. The foundation for islam (Muhammed - the quran) advocates terrorism in its numerous passages which tell muslims to lie to, cheat, and kill all non-muslims. Muhammed waged six very bloody religious wars before he died, but Christ died for us and then rose from the dead! Muslims (who are commanded to lie to us) claim that they do not support the actions of islamic terrorism... just as Christians claim that they do not support the actions of abortion clinic bombers. The difference here is that by bombing abortion clinics, the terrorists are acting in defiance of their Christian religion of peace, therefore you can not blame the religion or the followers of it for such acts of terrorism. BUT, you can and must blame Islam for religious terrorism because the quran directly commands it, regardless if muslims claim it does not.... they will naturally claim that their religion is that of peace because their religion commands them to not share their "truth" with infidels.

In short, the Bible (new testament) commands us to show peace, love, truth, kindness, etc. to ALL people. The quran commands its followers to lie to, cheat, and kill ALL who are not of the muslim faith. But hey, don't just take my word for it... find out for yourself and actually read the two books (if you have the guts to really know the truth for yourself) and you will see that the two are very different where one is quite good and the other is quite twisted and evil; a counterfeit religion.

I'm willing to bet that 99% of all liberals in America and The Commonwealth who defend Islam as a peacful religion worthy of our respect have never actually read the quran but just take muslims word for it that it advocates peace to all; this is a lie -- it certainly does not. It was created by Muhammed to first subject Arabs and then the whole world to fall under political rule by radical war mongers through counterfeit religion. And it is working. Any muslim who says otherwise is either lying or doesn't really fully understand their Quran themselves. Islamic terrorists are actually the most commited to following the commandments of their diety to its fullest, while violent so called "christians" are not acting like Christians at all; they are acting much more like muslims.
If Hitler were alive today and made Nazi-ism a "religion of peace", would liberals respect it's values? probably, as long as it is not Christian. And then if Hitler killed 6 million Jews in the name of his religion, what then? Because, Islam will not dis-continue terrorism until all "infidels" are eliminated. And liberals will not be convinced that there is a serious problem within the Quran until it is too late. So defend Islam if you want and even try to compare it to Christianity, but shame on you for being so foolish!

If you want to try to compare Islam to Christianity, you had better get your facts straight.

Talk about comparing apples to watermelons! Somehow there is a connection between a religious zealot bombing an abortion clinic over abortion rights and a Muslim extremists bombing people over religious issues? The only thing in common is that they are both using bombs but they are both doing it for completely different reasons, so I just don't get it.:Bang

I'm not picking a fight but could you please post some links or articles on the subject. I probably won't read the Quran nor will I pick up the Bible again so I'd like the Muslims for Dummies synopsys.

I am curious what your experiences are that led you to this conclusion?

Here's the Qur'an for skeptics (http://www.skepticsannotatedbible.com/quran/). There's also one for the bible.

I'm glad I'm not a Muslim woman. Worth half of a man? I'd like to see some more material since that site has a clearly Christian view point. It certainly upheld Groovin8's contentions.

I was disturbed by the icon they used to denote things they found laughable. I thought that was disrespectful. I was taught to be respectful to all religions.

I'm not picking a fight but could you please post some links or articles on the subject. I probably won't read the Quran nor will I pick up the Bible again so I'd like the Muslims for Dummies synopsys.

I am curious what your experiences are that led you to this conclusion?
I read the Quran! heh heh... simple!

No prob barry :) ummm actually if you google the quran you can find many websites that have put the english version online for ya to read. I have been told by an indian and an arab that the original Arabic version of the Quran uses even stronger language and commands harsher actions against "infidels" then the english version does. I have been told that the Quran was "watered down" in translation so that the "west" will more readily accept it. Even as it has been watered down, the english version does still plainly show these rediculous commandments of hate and violence towards Christians and Jews (yes it mentions Christians and Jews specifically). I wonder how much worse the arabic version is. And I find it interesting that while the Quran considers any non-muslim an "infidel", it singles out Christians and Jews as the most threatening. Now I know that some would say it is because of the wars waged in the name of Christianity or Judaism, and while I don't disagree that war has been wrongly waged in the name of Christianity (ex. Roman Catholicism), I think there is a far more logical yet seemingly elusive reason that Islam considers Christianity and Judaism a threat - They are the true religions!! The only way to expose a counterfeit is to realize the REAL DEAL. The "God" of Judaism and Christianity is the real creator -- the real deal (that's my theory, but don't take my word for it), while the "god" of Islam, Allah, is not the same "God" of Judaism and Christianity. It is a false religion, and Allah is a false god. Islam claims their "god", Allah, is the same "God" of the christians and jews, the God of the Old Testament and The New Testament. Islam claims that they believe that the old and new testaments are the first two books of the bible and that the quran is the "third" and final chapter. Islam claims that jesus was a prophet but not a messiah. Islam claims that Moses prophesy of the coming of Christ was really meant to be interperated as the coming of Muhammed. According to Islam, the true messiah was Muhammed, and he came not to offer peace, like Christ did, but muhammed came to wage war, a religious cleansing where only true muslims should be allowed to live. Incidentally, the 10 commandments given to Moses, say to not lie, cheat, steal, or murder against anyone.... Muhammed changed this by saying it is ok to lie, cheat, steal, and murder against "infidels"... in order to justify waging war. So while Islam claims to be very similar to Christianity and Judaism in efforts to seem credible, it also contradicts Judaism and Christianity in order to justify war. Anyhow, this is just one proof that Islam has serious problems as a "true" religion. In addition to the Quran being available to read in the un edited original english version online, there are also studies online to point out the vast problems that expose it as a contradictory and counterfeit religion. Why do the muslims not see these contradictions? The first rule of Islam... DO NOT QUESTION! We all know how crazy cult followers can be, like Jim Jones koolaid drinkers and Heaven's Gaters who commited suicide to be saved by a comet, lol! Islam is a cult as well and became very popular because of the supression of education. Most muslims can not even read their Quran!!!! Now the cult has spread millions of followers, and it's no wonder the world thinks its a serious religion just by evidence of sheer numbers! But the black and white truth in the quran is that muslims wage war on non muslims in the name of Allah. And because this cult has so many followers, we assume it must be a serious and peaceful religion, so we close our eyes to it and get bombed for being Christian and Jewish.

Sorry, i rant, i just have a real problem with the news these days interviewing muslims who claim their religion is peaceful without ever daring to actually expose their Quran and proving 100% that it is not. And I'll tell you why I think the world is afraid to "disrespect" Islam..... OIL! plain and simple.

I'm glad I'm not a Muslim woman. Worth half of a man? I'd like to see some more material since that site has a clearly Christian view point. It certainly upheld Groovin8's contentions.

I was disturbed by the icon they used to denote things they found laughable. I thought that was disrespectful. I was taught to be respectful to all religions.

It's actually an athiest point-of-view, but still...

I'm glad I'm not a Muslim woman. Worth half of a man? I'd like to see some more material since that site has a clearly Christian view point. It certainly upheld Groovin8's contentions.

I was disturbed by the icon they used to denote things they found laughable. I thought that was disrespectful. I was taught to be respectful to all religions.
I don't blame ya man... Im a big skeptic myself and i think that is healthy. I grew up in church and heard lots of bull.... Ya just gotta look at all the evidence and decide fer yourself... and that is an ongoing process until death, heh heh because lies are coming in from every angle and in everything is a thread of truth, and that truth is incontrovertable.... real truth does not change one bit, no matter what people believe. some people think faith is "i believe it, therefore it is true... cuz its true for me" well NO! hogwash! truth is truth whether you believe it or not, it dont change.
btw... i stole part of that phrase from Churchill: "Truth is incontrovertable; malice may attack it, ignorance may deride it; but in the end, there it is".... something like that anyway.

and i know what ya mean about respecting all religions.... but some do become laughable. I mean, i am sure that the Heaven's Gate cult did not find their religion a laughing matter at all.... but suicide so a comet will take you to heaven? cmon!!! lol some things, when exposed to be silly, do become laughable. To me, Islam is not laughable, because it is probably the most clever, believable, and destructive counterfeit religion the world has ever seen.... and I take that very seriously. especially after it fueled the death of 3,000 new yorkers.

Sorry, i rant

I didn't think so. Your views are harsh but I see where you're coming from.

I'm not picking a fight but could you please post some links or articles on the subject. I probably won't read the Quran nor will I pick up the Bible again so I'd like the Muslims for Dummies synopsys.

I am curious what your experiences are that led you to this conclusion?

All you have to do is look at every nation where Islam is the chief religion. Any time the muslims get power in a nation they lock it down, freedom-wise. It's called a malevolent society, and you can look at most or all of the Arab nations and see how they treat citizens in general and women in particular to know that Islam, in practice, is a conquest-driven religion. In fact, if you read Mohammed, you see that his teachings encouraged conversions at the point of the sword. Anyone who is an unbeliever must be either converted or terminated. It is THE most intolerant religion being practiced today.

I wonder how many more of these guys were spawned by the BuSh administration? We've already seen some early results last week in London.

Posted on Mon, Jul. 18, 2005

Lyons

Rudolph

Victims to confront bomber in court

By Jay Reeves

Associated Press

BIRMINGHAM, Ala. – Emily Lyons, critically injured in a 1998 blast outside a Birmingham abortion clinic, has a message for confessed bomber Eric Rudolph: His crimes only made her stronger.

“You did not shut the clinic down. You did not shut me down,” said Lyons, who planned to testify today at Rudolph’s sentencing to the first of four life terms for deadly bombings in Birmingham and Atlanta.

Rudolph, who remained defiant when he admitted setting the bombs and has discussed his reasons for the blasts only in written statements, will have his own chance to speak at today’s sentencing. Defense lawyers didn’t return calls seeking comment on whether Rudolph did plan to speak.

He also faces sentencing later in Atlanta.

Rudolph, 38, pleaded guilty in April to setting off a remote-controlled bomb that maimed Lyons, a nurse, and killed police officer Robert “Sande” Sanderson outside the New Woman All Women clinic on the morning of Jan. 29, 1998.

Sanderson’s wife and son also could make statements at the hearing today.

Under a plea agreement that let Rudolph avoid a possible death penalty, Rudolph confessed to the Alabama bombing and to the bombing at the 1996 Atlanta Olympics that killed one woman and injured more than 100.

He also admitted setting off bombs at an abortion clinic and gay bar in Atlanta in 1997.

He was captured in May 2003 after more than five years as a fugitive in the mountains of western North Carolina.

Under the agreement, federal judges in Birmingham and Atlanta will sentence him to four life terms without parole.

Rudolph’s sentencing in Georgia is set for Aug. 22, and victims of the Atlanta bombings will have a chance to speak then.

In a statement distributed after his guilty pleas, Rudolph portrayed himself as a devout Christian and said the bombings were motivated by his hatred of abortion and a federal government that lets it continue.

“The fact that I have entered an agreement with the government is purely a tactical choice on my part and in no way legitimates the moral authority of the government to judge this matter or to impute guilt,” Rudolph said in the statement.

Lyons was wounded by flying nails and other pieces of shrapnel in the bombing. She has undergone 21 operations, lost her left eye and has visible scars on her arms and legs. She is no longer physically able to work.

Face to face with Rudolph in court, Lyons hopes to get some glimmer of feedback from Rudolph, who rarely betrays any emotion in public.

“I want to see if it registers with him, or to see if it’s just more of that blank look,” Lyons said in an interview in her suburban home last week.

She also planned to release her book about the bombing today, her 49th birthday. In the self-published book she co-wrote with husband Jeff Lyons, titled “Life’s Been a Blast,” Lyons describes how she is moving on now that Rudolph is bound for life behind bars with no chance for parole.

The book concludes: “Our new life started out with a bang, and we intend to make the best of it. We are going to laugh, see movies, dine out, raise grandchildren and watch sunsets instead of fading into them. We will stand tall, and we will be smiling.”


When self-rightous "christianity" goes bad.

Terrorism. Its not just for muslims anymore.

I'm not sure I understand what you are trying to say. Is your point that this abortion clinic bomber was spawned by Bush? Because that would be incorrect, seeing as he did all these crimes in the mid to late 90's, when Clinton was president.

Talk about comparing kumquats to cherries.

Clearly what he said is that he was wondering if the BuSh administration hadn't created some more homegrown terrorists. The operative word being "more". Nothing was said about BuSh creating Randolph. Clearly the war on terror had resulted in more terrrorist acts. You would have to be blind not to see that.

Clearly what he said is that he was wondering if the BuSh administration hadn't created some more homegrown terrorists. The operative word being "more". Nothing was said about BuSh creating Randolph. Clearly the war on terror had resulted in more terrrorist acts. You would have to be blind not to see that.

Why can't he speak for himself? Does he need someone else to stick up for him?

And by the way, you should take your own advice:

Barry said to me:

"Fossten,

When I'm addressing something to Bryan, please try to keep your nose out of it. "

Here's the link in case you forgot you said those words:

http://www.lincolnvscadillac.com/showthread.php?t=10316&highlight=polling

Come on guys. Live and let live.

Fossten,

You never took my advice.

Fossten,

You never took my advice.

So? What, are you following my example now? Come on, be your own man/whatever!

Clearly the war on terror had resulted in more terrrorist acts. You would have to be blind not to see that.
That may be, but Bush didn't start the war with the 3,000 New Yorkers deaths... Islamic terrorists did, and Muslims throughout the world rejoiced.

If Bush's administration has spawned more acts of terrorism by groups who want to end freedom and convert the world to the oppressive religion of Islam, does that make bush's administration bad? nahh, i say it means that bush's administration has the follow through to spread freedom by stamping out terrorism -- that's a good thing. it's only expected that the terrorists would make their last stand to fight against freedom, especially against a non-muslim (Christian) nation. Don't forget that Bush proclaimed his faith in Jesus Christ while running for president. I'm quite sure this infuriated the radical muslims, especially when Bush won the presidency. While i do not agree with some of Bush's moderate actions, I'm thankful that he is prepared to resolve the problem of terrorism,... whatever it takes. it's just expected that the terrorists come out of the woodwork to fight back. I would hope liberals and conservatives alike would be glad that we are fighting terrorism... and winning!!

Mankind is doomed to destroy itself, unless of course, good conquers evil.

Personally, unless we eliminate all current inventory of WMD's, we are on the slippery slope to destroying ourselves. For me, it is only a matter of time at this point. As a species, we have sucked up all the worlds resources. I think our time is coming unless mankind makes some dramatic changes in the way we treat each other.

As a species, we have sucked up all the worlds resources.

I disagree. What about Siberia?

Why can't he speak for himself? Does he need someone else to stick up for him?

And by the way, you should take your own advice:

Barry said to me:

"Fossten,

When I'm addressing something to Bryan, please try to keep your nose out of it. "

Here's the link in case you forgot you said those words:

http://www.lincolnvscadillac.com/showthread.php?t=10316&highlight=polling

Latest quote:

"No, you just seem to lack any level of civility. Please mind your own business. When I ask your opinion, you'll know it. Until then please try to refrain from commenting when I ask someone else a question."


I guess I should leave the forum and mind my own business since that's what I'm being asked to do.

Who is attacking whom here?

I disagree. What about Siberia?With global warming, it will soon become the new tropics, so you have a point there.

With global warming, it will soon become the new tropics, so you have a point there.

ha ha ha...

Personally, unless we eliminate all current inventory of WMD's, we are on the slippery slope to destroying ourselves. For me, it is only a matter of time at this point. As a species, we have sucked up all the worlds resources. I think our time is coming unless mankind makes some dramatic changes in the way we treat each other.

Write this down, Bryan. I agree with you. :I

Of course, you could start making changes for the better as far as how we treat each other if you stopped buying Shrubs line of :bsflag:

I LOVE ....

I would like to take this time to point out that yesterday Bush had not only the liberals, but also the liberal media snowed. Everybody was faked out over who he was going to pick for SCJ. Edith Clement this, Edith Clement that. I watched them scramble to figure out just who this Roberts guy is. I watched Leaky Leahy and Upchuck Schumer on the podium trying to sound like they knew what they were talking about. Total losers. Petulant. Crying, whining babies. Obstructionist. I know most Americans saw through that.

Bush is smarter than any of you realize.

The guy is brilliant and always mis-underestimated.http://www.lincolnvscadillac.com//images/icons/icon10.gif


Smart as a .................................................. .............I always say

Clearly what he said is that he was wondering if the BuSh administration hadn't created some more homegrown terrorists. The operative word being "more". Nothing was said about BuSh creating Randolph. Clearly the war on terror had resulted in more terrrorist acts. You would have to be blind not to see that.

Thanks barry for clarifying what I thought was perfectly clear in my original post in my brief absence. Next time I'll bring it down closer to the ground so all those here can understand.

Talk about comparing apples to watermelons! Somehow there is a connection between a religious zealot bombing an abortion clinic over abortion rights and a Muslim extremists bombing people over religious issues? The only thing in common is that they are both using bombs but they are both doing it for completely different reasons, so I just don't get it.

Both are bombing people over religious issues. Both perps are religious radicals. SSDD, apples and apples.

Personally, unless we eliminate all current inventory of WMD's, we are on the slippery slope to destroying ourselves. For me, it is only a matter of time at this point. As a species, we have sucked up all the worlds resources. I think our time is coming unless mankind makes some dramatic changes in the way we treat each other.

OMG, :I That, I think, is the second time Bryan and I actuall agree on something (can't remember what that other thing was though).

That may be, but Bush didn't start the war with the 3,000 New Yorkers deaths... Islamic terrorists did, and Muslims throughout the world rejoiced.

One could (and the anti-Clintonians do..... they just misplace the blame) easily argue that this "war" started LONG before 9/11. Don't give those 9/11 terrorists so much credit. This religious war between Christians and Muslims have been going on for centuries, long before the USA was a twinkle in our founding father's eyes.

One could (and the anti-Clintonians do..... they just misplace the blame) easily argue that this "war" started LONG before 9/11. Don't give those 9/11 terrorists so much credit. This religious war between Christians and Muslims have been going on for centuries, long before the USA was a twinkle in our founding father's eyes.

And if you read what Islam is about (the quran) and read the history of islam starting with muhammed, you may learn where and why this terrorism started, as I first posted; the truth you have conveniently ignored.
;)

One could (and the anti-Clintonians do..... they just misplace the blame) easily argue that this "war" started LONG before 9/11. Don't give those 9/11 terrorists so much credit. This religious war between Christians and Muslims have been going on for centuries, long before the USA was a twinkle in our founding father's eyes.

That is absolute :bsflag: :bsflag: :bsflag: !

You are saying that the attack on our civilians on 9/11 was OUR FAULT!

That statement is so full of crap I can smell it on my screen.

Anyone who says 9/11 is our fault should examine their patriotism. It makes you sound like a terrorist sympathizer.

Comparing Rudolph to muslim terrorists is nice, but how many rudolphs are there in the world, and how many muslim terrorists are there in the world?? When was the last time you heard Priests and Preachers telling their congregations to go out and kill anyone and everyone, including people of the SAME faith???? And please don't start on the other problems with preachers and priests, such as molestation and stuff, because that's not relevant to this topic, and I fully acknowledge that's a HUGE problem. But no where near as huge these muslims killing people. The only positive thing I can say about the Muslims is that atleast they are killing themselves too. By the way, why aren't we holding Islam accountable for it's members actions?????? I mean, when a couple of the guards at Abu Ghraib abused the prisoners, everyone went into an uproar, but a muslim kills himself and a bunch of INNOCENT(I highly doubt the prisoners at Abu Ghraib were innocent) people, there are excuses left and right for them!! I mean come on, what's the deal here? You think it's Bush's fault that there are terrorists??? You think that if we never went to Iraq, they would've never bombed anyone?? Osama Bin Laden wsa busy making all of his plans during the Clinton administration(that's a FACT!!!) because no one really did anything about him. I remember hearing stories about and ex-Saudi terrorist trying to find out all the weaknesses of American Embassies around the world. That was OBL!! And this was in the mid-nineties. They have been planning this stuff for so long, and it's not because of American policy in the Middle East. It's just because America EXISTS!!!!

That is absolute :bsflag: :bsflag: :bsflag: !

You are saying that the attack on our civilians on 9/11 was OUR FAULT!

That statement is so full of crap I can smell it on my screen.

Anyone who says 9/11 is our fault should examine their patriotism. It makes you sound like a terrorist sympathizer.

Jeezus, pull your head out pal. WHERE did I say that 9/11 was our fault?? All I said was that the GWOT started LONG BEFORE 9/11/01. The front of that war just tip-toed on our own soil (and not for the 1st time!!) on 9/11/01. "GWOT" is just another name for the holy-war that has been raging for centuries.

QUIT putting words in other's mouths! I know it's probably a hard habit to break, considering you must be a senior understudy of the GOPs "slime and slander" tactics used against anyone who sees things differently. Put down the red kool-aid, step away from the crack pipe bud.

The left's belief that appeasing the terrorists will stop the conflict will not work. Even if we pull completely out of the sand castle, that will only serve to allow them to grow unimpeded and become an even more dangerous and formitable enemy. They will still seek to spread their vision of a new world order. And yes, I know we also seek to spread ours. The big difference is we are the good guys though. The guys that have done more for our fellow man than all of the other countries in the world put together.

Jeezus, pull your head out pal. WHERE did I say that 9/11 was our fault?? All I said was that the GWOT started LONG BEFORE 9/11/01. The front of that war just tip-toed on our own soil (and not for the 1st time!!) on 9/11/01. "GWOT" is just another name for the holy-war that has been raging for centuries.

QUIT putting words in other's mouths! I know it's probably a hard habit to break, considering you must be a senior understudy of the GOPs "slime and slander" tactics used against anyone who sees things differently. Put down the red kool-aid, step away from the crack pipe bud.

First of all, I object to your frequent abuse of the word "Jesus" as an obscenity to make your point. It's offensive.

Second, you said this:

"The lobbyists buy the BuSh administration, and the RNC buys the Oval Office. In the words of Church Lady, "How convieeeeeeeeeenient!"

Doesn't that remind you of someone? Maybe........... oh.......... I don't know........... SATAN!!!????"

Which agrees with the terrorists who routinely call America and Bush "The Great Satan."

You also said,

"I wonder how many more of these guys were spawned by the BuSh administration? We've already seen some early results last week in London.

Posted on Mon, Jul. 18, 2005

Lyons

Rudolph

Victims to confront bomber in court

By Jay Reeves

Associated Press

BIRMINGHAM, Ala. – Emily Lyons, critically injured in a 1998 blast outside a Birmingham abortion clinic, has a message for confessed bomber Eric Rudolph: His crimes only made her stronger..."

Which implies that Bush is responsible for terrorism. The key phrase is "how many more of these guys..."

But the piece de resistance is:

"Look in the mirror before you go off calling anyone short sighted and ignorant.

9/11 was "un-provoked"?? Now THAT is the most naive, shortsighted, ignorant statement you've made yet. The US has been acting like the proverbial bull in the china shop in the middle east (and elsewhere) for several administrations. You can't go around sticking a prod into a hornets nest and not expect to get some retaliation. You RWWs dream of "destroying the terrorists", and can't comprehend the fact that there is no way in hell that could EVER be accomplished. Ridding this planet of cockroaches would be easier.

WHEN these "so-called nukes" came into this country is totally irrelevant. Hypothetically speaking as if they do in fact exist, BuSh had the oppertunity to make a difference and focus our resources towards finding and eliminating them, but instead he's distracted our energy and blood-resources towards an empty well. For you RWWs to continue to advocate those actions and the "so-called leader" who has taken us down that wrong path only makes you look ignorant, simple minded and a traitor."

Never mind the poisonous personal slurs directed at me. You blatantly blamed The United States of America in that post.

Furthermore, it is an atrocious insult to the 3,000+ victims of 9/11 and their families to equate that deplorable attack with "tip-toeing." That's appalling. I guess it agrees with John Kerry, though, who called terrorism a "nuisance."

So there you have it. You asked me where you said that it was our fault.

I'm sure you will try to spin your own words or distract from them somehow, but you cannot deny that you posted them.

*owned* :bow:

Oh, Bryan, please check my post for name-calling. I will not do it. But I think you can see who's stooping to those lowbrow tactics. All I have done is present facts. It's funny, I actually think it's sort of a compliment to call me a senior understudy, although I'm sure the intent was pejorative (see dictionary).

BTW, I think the list is as follows:

- senior understudy of the GOPs "slime and slander" tactics
- implied crack pipe smoker
- Red Kool-Aid drinker (I actually like red Kool-Aid, no harm done there)
- naive
- shortsighted
- ignorant (twice)
- simple minded
- traitor

Quite impressive, no?

And I got called a hater. :bowrofl:

All I said was that the GWOT started LONG BEFORE 9/11/01. The front of that war just tip-toed on our own soil (and not for the 1st time!!) on 9/11/01. "GWOT" is just another name for the holy-war that has been raging for centuries.I'm not going to slam you too hard for this, BUT. It's true that terrorism has been a fact of life for the world for a few decades at least. But the attack on 9-11 took that war to a whole new level just by the enormity and audacity of it. If we (the U.S.) don't continue to ratchet it up like the terrorists do, we will lose plain and simple.

I'm not going to slam you too hard for this, BUT. It's true that terrorism has been a fact of life for the world for a few decades at least. But the attack on 9-11 took that war to a whole new level just by the enormity and audacity of it. If we (the U.S.) don't continue to ratchet it up like the terrorists do, we will lose plain and simple.

I don't mean this personally, Kbob, b/c I think you're a good guy. But we need to stop pussyfooting around with what we mean here. We need to speak directly and bluntly. "Ratcheting up" this war a notch or two isn't going to cut it.

We need to defeat the terrorists. We need to squash the terrorists. We need to destroy terrorism, obliterate it, annihilate it, conquer it, eliminate it. And by IT I mean THEM. We need to kill the terrorists. Period. Our wives and children depend on us to protect them and we depend on our government to protect us. We can't have confidence in our government's protection if they just "want to contain" terrorism as some sort of "nuisance*."

This is going to be a long war. But if we have patience, AND we kill terrorists, eventually the sources of cash for these psycho radical killers will start to dry up and we will win. I don't think the libs have the stomach for that kind of perseverance. I know they probably cringe at such strong talk. Probably start singing the song, "Why can't we be friends, why can't we..."

*See John Kerry.

BTW, I think the list is as follows:

- senior understudy of the GOPs "slime and slander" tactics
- implied crack pipe smoker
- Red Kool-Aid drinker (I actually like red Kool-Aid, no harm done there)
- naive
- shortsighted
- ignorant (twice)
- simple minded
- traitor

Quite impressive, no?

And I got called a hater. :bowrofl:








You forgot about having your head up where the sun doesn't shine. :N

Listen, I make no claim to being the best communicator, but your lack of understanding my statements, I believe, is because you've taken them somewhat out of 2 different contexts and are trying to compare them.

Gruuvin8 asserted that Islamic terrorists started the GWOT on 9/11/01. I disagreed with him by arguing that the "GWOT" is essentially the latest incarnation of a "holy war" (basically a war between two opposed views of religion and how people should live on this planet) that has been going on for centuries. Therefore, the 9/11 terrorist did not start this war. From that you've conjectured that I said that 9/11 was our fault, implying that I said that WE started this war (at least that's how I read your statement). And to THAT, I take issue, because that is NOT my intended message.

For the most part, the US had stayed out of this holy war being waged for the most part in the middle east and the Gaza strip. Over the past several administrations, we've tried to play referee between the opposing teams in that war (which is a noble cause, can't argue that, yet sometimes we should just mind our own buisness and let them duke it out.... whatever, I'm not going to rehash that now). And in the last couple decades, "playing referee" has turned into "taking sides" in this war, to the point of providing help to some of the players. Well, when we do that, like it or not, we've engaged in that battle, and sooner or later some of the players on the losing team not getting our help is going to retaliate. Thus 9/11, thus NOT "un-provoked". When we go around poking our nose into other country's wars where it is not welcome, we should expect a black eye every now and then. Our cause may very well be noble, but even the refs at a boxing match end up with occasional bruises.

You can try to spin my words into some twisted meaning by taking them out of context. You can attack my "patriotism" by "slime and slander" tactics, BFD. Those are MY opinions, and my statements and I'm standing by them.
:F

I don't mean this personally, Kbob, b/c I think you're a good guy. But we need to stop pussyfooting around with what we mean here. We need to speak directly and bluntly. "Ratcheting up" this war a notch or two isn't going to cut it.None taken. But, we are nowhere near being at full mobilization to defeat terrorism. We have taken it up a few "notches", but again, we aren't anywhere near being completely geared as a country to defeat this enemy. Bush is trying to win this with enough force to do the job. It may need to go up some more. Fortunately for us, I believe the U.S. is capable of defeating any foe. It's just a matter of the cost (lives and money) involved. And you communicate how you want to. I'll do the same thanks.

None taken. But, we are nowhere near being at full mobilization to defeat terrorism. We have taken it up a few "notches", but again, we aren't anywhere near being completely geared as a country to defeat this enemy. Bush is trying to win this with enough force to do the job. It may need to go up some more. Fortunately for us, I believe the U.S. is capable of defeating any foe. It's just a matter of the cost (lives and money) involved. And you communicate how you want to. I'll do the same thanks.

I TOTALLY agree.

:headbang: :I

You forgot about having your head up where the sun doesn't shine. :N

Listen, I make no claim to being the best communicator, but your lack of understanding my statements, I believe, is because you've taken them somewhat out of 2 different contexts and are trying to compare them.

Gruuvin8 asserted that Islamic terrorists started the GWOT on 9/11/01. I disagreed with him by arguing that the "GWOT" is essentially the latest incarnation of a "holy war" (basically a war between two opposed views of religion and how people should live on this planet) that has been going on for centuries. Therefore, the 9/11 terrorist did not start this war. From that you've conjectured that I said that 9/11 was our fault, implying that I said that WE started this war (at least that's how I read your statement). And to THAT, I take issue, because that is NOT my intended message.

For the most part, the US had stayed out of this holy war being waged for the most part in the middle east and the Gaza strip. Over the past several administrations, we've tried to play referee between the opposing teams in that war (which is a noble cause, can't argue that, yet sometimes we should just mind our own buisness and let them duke it out.... whatever, I'm not going to rehash that now). And in the last couple decades, "playing referee" has turned into "taking sides" in this war, to the point of providing help to some of the players. Well, when we do that, like it or not, we've engaged in that battle, and sooner or later some of the players on the losing team not getting our help is going to retaliate. Thus 9/11, thus NOT "un-provoked". When we go around poking our nose into other country's wars where it is not welcome, we should expect a black eye every now and then. Our cause may very well be noble, but even the refs at a boxing match end up with occasional bruises.

You can try to spin my words into some twisted meaning by taking them out of context. You can attack my "patriotism" by "slime and slander" tactics, BFD. Those are MY opinions, and my statements and I'm standing by them.
:F

Here's where you totally miss the point. Muslim clerics and imams that control the actions of their students want total domination of the world. That's the way Islam works. They get control of a country and lock it down. Heck, even Red China has an Islamic province in their borders, and they're scared to death of them!

The truth is this: We didn't butt in to the muslims' "holy war" (translation: religious cleansing: extermination) and piss them off. We are just in the way, and it's our turn to get attacked. If you don't believe that the Islam extremists' goal is world domination, read the article below, published by your no doubt beloved Washington Post:


washingtonpost.com (http://www.washingtonpost.com/)

Attacks on UK will continue, radical cleric says

By Gideon Long
Reuters
Friday, July 22, 2005; 10:57 AM




LONDON (Reuters) - Militant Islamists will continue to attack Britain until the government pulls its troops out of Iraq and Afghanistan, one of the country's most outspoken Islamic clerics said on Friday.

Speaking 15 days after bombers killed over 50 people in London and a day after a series of failed attacks on the city's transport network, Sheikh Omar Bakri Mohammed said the British capital should expect more violence.

"What happened yesterday confirmed that as long as the cause and the root problem is still there ... we will see the same effect we saw on July 7," Bakri said.

"If the cause is still there the effect will happen again and again," he said, adding he had no information about future attacks or contacts with people planning to carry out attacks.

Bakri, a Syrian-born cleric who has been vilified in Britain since 2001 when he praised the September 11 hijackers, said he did not believe the bombings and attempted attacks on London were carried out by British Muslims.

He condemned the killing of all innocent civilians but described attacks on British and U.S. troops in Muslim countries as "pro-life" and justified.

In an interview with Reuters, Bakri described Osama bin Laden, leader of the radical Islamist network al Qaeda, as "a sincere man who fights against evil forces."

Bakri said he would like Britain to become an Islamic state but feared he would be deported before his dream was realized.

"I would like to see the Islamic flag fly, not only over number 10 Downing Street, but over the whole world," he said.


I left out part of the article to conserve space - here's the whole thing:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/07/22/AR2005072200709_pf.html

Here's where you totally miss the point. Muslim clerics and imams that control the actions of their students want total domination of the world.

And here is where YOU miss the point. One could make the same argument about the US goal of "spreading democracy" across the globe as being "total domination of the world". Yeah I know there is a difference between true democracy & freedom and oppressive governments, and only a moron would want to live under the latter. But every excuse you guys come up with to "stay on the attack" in the GWOT can and is used against us. All we are doing is escellating the war, it's going to get worse before it gets better. There has got to be a better way.

And here is where YOU miss the point. One could make the same argument about the US goal of "spreading democracy" across the globe as being "total domination of the world". Yeah I know there is a difference between true democracy & freedom and oppressive governments, and only a moron would want to live under the latter. But every excuse you guys come up with to "stay on the attack" in the GWOT can and is used against us. All we are doing is escellating the war, it's going to get worse before it gets better. There has got to be a better way.

Except that there is no better way.

I'm not missing your point. Instead, I'm discrediting it.

As far as spreading democracy around the world, I doubt you have ever lived in an oppressive, malevolent society, wondering what it's like to be free, wishing you could somehow escape to America. The argument that spreading democracy is somehow domination of the world is ridiculous from a dictatorial standpoint. To give a nation like the people of Iraq a real shot at being a legitimate, world player with a free society is benign at worst and landmark historic at best. Again I am forced to use examples. Japan and Germany. We defeat them, wipe out their armies, then give them back their country. Afghanistan. Iraq. Free elections in both countries. We will give them back their countries also. Of course we're not altruistic. But nobody else in the world has the guts to do something like Bush did. Not even the Russians.

Now, about these terrorists you seem so afraid of:

These aren't simply people who have an agenda and want to get our attention so we will meet them at the bargaining table. They are hell-bent on destroying us, our way of life, because they hate us. Why? Because they have been taught to, that's why. (Just like Klansmen who were taught to be racist hated blacks. What did the blacks do to them? Nothing. The only difference is religious instead of racist.) They aren't born with it. These terrorists have been told that anyone who doesn't believe in Islam (an unbeliever) is to be killed. If they die in the attempt, they will get 72 virgins in heaven as their reward. These people won't listen to us any more than you would listen to someone you hated and wanted to kill. They have been programmed to kill.

I'm sick and tired of hearing you sympathize with these killers as though we are to blame and if we would just stay out of their way they would leave us alone. In the end, they attacked us, our innocent non military civilians. We have a responsibility to protect our citizens. Since these thugs don't fight on a military front, we have to root them out like parasites, one by one. I'm actually surprised. I figured anyone who loves their country would be enraged by these attacks, not saying, "See, we brought this on ourselves."

You just keep believing there's a better way. You'll see. They will not ever go away until they are defeated. Reasoning with these fanatics WILL NOT WORK.

Here's more evidence that refutes your opinion that WE started this: (highlights mine)





Atta's father praises London bombs





Wednesday, July 20, 2005; Posted: 8:57 a.m. EDT (12:57 GMT)
CAIRO, Egypt (CNN) -- The father of one of the hijackers who commandeered the first plane that crashed into the World Trade Center on September 11, 2001, praised the recent terror attacks in London and said many more would follow.

Speaking to CNN producer Ayman Mohyeldin Tuesday in his apartment in the upper-middle-class Cairo suburb of Giza, Mohamed el-Amir said he would like to see more attacks like the July 7 bombings of three London subway trains and a bus that killed 52 people, plus the four bombers.

Displayed prominently in the apartment were pictures of el-Amir's son, Mohamed Atta, the man who is believed to have piloted American Airlines Flight 11 into the north tower of the World Trade Center as part of the attacks on the United States.

El-Amir said the attacks in the United States and the July 7 attacks in London were the beginning of what would be a 50-year religious war, in which there would be many more fighters like his son.

He declared that terror cells around the world were a "nuclear bomb that has now been activated and is ticking."

The man, who gave his age as "at least 70," said he had no sorrow for what happened in London, and said there was a double standard in the way the world viewed the victims in London and victims in the Islamic world.

Cursing in Arabic, el-Amir also denounced Arab leaders and Muslims who condemned the London attacks as being traitors and non-Muslims.

He passionately vowed that he would do anything within his power to encourage more attacks.

When asked if he would allow a CNN crew to videotape another interview with him, el-Amir said he would give his permission -- for a price of $5,000.

That money, he said, would not be kept for himself, but would be donated to someone to carry out another terror attack.

El-Amir said that $5,000 was about how much it would cost to finance another attack in London.

CNN's crew refused to pay for the interview and left after el-Amir's request.

It is CNN policy not to pay people for interviews.

A lawyer by trade, el-Amir had a sign on his apartment door saying he was a consultant.

The security guard for the apartment building said el-Amir had been under surveillance by Egyptian agents for several months after the September 11 attacks, but no one had been watching him recently.

(How convenient for CNN to have that policy. God forbid they should do something noble like refuse on principle.)


So a terrorist sympathizer (if not leader) says this is the beginning. Why didn't he say that we started this, or that this war has been going on?

Johnny... two things you said that i want to address.

First of all, concluding GWB's spread of democracy as being world domination and then comparing it to the spread of Islam, because it is intent on world domination is unfair and incorrect. GWB is trying to spread the opposite of world domination. It is world domination that GWB understands will be the last great mistake of mankind. This is why GWB is trying to spread FREEDOM through democracy across the world. If the whole world is democratized, then there can be no world domination, only individual freedom. If GWB was intent on world domination, he would not oppose the UN but would run for a UN seat as Bill Clinton may do.... but that is another story.


Second is the point you claimed that this is a holy war that has been going on for years and that islamic terrorism is just an answer to basically the crusades...

I do not agree with the roman catholic churches crusades. The crusades was an evil committed by the roman catholic church with a goal of world domination just as Islamic terrorism is wrong today. There are many years of history of religious wars, but it did not start with the crusades. There is actually 6,000 years of history documenting a war between God's people (jews) and those who want to conquer and eliminate God's people. Sometimes, when God's people were being "good", God would allow them to to conquer the enemies that wished to exterminate them... and when God's people were "bad" God would allow them to become conquered. Then came along God's Son, who basically made a covenant with God's people AND those against God's people (gentiles). This covenant was for freedom and acceptance for EVERYONE by means of peace, without any debt to pay for this freedom. Then 600 years later, along came Muhammed, who said "I am the real messiah, here is your new religion, you must kill all who oppose this new religion, especially the Jews and Christians." And Muhammed went to work doing just that, and it is still going on today.

Now you may or may not believe in this "God" as being the one true God. If you don't you should still see that Islamic terrorism through this new religion of Muhammed is wrong to exterminate all other religions. If you do understand that this "God" is the real deal then you would realize even further that the "god" if Islam, Allah, IS Satan who is determined to destroy all of God's people. Either way you choose to believe, you should realize that Islam is bad, Islamic terrorism is unjust, and must be eliminated. BTW, America was born by secession from a religion that was bent on world domination, the Church of England, which seceded from another similar religion bent on world domination, the Roman Catholic Church. We are lucky today that neither The Church of England, The Roman Catholic Church, nor Islam has succeeded in dominating the world. IMPORTANT: The difference between the Roman and English churches and Islam, is that the first two religions, although gone astray, were/are based in Christianity, which is actually against murder and world domination, Islam on the other hand, is a counterfeit deity of Judaism and Christianity with the sole purpose destroying Christianity and Judaism.

If you do not see that Islam is not a "good religion" then it is possible that you yourself are being decieved. And since you are an intelligent man, and being decieved, you should wonder why such an intelligent man like yourrself can be decieved! you may realize that you are not being decieved because you are stupid (which you are not) but that you are being decieved because of the presence of one that is greater than you or any man that is not of God's people; you are being decieved by Satan himself.... which is how Islam is spreading. Islam, by the very words of its Quran, means to exterminate all Christians and jews. If you saw God today (seeing is believing) and He told you that there are no other Gods but only Him, you would understand what I'm talking about. Seeing the bigger picture can completely change the way one sees the smaller picture.

I'm not here trying to preach at you, I am simply trying to make the point that, it is very easy to say there is no such thing as the beautiful world outside when someone has never seen it but has existed in a black room with no doors or windows their whole life. If one never sees the world outside, they would probably not believe in it, and would probably agree that living in a black box is a good thing (better than bein dead right?). But if you do see the world outside, then your whole bases for reality changes and suddenly the black box goes from being a great existence to a prison. Seeing the bigger picture changes the perceived reality of any of the parts.

Islam is an attempt by satan to poison creation and have the last laugh in the end when there are no jews and christians left. A statement that radical can not just be made up. It IS reality.

You make a very powerful argument. I don't agree with you but you make a strong case.

What about American Muslims that truly love this country? What about the American soldiers that are Muslims? What about the Muslim Iraqi soldiers that continue to die in the fight against terrorism? Would you exterminate them too? Are you advocating ethnic cleansing?

I don't see where all Muslims are bad, as you state. I often work in the Arabic community as the Detroit area has the largest concentration of Arabs in the United States. The fact that I'm Jewish has never entered the picture in a business relationship. The bottom line is "Can you do the job for the specified price in the specified amount of time?" In 28 years in business I've never been asked what my religion is. Do you think my customers would kill me, given the chance? I don't think so.

Why does your religious viewpoint often enter your political posts? I'm not saying it's wrong, it's just unusual.

You make a very powerful argument. I don't agree with you but you make a strong case.

What about American Muslims that truly love this country? What about the American soldiers that are Muslims? What about the Muslim Iraqi soldiers that continue to die in the fight against terrorism? Would you exterminate them too? Are you advocating ethnic cleansing?

I don't see where all Muslims are bad, as you state. I often work in the Arabic community as the Detroit area has the largest concentration of Arabs in the United States. The fact that I'm Jewish has never entered the picture in a business relationship. The bottom line is "Can you do the job for the specified price in the specified amount of time?" In 28 years in business I've never been asked what my religion is. Do you think my customers would kill me, given the chance? I don't think so.

Why does your religious viewpoint often enter your political posts? I'm not saying it's wrong, it's just unusual.

He didn't say all Muslims are bad. He said Islam and Islamic terrorism is bad. There's a distinct difference. You didn't "hear" what he said, you only heard what you wanted to hear.

Please explain the difference.

What about American Muslims that truly love this country? .... Why does your religious viewpoint often enter your political posts? I'm not saying it's wrong, it's just unusual.
Muslims are people not the religion. religion is a way. people follow the way of their choosing in different degrees. Over time people either adhere more strictly to their way or decide to reject their way and choose another... but they always evolve to follow their way more and more. Generally people have the want to do good, but a tendency to default to what's bad. It takes an effort for the good in people to rise above their natural inclination to be selfish. and good intentioned people can fall for any flaw. I'm not saying that all muslims are evil, I am saying that the religion of islam, while iced with pretty things is evil in its core. It is not meant to appear evil but good, and I'm willing to bet that even muhammed believed it was "good" when he started it This is why it is so seductive as a religion; this is necessary in order for it to fool people. An effective cult NEVER is what it appears to be at first glance. The people are people, some good some bad, the religion is a problem when people get in too deep.

And, religion is the basis for this Jihad, this political problem, this thread, peoples moral foundation... which is the basis for all intentions... it should not be unusual that religion dictates viewpoint. I used to be atheist, and even that is a form of religion (it also takes faith to believe there is no god or moral law giver because it can not be empirically proven). even atheism dictates ones morals. But if there is a real God as described in the Bible, He and His Truth is the basis for everything. If that is so, it can not possibly be removed from the equation.

Ya cant talk politics without discerning what is right and what is wrong for people. Ya can't decide what is right and what is wrong without a foundation of what is moral. you cant create a foundation of morals without deciding if God is superior or if man is superior. If nature is superior (or man -- a purely humanistic viewpoint) then nature dictates only survival of the fittest with no accountability for domination. this makes killing ok... no accountability.

and... when i was an atheist, i never would have agreed with the way i now think.... i just could/would not see things this way.

anyways... like i said... im not trying to get all religious on ya'lls, and I'm not trying to hijack the political forums with religion. It's just that morals based on religion based on belief in what is God is an integral and inescapable part that serves as a foundation for the two differing views that polarize any issue.

Ahhh... it's so buch easier to debate science; at least that is based on the empirical.

He didn't say all Muslims are bad. He said Islam and Islamic terrorism is bad. There's a distinct difference. You didn't "hear" what he said, you only heard what you wanted to hear.

easy there, fossten, we all have a tendency to hear only what we want to hear. we're all the same kind of creature.... were no better than barry or anybody else.

were all screwups.....
some screwups just happen to do much worse things than others, like terrorism..... but we are all created equal, we've all been wrong.... we've all been there.

The only thing I can add to what my distinguished comrade said is that Islam, as taught by Mohammed, says that any unbeliever of Islam is an infidel, and therefore must be either converted or destroyed (killed, slaughtered). That doesn't leave much wiggle room. So any Muslim who follows those teachings and participates in terrorism is "bad".

Not all Muslims believe in their hearts that they should kill people who don't believe. This is due to their inherent sense of right and wrong; their conscience. Interestingly, this is despite what Islam teaches. These Muslims would be considered "not bad" by normal people, but probably would also be considered "bad" Muslims by the fanatical imams and clerics who preach terrorism.

Barry, I hope this helps. Probably not.

btw... i don't advocate exterminating muslims.... that's like throwing out the baby with the bathwater. I advocate exterminating islam because it advocates throwing out the baby with the bathwater; exterminating christians and Jews. I think the only way to rid the world of islam is by educationg the people. By fully showing them the "other side" of their religion, where the good part of their religion came from, maybe they could see that it should be abandoned for a better way. That goes for christians too (the people, not the religion)... they could and should be exposed to a better way (the real truth, something we all gotta search for). I think there is and has always been a big difference between religions and real Truth. religion is man's (faulty) interpretation of the real Truth, and it is usually pushed on the masses and implemented as a form of subjection so men can attain power. there is Truth, there is religion, and there are intentions, none are all bad, and only one is all good.

The bulk of the muslim world is prohibited from education... and can't read. that's sad... and a good way to keep them from being exposed to other ideas.
democracy is a good way to help the arab world become educated and free to learn things for themselves.... they can then decide how to live with the rest of us, than be told how (without why) to object to us.

The only thing I can add to what my distinguished comrade said is that Islam, as taught by Mohammed, says that any unbeliever of Islam is an infidel, and therefore must be either converted or destroyed (killed, slaughtered). That doesn't leave much wiggle room. So any Muslim who follows those teachings and participates in terrorism is "bad".

Not all Muslims believe in their hearts that they should kill people who don't believe. This is due to their inherent sense of right and wrong; their conscience. Interestingly, this is despite what Islam teaches. These Muslims would be considered "not bad" by normal people, but probably would also be considered "bad" Muslims by the fanatical imams and clerics who preach terrorism.

Barry, I hope this helps....

i couldn't agree more, mate! cheers!


well except for this
...probably not
it probably will!
thats why were talkin bout it! i think were all helping each other.... i hope.
that's what we should be doing!

You clearly stated that Islam is a false religion. IMHO all religion is false, made and enforced by man, who is flawed. Isn't that a basic idea in Christianity?

Do you really think that the ability to read will change viewpoints? I have trouble with that. Most Christians couldn't read until the 19th century. Nothing has changed since then. Isn't it arrogant to claim that yours is a true religion and Islam is false?

Isn't the Quran like the Bible in that it has always been subject to interpretation and those in charge of printing it have always had an influence on its meaning? Who's to say that the original Quran had all the rhetoric about killing infidels? I'm sure the Quran has been modified over time.

Isn't it true that the victors typically get to write the history?

You clearly stated that Islam is a false religion. IMHO all religion is false, made and enforced by man, who is flawed. Isn't that a basic idea in Christianity?
Yes, actually, i do agree that all religions are false (if you define false as not 100% truth) ....because i define religion as creation of man, who errs. But there is false and then there is FALSE, heh heh.... where one may be full of mistakes but with simple intentions and another may be full of intentional deceit with contrary intentions. And I think this is why we find problems within all religions. I also define Christianity as a NON-religion but a way of seeking the Truth. I believe that the Truth is found through Christ, therefore Christianity is The Way. I have much evidence to base this on which can be discussed in pm if you'd like. Catholicism is a religion based on Christianity. Protestantism is a religion based on Christianity. Baptist is a denomination of the protestant religion. They all have their faults. I think that once one indoctrinates christianity (writes their interpretation of Truth as law), they have created a religion. I believe in some religions can be found more of this Truth than in others. I think that even Islam has some truth sprinkled in there where those who do not adhere to it stricly find an answer of peace with it. I think that islam at it's core, it's "motive" if you will, is to do away with Christians and Jews -- the people not the religion. Really, I believe islam is just another religion which contains some truth, but its goal is deceit.
Do you really think that the ability to read will change viewpoints? I have trouble with that. Most Christians couldn't read until the 19th century. Nothing has changed since then. Isn't it arrogant to claim that yours is a true religion and Islam is false?
I do believe that the ability to read helps tremendously but is not 100% necessary. I believe that we all have something within in us that helps us recognize truth when we hear it, and lies as well. I believe that the worse off we become, the harder it is for that ability to discern Truth. But, in todays world where there are lies like never before, and where we are more selfish as individuals like never before, it is extremely important to be able to read everything we can and actually comb through every "story" to find small grains of Truth, and put the pieces together. Yes it would be arrogant to claim that my religion is better than another.... but i do not ascribe to any religion as I define it. I ascribe only to the way of finding the truth through Christ, and I don't at all have all the answers. I will spend my life trying to understand Truth. And, actually, I believe that the best representation of the way of Christianity as a form of religion was shortly after christ in the first generation of the churches... I think that in the last 2000 years, religions based in christianity have grown full of mistakes... that is why there is so much disagreement and confusion within them today.
Isn't the Quran like the Bible in that it has always been subject to interpretation and those in charge of printing it have always had an influence on its meaning? Who's to say that the original Quran had all the rhetoric about killing infidels? I'm sure the Quran has been modified over time.
Thats an excellent question. yes they probably have both gone through changes.... but what changes? that is the important question. Does the original Quran advocate eliminating Christians and Jews? yes i believe so because Muhammed did just that. Does the original Bible advocate that Jesus is the Way, Truth, and Life? well the Bible is a collection of many books written by people who God supposedly chose to write them... and some of these books have been taken out. but the oldest books of the old testament fortold of the coming of the messiah, and the new testament book described a life lived by Jesus that could not have been possible by any human unless they ARE God. Its a story that seems to make more and more sense the more i understand it (and i initially set out to disprove it, being an atheist). It is a very different way than the way of muhammed. the history of the books are of course complicated but understandable. but the books are definately not the only proof that there was a guy named Jesus who rose from the dead. Incidently, I have only heard once that Islam was initially bases on the fact that Jesus Christ IS the ONLY TRUE MESSIAH!!! And that it was quickly re-written to subject first the arabs to be conquered under islamic rule and then on to conquer the christians and jews. I heard this on tv by a muslim woman who was interviewed. I was so interested in this claim that i have searched for evidece since.... i have found none although. If muhammed created islam, and history shows that he went on to conquer arabs and jews and then christians... by bloody force, i kinda doubt that claim.... but if i find evidence of it, i will be inclined to see it through, because i can somehow believe that this is totally possible, even if muhammed ended up drunk on his own power and claimed he himself was the messiah (which he did).
Isn't it true that the victors typically get to write the history?yep! doesnt help education at all does it?

You clearly stated that Islam is a false religion. IMHO all religion is false, made and enforced by man, who is flawed. Isn't that a basic idea in Christianity?

Do you really think that the ability to read will change viewpoints? I have trouble with that. Most Christians couldn't read until the 19th century. Nothing has changed since then. Isn't it arrogant to claim that yours is a true religion and Islam is false?

Isn't the Quran like the Bible in that it has always been subject to interpretation and those in charge of printing it have always had an influence on its meaning? Who's to say that the original Quran had all the rhetoric about killing infidels? I'm sure the Quran has been modified over time.

Isn't it true that the victors typically get to write the history?

If you don't mind, barry, I have a little to contribute to this thread. I know you are talking with Gruuvin8, but it may be helpful.

I agree with your premise about religion, if by that you mean "religion" per se, created by man. But to worship a creator that has made His existence obvious to anyone who looks around him is not flawed; in fact, to do that fulfills the purpose for which we were created.

As far as the Quran being modified, I can't speak to that. I can, however, with confidence and much evidence, speak to the preservation of the Bible and the level of perfection with which it was translated into English. I won't bore you with the details here, but suffice it to say that God, who inspired the Bible, both possesses and has wielded the power to preserve his Word perfectly down through the centuries.

I disagree with your statement that "not much has changed since then." In fact, since the translation of the Bible into English (The Authorized King James Version), there have been numerous revivals and reformations, both in England and the United States, producing hundreds of thousands of conversions.

Christianity teaches faith and repentance in Jesus Christ as the atonement of our sins. He commands us to love one another and spread all his teachings around the world. Nowhere in the Bible does He EVER advocate killing unbelievers; in fact, He urges Christians to warn unbelievers before it is too late. So the question I have for you is this: If you only had two choices: The aforementioned Christianity, or the also aforementioned Islam, which one appears to be more God-like? Saving souls or killing people?

Not many people realize this, but the God of the Bible and Allah of the Quran are not the same person.

It isn't nearly as arrogant to claim that Christianity is the true religion than it is arrogant to kill anyone who doesn't believe in Islam and Mohammed. By its very nature, then, Islam is a false religion. No true religion would spread hate and death and terrorism.

Overall, I concur w/ Barry and Gruuvin8's assertion that all religions are "false" to an extent, and that NO religion has a full grasp on "the truth" about the universe we live in. That's why (in case 'yall couldn't tell) I'm very distrustful of any organized religion, and have a low tolerance for anyone who is too self-rightous about their own religion. I also believe that EACH religion has something "right" and "positive" (i.e.: GOOD) to bring to the table of universal understanding amongst all people of this earth. I simply don't believe that any one religion is purely evil, whether it's veiled in deceitful teachings or not. I live my life by filtering what I've read, seen, heard, feel etc. and draw my own experiences to guide me through life in a positive manner that I believe pleases my God. If I had one mantra to live my life by, it'd have to be "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you." Corrilaries to that are, "Don't throw stones if you live in a glass house", "Walk a mile in the other guy's shoes before passing judgement", etc. Instead of asking "What would Jesus Do?", I ask "What would Scooby Doo?" ;)

As far as this issue of Islam, the Quran and Muslims, I know several peace-loving Muslims who practice the religion of Islam. So I find it hard to believe Islam is evil at its core. However I have not studied the history of it or the teachings in any level of detail, and knowing how practitioners of religions are not necessarily experts, it could be possible that millions of peace-loving Muslims are being mislead like a flock of sheep (familiar visual?) as Gruuvin8 asserts. I do believe that Islam has a "dark side" (the movie "Malcom X" touches on it), but I also believe all religions have a "dark side". Not having studied the world's religions in excrutiating detail myself to see how they've evolved and been distorted over the centuries, who am I to judge any one of them?

Which brings me back to my original post. I still believe I was drawing a valid parallel comparing apples to apples. Maybe some think I was comparing a "red delicious apple" (sweet) to a "green apple" (sour), but both are apples none the less.

Overall, I concur w/ Barry and Gruuvin8's assertion that all religions are "false" to an extent, and that NO religion has a full grasp on "the truth" about the universe we live in. That's why (in case 'yall couldn't tell) I'm very distrustful of any organized religion, and have a low tolerance for anyone who is too self-rightous about their own religion. I also believe that EACH religion has something "right" and "positive" (i.e.: GOOD) to bring to the table of universal understanding amongst all people of this earth. I simply don't believe that any one religion is purely evil, whether it's veiled in deceitful teachings or not. I live my life by filtering what I've read, seen, heard, feel etc. and draw my own experiences to guide me through life in a positive manner that I believe pleases my God. If I had one mantra to live my life by, it'd have to be "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you." Corrilaries to that are, "Don't throw stones if you live in a glass house", "Walk a mile in the other guy's shoes before passing judgement", etc. Instead of asking "What would Jesus Do?", I ask "What would Scooby Doo?" ;)

As far as this issue of Islam, the Quran and Muslims, I know several peace-loving Muslims who practice the religion of Islam. So I find it hard to believe Islam is evil at its core. However I have not studied the history of it or the teachings in any level of detail, and knowing how practitioners of religions are not necessarily experts, it could be possible that millions of peace-loving Muslims are being mislead like a flock of sheep (familiar visual?) as Gruuvin8 asserts. I do believe that Islam has a "dark side" (the movie "Malcom X" touches on it), but I also believe all religions have a "dark side". Not having studied the world's religions in excrutiating detail myself to see how they've evolved and been distorted over the centuries, who am I to judge any one of them?

Which brings me back to my original post. I still believe I was drawing a valid parallel comparing apples to apples. Maybe some think I was comparing a "red delicious apple" (sweet) to a "green apple" (sour), but both are apples none the less.

The only thing your original posts do are show how confused you are. You imply on one hand that the Bush administration has "created" terrorists. You then state that the "holy war" has been going on for centuries. In other posts I have listed for everyone here, you have stated that the U.S. is the "bully" who is to blame for terrorism.

If this "holy war" has been going on for centuries, then logically one man and his country opposing it isn't going to "create" more of it. Opposition will either slow the advance or not affect it at all.

You can't have it both ways.

The only thing this last post does for you is illustrate that you don't know what you're talking about concerning Islam.

islam is like a rat poison cake with tasty buttercream icing.
some people just lick the icing, but they are still buying the cake.

Do the tasters deserve to be exterminated too?

Do the tasters deserve to be exterminated too?

now now.... i never EVER said muslims should be exterminated.... just islam!

do i have to draw a picture too?


________
| quran | <--islam


.O
-|- <----muslim
./\


This is what bothers me.... we can try to tell people till we're blue in the face but they still don't hear it.

This problem of terrorism does not stem from just a few radical people who are not correctly following their religion..... terrorism stems from their RELIGION!! it's written in their quran!!!! the root of the problem is not the people, its the religion!!

Do the tasters deserve to be exterminated too?

Classic liberal distortion.

Classic liberal distortion.
:I even if the truth would hit 'em like a Mack truck, they'd still only believe what they have wanted to believe.

:I even if the truth would hit 'em like a Mack truck, they'd still only believe what they have wanted to believe.

And try to make it look like you're actually saying what they believe.

And try to make it look like you're actually saying what they believe.

yes!... and oddly enough, they don't even seem to realize they are twisting things.

I mean, in all my numerous posts in this thread, I (and you) made the distinction between the religion and the people MANY times! And for some reason, they still think that we think they are one and the same. Nevermind if they agree or not, they still don't know what I typed MANY times in this thread!!! truly amazing! This is mainly why I tire quickly of arguing politics with liberals. I mean generally we conservatives hear and understand the arguments of the liberals, and often try to offer evidence of their errors and solutions to the real problems. But the liberals generally don't seem to even listen to anything a conservative says! It's no wonder they don't understand and offer solutions these days. They aren't even really paying attention to the core of the issues. They just dance around the issues enough to create a twist that fits their pre-supposed notions of delusion. How can they not realize that from a logical standpoint of argument, right or wrong, they are nowhere near using a follow through of logic to make their points, but just playing devil's advocate. This is almost beyond me because I refuse to believe they are just stupid, because they are clever at what they do! artful dodgers!

Maybe not 100% of the time but usually, and certainly in this thread!

And I'm not really trying to offend anyone here..... heh heh, cuz I don't think that those who might be offended ever really paid enough attention!

This is almost beyond me because I refuse to believe they are just stupid, because they are clever at what they do! artful dodgers!

The reason I pushed for a 'Political Forum' on a car site was to try to understand how the other side thinks.

Quick point: The were some comments about having a separate site linked to this site to carry on political discussions. I know I am not in favor of that and would not frequent that off-site very often. I want to discuss politics with everyday people and I want to effect those everyday people like the ones that would tend to frequent a car site. I think they are the most fertile group to engage.

I don't understand how almost 50% of this populace votes for the other guy. I really, really don't. How can 2 people look at the same issue and come out of it with completely different viewpoints? I just don't get it. Especially when I personally feel the side I usually side with is correct on the issues 80-90% of the time.

This is the reason I am here. 1st to have fun. 2nd to share ideas. 3rd to poke some fun at the opposition and 4th to maybe open up some minds that may think or believe differently than myself.

... This is the reason I am here. 1st to have fun. 2nd to share ideas. 3rd to poke some fun at the opposition and 4th to maybe open up some minds that may think or believe differently than myself.
:I

http://www.faithfreedom.org/Quran.htm

this is a website that lists some of the things in the quran that are destructive. you can click on the points and be redirected to another website with the text of the quran (the watered down english version). here are a few of the main points that make the quran and islam a serious problem:

Don't bother to warn the disbelievers. Allah has blinded them. Theirs will be an awful doom. Kill disbelievers wherever you find them. If they attack you, then kill them. Such is the reward of disbelievers.
War is ordained by Allah.
We shall cast terror into the hearts of those who disbelieve. Their habitation is the Fire
Allah will bestow a vast reward on those who fight in religious wars
Have no unbelieving friends. Kill the unbelievers wherever you find them.
If the unbelievers do not offer you peace, kill them wherever you find them. Against such you are given clear warrant
When you fight with disbelievers, do not retreat. Those who do will go to hell
Exhort the believers to fight. They will win easily, because disbelievers are without intelligence.
Slay the idolaters wherever you find them.
If you refuse to fight, Allah will afflict you with a painful doom.
Fight the disbelievers and hypocrites. Be harsh with them. They are all going to hell anyway.
Don't pray for idolaters (not even for your family) after it is clear they are people of hell-fire.
Fight disbelievers who are near you, and let them see the harshness in you.
Allah does not hear the prayer of disbelievers.
Allah sends some people astray
Iblis will lead humans astray. Only perfect Muslims will be safe from him. The rest will go to hell.
Allah could have led everyone to the truth, but he chose not to
Allah destroyed entire towns, yet the people still disbelieved.
The people cried out for mercy, but Allah killed them anyway.
Whoever thinks that Allah will not give Muhammad victory should go hang himself.
It's okay for believers to own slaves
Allah leads those who do not believe in the Hereafter astray by making things work out OK in this life, so that he can torment them forever in the next. They will get the worst punishment and will be the greatest losers.
Allah will taunt Christians on the day of their doom, saying: Where are My partners whom ye imagined?
Never help disbelievers.
Allah will tear Christians apart for ascribing partners to him.
It's OK to own slaves.
Allah does not love disbelievers
Allah will give disbelievers a little comfort for a little while, and then he'll torment them forever with a heavy doom.
Allah sends whoever he wants astray.
If Allah feels like it, he will drown everyone
Allah sends some people astray and then punishes them for it by burning them in the Fire.
Allah will taunt the disbelievers that he torments in the fire, saying: "Taste the doom for that ye disbelieved."
Smite the necks of the disbelievers whenever you fight against them. Those who die fighting for Allah will be rewarded.
Allah curses people by making them deaf and blind.
If you refuse to fight for Allah, he will punish you with a painful doom.
But if you're willing to fight for Allah, he will provide you with lots of booty.
Don't make friends with Allah's enemies. For those who do so, Allah has prepared a dreadful doom.
On the Last Day good Muslims will not love their non-Muslim friends and family members, not even their fathers, sons, or brothers (or their mothers, daughters, or sisters).
Don't be friends with disbelievers. They are your (and Allah's) enemy.
Don't be friends with those who have warred against you because of religion. Whoever makes friends with them is a wrong-doer.
Don't be friends with those who disbelieve in the Hereafter. They are Allah's enemies.
Allah loves those who fight for him.
A hypocritical Jew looks like an ass carrying books. Those who deny the revelations of Allah are ugly
Allah seals the hearts of those who believe and then disbelieve so that they can understand nothing.
Don't bother to ask Allah to forgive the disbelievers. He will never forgive them.
Muhammad's wives need to be careful. If they criticize their husband, Allah will replace them with better ones

Wow. I knew it was bad, but...that's powerful. Do you lefties see why we can't reason with these fanatics?

!

:Bang :Bang :Bang

I'm going to try this ONE more time before I give up, as you seem to have a mind-block comprehending what I've stated.

The only thing your original posts do are show how confused you are. You imply on one hand that the Bush administration has "created" terrorists.

To deny that terrorist attacks have increased rapidly over the last year or so in response to the US invasion of Iraq is ignoring FACTS and shows pure ignorance.

You then state that the "holy war" has been going on for centuries.

Yep, most here agree as well.

In other posts I have listed for everyone here, you have stated that the U.S. is the "bully" who is to blame for terrorism.

You've exagerated my statements once again. No where did I place 100% of the blame for all the world's terrorism on the US or at BuSh's feet. But to claim that the US foreign policy over the last several decades, and more specifically this Iraq war, is totally innocent of instigating backlash from terrorists is again blatant ignorance.

If this "holy war" has been going on for centuries, then logically one man and his country opposing it isn't going to "create" more of it. Opposition will either slow the advance or not affect it at all.

Since when has logic applied to terrorists? If you walk near a hornets nest and you get stung, what do you think will happen if you poke a stick into that nest? You better be prepared to get stung many times over. A smart man would put on protective gear before poking that hornets nest. I only wish one was in the White House.

You can't have it both ways.

Already have.

The only thing this last post does for you is illustrate that you don't know what you're talking about concerning Islam.

Thank you Mr. Obvious. The only one here that seems to (or claims to) have an innate knowledge of Islam and the Quran is Gruuvin8. However his agressive, passionate approach makes his credibility questionable. He may be totally right, and I've never claimed to know more, only that I'm having a hard time swallowing every word he says.

yes!... and oddly enough, they don't even seem to realize they are twisting things.

I mean, in all my numerous posts in this thread, I (and you) made the distinction between the religion and the people MANY times! And for some reason, they still think that we think they are one and the same. Nevermind if they agree or not, they still don't know what I typed MANY times in this thread!!! truly amazing! This is mainly why I tire quickly of arguing politics with liberals. I mean generally we conservatives hear and understand the arguments of the liberals, and often try to offer evidence of their errors and solutions to the real problems. But the liberals generally don't seem to even listen to anything a conservative says! It's no wonder they don't understand and offer solutions these days. They aren't even really paying attention to the core of the issues. They just dance around the issues enough to create a twist that fits their pre-supposed notions of delusion. How can they not realize that from a logical standpoint of argument, right or wrong, they are nowhere near using a follow through of logic to make their points, but just playing devil's advocate. This is almost beyond me because I refuse to believe they are just stupid, because they are clever at what they do! artful dodgers!

Maybe not 100% of the time but usually, and certainly in this thread!

And I'm not really trying to offend anyone here..... heh heh, cuz I don't think that those who might be offended ever really paid enough attention!

Gruuvin8, THANK YOU for making clear the distinction between the people (Muslims) and the religion (Islam). We GOT it, you either just don't realize it, or refuse to accept it.

The rest of your tirade describes exactly how I feel taking to brainwashed conservatives. This is a two-way street, bud. :Beer

Exactly what was your intention with this thread? To make us think it's not fair to come down so hard on islamic terrorism because terrorists existed within Christian circles too? Two wrongs don't make a right. It's obvious that many folks don't understand what it is about islam that fuels terrorism, so they act like we should see the issue from the terrorist muslim's point of view, and give islam a little more respect. I know what you are getting at. It's misdirection -- it's a waste of time. I'm trying to show you where our current problem with terrorism comes from, which is also a waste of time. So, read the Bible and the quran, and educate yourself. Proclaim your insight into the problem of terrorism when you actually understand it. And thanks for the beer! :Beer

He may be totally right, and I've never claimed to know more, only that I'm having a hard time swallowing every word he says.

You wouldn't have such a hard time swallowing what he says if your foot wasn't shoved so far down your throat you could sit on it.

You DID call the U.S. the bully that is getting what it deserves. The quote is in this very thread. You're not fooling anybody. Prevarication only works in the absence of good sense AND evidence.

And I would like to point out, since you evidently need to hear from Mr. Obvious, that there hasn't been ONE successful attack on U.S. soil since 9/11, and YES you can credit President Bush for that.

You wouldn't have such a hard time swallowing what he says if your foot wasn't shoved so far down your throat you could sit on it.
Is this hostility really necessary? Grow up.

You DID call the U.S. the bully that is getting what it deserves. The quote is in this very thread. You're not fooling anybody. Prevarication only works in the absence of good sense AND evidence.


You keep arguing in circles, pulling the trigger, and all I hear is "click, click" and no "bang". You've run out of bullets. You think I'm confused. I say you are confused from reading more into my statements than what is there. Take off your shrub-colored glasses and re-read my statements and check back when you fully comprehend what I've said. Until then, PISS OFF.

Exactly what was your intention with this thread? To make us think it's not fair to come down so hard on islamic terrorism because terrorists existed within Christian circles too? Two wrongs don't make a right.

Cliff notes for Gruuvin8 and fossten:

My intention of this thread:
1) To point out that religion-fueled terrorism is not only limited to muslim extremists. I used Rudolf as an example.
2) To question hypothetically, "how many more homegrown terrorists have been spawned by BuSh and his actions in Iraq". My proof that BuSh has "spawned" terrorists is that the recent attacks in London were by people who are essentially "homegrown", and they were acting in retaliation of Britan's presence in Iraq, which is a result of BuSh's declaration of war. I did not even initially mention the extraordinary increase (since even a year ago) in suicide bombers (the "insurgents") attacking Iraqi civilians and US soldiers in Iraq, but they count too as A) they are most likely "homegrown", and B) it'd be a safe bet that most of them (the suicide bombers) would not have become "terrorists" had the US stayed out of Iraq.

NO, two wrongs don't make a right, but listening to most of the drivel coming from the RWWs here one would think it does.

I know Barry gets it. I'm pretty sure Gruuvin8 and maybe even Bryan now gets it. The only question remaining in my mind is does fossten get it? WAIT, DON'T ANSWER FOSSTEN, I REALLY DON'T CARE.

Are we having fun yethttp://www.lincolnvscadillac.com//images/icons/icon11.gif or whathttp://www.lincolnvscadillac.com//images/icons/icon9.gif!

I must admit that I've learned a great deal from Groovin8's posts. I can not say the same for Fossten. It is sad to see someone get their rocks off insulting anyone with a different point of view.

The rest of us have managed to tone down the hostilities yet fossten persists in trying to force his opinions down our throats. He has even taken to calling people liars. I believe his personal attacks have gone on far too long and I think it is time for something to be done about it.

What do you all think?

What do you all think?

You know my answer. :yourock:

I must admit that I've learned a great deal from Groovin8's posts. I can not say the same for Fossten. It is sad to see someone get their rocks off insulting anyone with a different point of view.

The rest of us have managed to tone down the hostilities yet fossten persists in trying to force his opinions down our throats. He has even taken to calling people liars. I believe his personal attacks have gone on far too long and I think it is time for something to be done about it.

What do you all think?

I think you should stop crying like a little baby every time someone gives you a taste of your own medicine. You are the master of name-calling on this forum; I don't do one-tenth the insulting and hating you do.

I'm not here to coddle you, not here to teach you. If you don't have the good sense to accept information that is accurate and true just because you don't personally like the person sharing that information, that's your own problem.

You libs don't scare me one little bit. Anytime you guys want to start keeping score and add up all barry's (or Johnny's, for that matter) personal attacks and compare them to mine, GIVE IT YOUR BEST SHOT. As I've said before, I don't have a thing to worry about.

Oh well, he still doesn't get it. We can always ignore him and hope he'll go away. Let's try that.

No Fossten. If you'd read my posts I don't hate anyone except George Bush. I hate George Bush because I believe he has been far less than truthful with the American people and I believe that he will be held accountable for it.

I called someone a moron early on in my stay here and I was soundly thrashed for it. I think maybe Kbob might remember that. I don't think I've done that since then. There is a fine line between ribbing someone and stabbing them. You seem to miss the distinction.

The object of Saturday nights chat was supposed to be about toning down the disagreeable posts. Your name came up frequently. We all determined that we wanted to keep the format that had developed over time. That format clearly does not allow for your type of personal assaults.

If I can change, so can you.

My intention of this thread:
1) To point out that religion-fueled terrorism is not only limited to muslim extremists. I used Rudolf as an example.
2) To question hypothetically, "how many more homegrown terrorists have been spawned by BuSh and his actions in Iraq".
What do you mean by "spawned"? Bush and Blair are taking a brutal tyrant out of power and establishing freedom, democracy, education, and prosperity in a country that has been oppressed. We did not send troops to Iraq to kill innocent people like the terrorists do in London and New York. The people the US military are fighting in Iraq are insurgents that oppose freedom, not the innocent bystanders who are greatful for the US establishing freedom. Don't forget that the Iraqis praised the US actions when they pulled down the statue of Saddam. Then insurgents who oppose freedom came out of the woodwork to fight -- they should lose, by coalition force, to protect what the iraqis want.
The people the terrorists kill are innocent bystanders. They do nothing to stop the military; they only try to create fear so that the US will stop defending the Iraqis freedom. Bush did not create terrorists. It is their own hatred of freedom for all (infidels) that causes muslims to become terrorists -- dictated directly by islam.
If you blame Bush's actions as wrong because you think those actions are responsible for creating terrorism, then you must also think that pregnant women and their surgeons are wrong because they created, or "spawned", terrorists who blew up abortion clinics. By the same reasoning, we could argue that you "spawn" hostility in these forums because you push issues we don't agree with. We all know the truth. Everyone is responsible for their own actions. If you pose a viewpoint we don't like and we become hostile, it is our fault. If a man uses the guise of christianity (which opposes violence) to blow up a clinic, you can not blame christianity, or the actions of the woman or surgeon; you must blame the man.

If a man wants to kill innocent Americans and Londoners who want to see the middle east become free, and he kills these people because his religion tells him to do exactly that and because of the hatred in his heart, you can only blame the terrorist for hating and killing, and you can certainly question the religion that has brainwashed him into doing such horrible things, but you can not blame the Americans (Bush included) or Londoners (Blair included) for the terrorist's actions.
Bush and Blair have created the solution to end terrorism through freedom and education (not killing innocent people); they have not created the terrorists. You have been pushing this twisted view of ill-founded logic for a while now and we know it. We are not missing your point -- you are missing the point! You are wrong!
Check Mate!

btw.... oil DOES play a part in this conflict in two ways.
Bush is a smart oil man, and he knows that the spread of terrorism and tyranny through islam is sitting on the energy that fuels the world. He knows this is very dangerous for the whole world. Instead of taking the oil away from the terrorists, he is taking the terrorists away from the oil. He is not trying to control or steal the oil. He is saying to the Iraqi people, "here, have freedom and prosperity to take control of your oil so you can play fair with the rest of the world." Our involvement in Iraq may not be perfect, but in the end, it is a win win situation for all, including (especially) for the Iraqis.

The fear of angering those who control this oil is what causes the other major power players in the world to "hush up" about islam and not expose it for how it is brainwashing its followers to hate and kill all non-muslims. The fear of exposing Bush and Blair's intentions as "good" is what causes the leftist media to "hush up" about the truth about islam.

What do you mean by "spawned"?

You answered your own question......

Then insurgents who oppose freedom came out of the woodwork to fight --

IOW, the invasion of Iraq gave them reason to pick up arms and become terrorists. I in NO WAY implied that BuSh or Blair strapped bombs onto innocent people and told them "Here, now go be a terrorist".

Bush and Blair are taking a brutal tyrant out of power and establishing freedom, democracy, education, and prosperity in a country that has been oppressed.

Yea! Whoopie!

We did not send troops to Iraq to kill innocent people like the terrorists do in London and New York.

Never said we did.

The people the US military are fighting in Iraq are insurgents that oppose freedom, not the innocent bystanders who are greatful for the US establishing freedom.

Duh!

Don't forget that the Iraqis praised the US actions when they pulled down the statue of Saddam.

Double Duh!

Then insurgents who oppose freedom came out of the woodwork to fight --

EXACTLY!

they should lose, by coalition force, to protect what the iraqis want.

:I

The people the terrorists kill are innocent bystanders. They do nothing to stop the military;

Nope, can't STOP the US military forces, but nearly 1800 deaths is certainly taking a bite out of it.

they only try to create fear so that the US will stop defending the Iraqis freedom.

Yep.

Bush did not create terrorists. It is their own hatred of freedom for all (infidels) that causes muslims to become terrorists -- dictated directly by islam.

Here's where my communication skills must be lacking. In my mind, "create" and "spawned" are two different things, while you apparently see them as being the same. My bad, see above clarification ("the invasion of Iraq gave them reason to pick up arms and become terrorists.")

If you blame Bush's actions as wrong because you think those actions are responsible for creating terrorism, then you must also think that pregnant women and their surgeons are wrong because they created, or "spawned", terrorists who blew up abortion clinics.

Nope, don't agree. In the first example, the terrorists are responding to an action that was not condoned by the governing power. In the second example, the terrorist was responding to an action that WAS condoned by the governing power.

By the same reasoning, we could argue that you "spawn" hostility in these forums because you push issues we don't agree with.

:F

We all know the truth. Everyone is responsible for their own actions. If you pose a viewpoint we don't like and we become hostile, it is our fault.

Amen.

If a man uses the guise of christianity (which opposes violence) to blow up a clinic, you can not blame christianity, or the actions of the woman or surgeon; you must blame the man.

Read up on Eric Rudolph, you'll find that his radical version of christianity fostered hate and violence. Why can't you blame his "religion"? Mohammed's interpretation of Islam certainly is NOT the only "religion" on the face of this earth that desires "total world domination" at the expense of "killing infidels" as necessary.

If a man wants to kill innocent Americans and Londoners who want to see the middle east become free, and he kills these people because his religion tells him to do exactly that and because of the hatred in his heart, you can only blame the terrorist for hating and killing, and you can certainly question the religion that has brainwashed him into doing such horrible things, but you can not blame the Americans (Bush included) or Londoners (Blair included) for the terrorist's actions.

Again, see above clarification ("the invasion of Iraq gave them reason to pick up arms and become terrorists.")

Bush and Blair have created the solu