The God Driven President
Mike L.
<violinmike@hotmail.com>instructed me to strike at Saddam, which I did, and now I am
determined to solve the problem in the Middle East. If you help me I
will act, and if not, the elections will come and I will have to focus
on them.
-- George W Bush, according to Palestinian Prime Minister Mahmoud
Abbas, from minutes acquired by Haaretz from cease-fire negotiations
between Abbas and faction leaders from the Hamas, Islamic Jihad and
the Popular and Democratic Fronts (circa June, 2003), quoted from
Arnon Regular, "'Road map is a life saver for us,'
American Military Casualties in Iraq
Date
Total
In Combat
American Deaths
Since war began (3/19/03): 3646 3014
Since "Mission Accomplished" (5/1/03) (the list)
3507
2906
Since Capture of Saddam (12/13/03): 3185 2708
Since Handover (6/29/04): 2787 2381
Since Election (1/31/05): 2209 2118
American Wounded Official Estimated
Total Wounded: 26953 23000 - 100000
Dev
<thedeviliam@fastmail.fm>Yes, there is a valid argument against saying that religious delusion
was the motivation for the monkey with the helmet with the country
that God loves. It could have had something to do with oil or some
creepy personal legacy to get back at daddy ("I answer to the bigger
daddy"). Of course, if religious faith is respectable we have no
grounds for criticizing Osama Bin Laden or anyone else that acts on
faith. You can't reasonably say this religious faith is okay and that
is not because whenever religious faith is acceptable reason is
nowhere to be found anyway.
Polls say that most Americans refuse to elect an atheist president.
This when we are in a ideological war with the faithful. Brilliant.
random
<random.shba@gmail.com>You don't believe a word he is saying, yet you think his words about
being sent from God are honest truth and not (Godless forbid) a
politician's way of making himself look good.
yeshu2004@gmail.com
<yeshu2004@gmail.com>historians will hail him as the "best" President that America ever
had. When he first moved into the White House, his agenda was totally
different. American economy, health and immigration were given top
priorities. Then came out of the blue 9/11. Only a coward of a
President will run away when terrorism struck America. As Roosevelt
responded to Pearl Harbor attack, Bush manfully responded to 9/11 and
quickly brought two al-Qaida countries - Afghanistan & Iraq - under
American control. That by itself is a great achievement.Russians were
defeated in Afghanistan and they had to withdraw in great humiliation.
In Iraq many GIs, of course, lost their lives. But it isn't a
surprise. During World War II, there were more than 47,000 American
casualties just to take a small Japanese island of Okinawa. It is by
such sacrifice that the US became a superpower. In Iraq it is very
difficult to get a quick victory. Iran & Syria are the real trouble
makers. Putin gives them the most sophiticated weapons. So the war
drags on. But it is foolish to quit Iraq just to satisfy war critics
who do not know anything about ground reality. Bush has succeded in
having a separate peaceful zone for the Kurds in Iraq. Iraqi oilfields
are under American control, and in a future war with Iran Iraqi oil
will be crucial for Americans. Furthermore, it is not a war to end war
as in World War II; it is a war against Islamic terrorism; a war
against a barbarian culture. It will take time to wipe out a bizarre
culture. No wonder Bush was given Divine instruction to attack al-
Qaida, for this fanatical terrorism does not end with Iraq, it is
global, and it may strike anywhere at anytime to destroy modern
civilization.
> >http://www.antiwar.com/casualties/- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
bonfly
<anubis2@aapt.net.au>tourettekissmyass or 'yeshua' whatever the fuck your fucking fucked up
fucking fuck hole name is, Would you like to know what the rest of
the world thinks?
* The USA has already lost more citizens in the IRAQ war than it lost
on 911. You're real good at math there.
* Bush lied about everything to go to war, first in Afghanistan, then
in Iraq.
* Rumsfeld and Cheney have made an absolute "killing" out of the war
(sad pun intended)
Go back to Texas and get your spam pay for this fucked up spam shit
post.
> > >http://www.antiwar.com/casualties/-Hide quoted text -
random
<random.shba@gmail.com>On Jul 29, 9:46 am, "yeshu2...@gmail.com" <yeshu2...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Although Bush critics claim that he is "the worst" President, future
> historians will hail him as the "best" President that America ever
> had. When he first moved into the White House, his agenda was totally
> different. American economy, health and immigration were given top
> priorities.
>Then came out of the blue 9/11. Only a coward of a
> President will run away when terrorism struck America.
So far I agree, terrorism cannot be ignored.
> As Roosevelt
> responded to Pearl Harbor attack, Bush manfully responded to 9/11 and
> quickly brought two al-Qaida countries - Afghanistan & Iraq - under
> American control.
Now here is a problem.
How did you reach to the conclusion that Iraq had anything to do with
Al-Qaida?
The formal reason for this war was the weapons of mass destruction,
not the connection to terrorism.
> That by itself is a great achievement.Russians were
> defeated in Afghanistan and they had to withdraw in great humiliation.
> In Iraq many GIs, of course, lost their lives. But it isn't a
> surprise. During World War II, there were more than 47,000 American
> casualties just to take a small Japanese island of Okinawa. It is by
> such sacrifice that the US became a superpower. In Iraq it is very
> difficult to get a quick victory. Iran & Syria are the real trouble
> makers. Putin gives them the most sophiticated weapons. So the war
> drags on.
Here is another problem.
If Iran and Syria are the real troublemakers, why attack Iraq and give
Iran exactly what it wants?
> But it is foolish to quit Iraq just to satisfy war critics
> who do not know anything about ground reality. Bush has succeded in
> having a separate peaceful zone for the Kurds in Iraq. Iraqi oilfields
> are under American control, and in a future war with Iran Iraqi oil
> will be crucial for Americans. Furthermore, it is not a war to end war
> as in World War II; it is a war against Islamic terrorism; a war
> against a barbarian culture. It will take time to wipe out a bizarre
> culture.
How do you suggest something like that can be done?
> No wonder Bush was given Divine instruction to attack al-
> Qaida, for this fanatical terrorism does not end with Iraq, it is
> global, and it may strike anywhere at anytime to destroy modern
> civilization.
Again, if the purpose was to fight against Islamic terrorists, why
center only on Iraq where the effect is exactly the opposite of the
desired result?
> > >http://www.antiwar.com/casualties/-Hide quoted text -
rappoccio
<rappoccio@gmail.com>vast majority of US citizens become progressively more and more
stupid.
You're onto a good start yourself.
> > >http://www.antiwar.com/casualties/-Hide quoted text -
scooter
<scooter.leto@yahoo.com>President in which the President stated that his M.E. policy was based
on his "theological perspective" I don't have "Times Select" or I
would post the article. It came from the July 17th edition. Bush also
told Brooks that he believes there is an "Almighty" and that the
"Almighty had given the gift of "freedom for everyone". Apprently,
Bush thinks he's charged with seeing that they have it. The problem is
that not everyone's ideal of freedom is congruent with Bush's.
Especially when he thinks that "freedom" is to be crammed down the
throats of others who do not share those views. Freedom is not and
cannot be dictated by the point of a gun.
Basically, Bush operates on the same frequency as any militant muslim
group insofar as his decision making and policy is based on his
religious beliefs. Now, some are afraid to call this fanatical because
they think the U.S. is immune from such criticism no matter how
similar their rationale is to terrorist organizations. For this
reason, I think he is as dangerous as any of them. This guy is a
freakin nut job, as far as I'm concerned, and needs to be removed from
office.
Mike L.
<violinmike@hotmail.com>right to vote for him. I believe he earnestly prays in the prayer
group
at the white house. I believe he believes in God and Dick ( cheney)
Dev
<thedeviliam@fastmail.fm>wrote:
> Although Bush critics claim that he is "the worst" President, future
> historians will hail him as the "best" President that America ever
> had.
<to the theme of "Batman">
Dunna dunna dunna dunna dunna dunna dunna dunna QUOTELIIIIIST!
> When he first moved into the White House, his agenda was totally
> different. American economy, health and immigration were given top
> priorities. Then came out of the blue 9/11.
Not out of the blue. Osama was even polite enough to tell us what was
going to happen.
> Only a coward of a
> President will run away when terrorism struck America.
Only a retard would invade the wrong fucking country.
> As Roosevelt
> responded to Pearl Harbor attack, Bush manfully responded to 9/11 and
> quickly brought two al-Qaida countries - Afghanistan & Iraq - under
> American control.
Guess which country most of the bombers were from? Iraq? Wrong.
Afghanistan? Wrong. You have no fucking idea, do you? Maybe you could
be president.
> That by itself is a great achievement.Russians were
> defeated in Afghanistan and they had to withdraw in great humiliation.
> In Iraq many GIs, of course, lost their lives. But it isn't a
> surprise. During World War II, there were more than 47,000 American
> casualties just to take a small Japanese island of Okinawa. It is by
> such sacrifice that the US became a superpower. In Iraq it is very
> difficult to get a quick victory. Iran & Syria are the real trouble
> makers. Putin gives them the most sophiticated weapons. So the war
> drags on. But it is foolish to quit Iraq just to satisfy war critics
> who do not know anything about ground reality.
This war was started by people who didn't know the difference between
a Sunni and a Shi'ite. This war was started by people who thought we
would be greeted as liberators. Every prediction by the hawks about
this war has been _wrong_ and now they're asking us to take their word
for it that things will get better as we throw young Americans into
the meat grinder. As Bill Maher said, "Put down the magic 8-Ball
Nostradamus!"
> Bush has succeded in
> having a separate peaceful zone for the Kurds in Iraq. Iraqi oilfields
> are under American control, and in a future war with Iran Iraqi oil
> will be crucial for Americans.
Here is something that pisses me off: there is an escalation, a very
consistent escalation, of casualties in Iraq from month to month.
Things are GETTING WORSE. NOT BETTER. This is a fact that would be
obvious to a sane child.
> Furthermore, it is not a war to end war
> as in World War II; it is a war against Islamic terrorism; a war
> against a barbarian culture.
It is a war against an ideology--_this_ is correct. This is where many
liberals fuck up. We _are_ at war with Islamic literalism and the fact
that some assholes (even Bush) are too PC to admit that a religion can
be bad is costing us in blood. If America wasn't so full of Christians
it would be a lot easier for us to just say that Islam is insane, but
since Christianity is equally unsubstantiated this "religious
tolerance" jazz is actually killing people.
> It will take time to wipe out a bizarre
> culture.
"Bizarre" fucking how? Wow--they believe in a psychotic religion with
no evidence. That is _completely_ different than other cultures.
Listen: I think Islamic culture is insane but I get to say that
without being a hypocrite because I don't follow an equally stupid
faith myself. Christians are not better than Bin Laden. Christians are
the same.
> No wonder Bush was given Divine instruction to attack al-
> Qaida, for this fanatical terrorism does not end with Iraq, it is
> global, and it may strike anywhere at anytime to destroy modern
> civilization.
Of course we are at war with Islam. But if you're religious--guess
what? You have no case for your beliefs being any better than theirs.
They are unsubstantiated in an equal way.
I know that Iraq is not isolated. I know we are fighting a larger
threat. It is _faith_ that we are fighting. Islam is what unites this
terrorist front and the lack of logic behind it is what should be
attacked--but we can't, because so many Westerners are guilty of the
same retarded religious dogshit. If you believe Jesus Christ was born
of a virgin as the Son of God then you are in no position to call the
terrorists crazy. YOU ARE THE SAME.
> > >http://www.antiwar.com/casualties/-Hide quoted text -
scooter
<scooter.leto@yahoo.com>mentioned. The certitude of Bush comes from the same source as the
Christians on this NG--its theological. His foriegn policy is based on
his theological beliefs. he said so himself. So, its like a YE
creationist creating foriegn policy. Is it any wonder his convictions
are so concretized? He's got the urge, the urge to surge. Think about
the way a YE creationist defends the age of the earth being 6k yrs
old--not with facts or reality--but with dogmatic beliefs. The man is
a menace.
> > > >http://www.antiwar.com/casualties/-Hidequoted text -
>
> > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
Dev
<thedeviliam@fastmail.fm>and skeptical as possible when addressing the theological motivations
of evil people. I want to prove that no slant is required to prove the
real consequences of faith regarding tyrants. For example, Hitler
claimed theological motivations and theology _was_ beyond any shadow
of a doubt instrumental in bringing him into power. As for his
"personal" beliefs...it is a little dicey. My central point regarding
Hitler is that it doesn't much matter when you consider that the real
issue is the role theism played in his actions, which was huge.
Obviously, I hate George W. Bush. I can only speculate as to the
overall response to the assassination of him and Dick Cheney. The
media would be very confused as to how to react. They would have no
choice but to pretend like it was some kind of tragedy. Patriotism is
racism like that. Bush and Osama Bin Laden do deserve to be placed on
the same pedestal.
My central point regarding my antitheism lies in the tolerance of
Islam by Christians because deep down inside the Christians know they
are full of shit about everything. Islam is not a religion of peace.
Christianity is not a religion of peace. It is all shit and kills
people. Fuck stupid ideologies or die: that is what we're up against.
> > > > >http://www.antiwar.com/casualties/-Hidequotedtext -
scooter
<scooter.leto@yahoo.com>theological certitude reflected in his foriegn policy. That's what
they should be talking about on Meet the Press--not whether or not the
surge is working--but why the fuck we are "surging" to begin with. AT
leaest I have the comfort of knowing I'm not the only one who sees
this insanity.
Dev
<thedeviliam@fastmail.fm>shit. Why is there this magic word that makes damaging ideologies off-
limits? The only moral position is antitheism period. Christians are
unintentionally being complicit regarding the evil of Islam because of
their fear. Even Bush is willing to lie (well, not such a stretch for
him) and say "Islam is a religion of peace".
Ideally, theists should just be treated like other stupid animals we
eat.
bonfly
<anubis2@aapt.net.au>whoever types your posts on the computer the book "State of War" by
James Risen. Ask them to read to one of your relatives who
understands English ... maybe they could explain some of the simpler
concepts to you. Failing that I'll probably smack you in the head
with the book.
... hmmm ... few times.
(lots)
On Jul 29, 5:46 pm, "yeshu2...@gmail.com" <yeshu2...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >http://www.antiwar.com/casualties/-Hide quoted text -
Word_Swordsman
<Ouachitabassangler@gmail.com>dog in Boston with crap dried in his tail and called the Supreme Being
Whose Butt Don't Stink.
The President has faith in the only true God. Almost all Presidents
shared that same God. An exception is Clinton. Hypocrites are not
numbered among the favored.
Islam studies a religion of death. There is no life there. Their
ultimate marching order is to destroy all humans if necessary, taking
their own lives. Survival means nothing to them. They are uncivilized,
corrupt, abominable fools. Christians brought the height of
civilization to the world as well as the Savior.
Jim
Word_Swordsman
<Ouachitabassangler@gmail.com>Pearl Harbor in 1941, and far below the single invasion of Normandy by
allies, the objective less directly concerning American security than
the current war on terror. On D-Day, June 6, 1941 America lost 29,000
killed, 106,000 wounded or missing at Normandy. Your problem is you
are a coward, probably willing to be the first to throw up a white
flag of surrender should America come under attack. You can't stomach
doing the right things at the tight times that could cause a drop of
your blood to spill. Under those circumstances you would be inducted
anyway, then promptly shot to death for cowardice as you tremble
between some rocks.
Jim
random
<random.shba@gmail.com>the country.
Also, the attack on Iraq had nothing to do with an attack against
America.
On Jul 30, 10:52 am, Word_Swordsman <Ouachitabassang...@gmail.com>
wrote:
rappoccio
<rappoccio@gmail.com>On Jul 30, 4:41 am, Word_Swordsman <Ouachitabassang...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> You reprobate atheists can't tell Islam from Christianity from some
> dog in Boston with crap dried in his tail and called the Supreme Being
> Whose Butt Don't Stink.
Apparently you don't know the difference yourself, given statements
like below.
> The President has faith in the only true God.
Osama bin Laden shares faith in the same God. Do I really have to give
you a history lesson in world religions?
> Almost all Presidents
> shared that same God. An exception is Clinton.
And
Thomas Jefferson,
James Madison,
James Monroe,
Martin Van Buren,
John Tyler,
Zachary Taylor,
Chester Alan Arthur,
and
Abraham Lincoln.
Also Thomas Paine, Benjamin Franklin, and a host of other notable US
citizens.
> Hypocrites are not
> numbered among the favored.
And apparently neither are the intelligent.
> Islam studies a religion of death. There is no life there. Their
> ultimate marching order is to destroy all humans if necessary, taking
> their own lives.
Actually, their goal is the same as Christianity... to convert every
last man, woman, and child to their religion.
> Survival means nothing to them. They are uncivilized,
> corrupt, abominable fools. Christians brought the height of
> civilization to the world as well as the Savior.
Thank you, from "The Department of the Ignorant". Are there any other
questions to be raised?
rappoccio
<rappoccio@gmail.com>On Jul 30, 4:52 am, Word_Swordsman <Ouachitabassang...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> The casualties are so far about equivalent to the single event at
> Pearl Harbor in 1941, and far below the single invasion of Normandy by
> allies, the objective less directly concerning American security than
> the current war on terror.
So that makes it justified?
And this doesn't count the civilian casualties on the Iraq side,
either.
> On D-Day, June 6, 1941 America lost 29,000
> killed, 106,000 wounded or missing at Normandy. Your problem is you
> are a coward, probably willing to be the first to throw up a white
> flag of surrender should America come under attack.
Oh, I'm sorry, I guess I missed the point where Iraq attacked the
United States. When was that, exactly?
Do you see people complaining about Afghanistan? No. Why is that?
Because that war is actually justified (which the US summarily forgot
about because there was not enough oil in the fields). So why do you
think Bush stopped pursuing bin Laden (an ACTUAL threat to US
security)?
Right. No oil involved. Can't get rich off of capturing one guy.
> You can't stomach
> doing the right things at the tight times that could cause a drop of
> your blood to spill. Under those circumstances you would be inducted
> anyway, then promptly shot to death for cowardice as you tremble
> between some rocks.
Bullshit. You're just a fucking coward and an unintelligent dumbass
who doesn't understand that this war is not fought about our freedom.
It's a war to send poor young men to die so that rich old men can get
richer off the spoils of oil.
Anyone that tells you otherwise is a liar. Just like you.
bonfly
<anubis2@aapt.net.au>bass from his pontoon. He's probably good at that. I think he's too
old to begin studying Logic.
Mike L.
<violinmike@hotmail.com>This is a joke right ? You must be joking. Or just baiting the
regulars.
Strange but true: those who have loved God most have loved men least.
-- Robert Green Ingersoll, speech (1881)
Christians brought the height of
> civilization to the world as well as the Savior.
This HAS to be more comedy. You can't really believe that.
The world would still be considered flat if the catholics had had
their
way. But R. Ingersoll said it better so I quote
We have already compared the benefits of theology and science. When
the theologian governed the world, it was covered with huts and hovels
for the many, palaces and cathedrals for the few. To nearly all the
children of men, reading and writing were unknown arts. The poor were
clad in rags and skins -- they devoured crusts, and gnawed bones. The
day of Science dawned, and the luxuries of a century ago are the
necessities of to-day. Men in the middle ranks of life have more of
the conveniences and elegancies than the princes and kings of the
theological times. But above and over all this, is the development of
mind. There is more of value in the brain of an average man of to-day
-- of a master-mechanic, of a chemist, of a naturalist, of an
inventor, than there was in the brain of the world four hundred years
ago.
These blessings did not fall from the skies. These benefits did
not drop from the outstretched hands of priests. They were not found
in cathedrals or behind altars -- neither were they searched for with
holy candles. They were not discovered by the closed eyes of prayer,
nor did they come in answer to superstitious supplication. They are
the children of freedom, the gifts of reason, observation and
experience -- and for them all, man is indebted to man.
-- Robert Green Ingersoll, "God In The Constitution"
On Jul 30, 4:41 am, Word_Swordsman <Ouachitabassang...@gmail.com>
wrote:
Mike L.
<violinmike@hotmail.com>I will never be fighting American wars.
Glad you think that 11 billion dollars plus a month is well spent
while
50 million of your residents have no health care.
Glad you think the blood of your young is well sacrificed.
Are you young enough to go over there? Volunteer.
If your government ( as I am Canadian) had followed the Colin Powell
doctrine outlined after the Gulf War it would not be in its next
potential Vietnam.
Essentially, the Doctrine expresses that military action should be
used only as a last resort and only if there is a clear risk to
national security by the intended target; the force, when used, should
be overwhelming and disproportionate to the force used by the enemy;
there must be strong support for the campaign by the general public;
and there must be a clear exit strategy from the conflict in which the
military is engaged.
http://www.pbs.org/newshour/extra/teachers/lessonplans/iraq/powelldoctrine_short.html
On Jul 30, 4:52 am, Word_Swordsman <Ouachitabassang...@gmail.com>
wrote:
Word_Swordsman
<Ouachitabassangler@gmail.com>administration. The concern with them and of course successor Bush was
to go after any possibility of possession and willingness to use
weapons of mass destruction. That was not a Bush invention. Many of
the Dems in power before Bush insisted Saddam had to be stopped.
Hillary Clinton was a chief complainer against Saddam.
http://clinton.senate.gov/speeches/iraq_101002.html The task is to
broaden the search to Iran and Syria, in the process neutralizing
facilities capable of spawning and or storing such weaponry. Allowing
such pursuits to remain unfettered would guarantee a blackmailing of
Europe and eventually us, not to mention abusing us at the gas pumps.
Without oil we would be dead in the water. The big mistake we made was
not emphasizing nuclear power to make it possible to get off burning
of fossil fuels. It's too late to fix that.
Jim
Word_Swordsman
<Ouachitabassangler@gmail.com>On Jul 30, 8:32 am, rappoccio <rappoc...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Jul 30, 4:41 am, Word_Swordsman <Ouachitabassang...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > You reprobate atheists can't tell Islam from Christianity from some
> > dog in Boston with crap dried in his tail and called the Supreme Being
> > Whose Butt Don't Stink.
>
> Apparently you don't know the difference yourself, given statements
> like below.
>
> > The President has faith in the only true God.
>
> Osama bin Laden shares faith in the same God. Do I really have to give
> you a history lesson in world religions?
Not so. The God of the Bible would be guilty of lying profusely if He
is also Allah. Muslims mock the God of Israel. There is only one God,
and His name is not Allah or anything else not indicated in the
Bible.
> > Almost all Presidents
> > shared that same God. An exception is Clinton.
>
> And
> Thomas Jefferson,
> James Madison,
> James Monroe,
> Martin Van Buren,
> John Tyler,
> Zachary Taylor,
> Chester Alan Arthur,
> and
> Abraham Lincoln.
>
> Also Thomas Paine, Benjamin Franklin, and a host of other notable US
> citizens.
Wrong. Check out http://www.adherents.com/adh_presidents.html I
witnessed Clinton as being the least concerned about living a
Christian life, making a few small shows of religion to gain votes.
Lincoln was a deep deist, in his last days honoring Christ. Jefferson
rejected the notion of miracles, but never denied Christ. Believing in
miracles is not required.
> > Hypocrites are not
> > numbered among the favored.
>
> And apparently neither are the intelligent.
It's one thing to have book smarts, another to be intelligent.
> > Islam studies a religion of death. There is no life there. Their
> > ultimate marching order is to destroy all humans if necessary, taking
> > their own lives.
>
> Actually, their goal is the same as Christianity... to convert every
> last man, woman, and child to their religion.
Christianity makes no such claim to convert all. The means of
salvation was paid for by Christ. Christianity centers around teaching
the Word of God and making disciples of those who embrace Christ.TODAY
the two beliefs stand directly opposed. Islam continues to employ
conversion-or-die tactics. Christians put their resources into people
who come to listen to the preachers, follow seeking, and wanting to
complete the change. None are compelled to decide, while Islam forces
choice at the tip of swords and guns. Modern day Muslims insist on
vindicating a violent spread of Islam wherever it is resisted.
> > Survival means nothing to them. They are uncivilized,
> > corrupt, abominable fools. Christians brought the height of
> > civilization to the world as well as the Savior.
>
> Thank you, from "The Department of the Ignorant". Are there any other
> questions to be raised?
Islam = poverty and death
Christianity = prosperity and life
Jim
random
<random.shba@gmail.com>By attacking Iraq for no real self defense reasons, US caused it to be
much more difficult to make an attack on other countries in the area,
even if it will be fully justified.
Iran's undisturbed quest for nuclear weapons is the exact result from
the attack on Iraq.
To make things worse, the attack weakened Iraq, and left Iran as the
strongest threat in the area. A strong threat that isn't shy about
it's intentions toward the west. And a strong threat that can now
unite all the fanatics of the area against "the crusaders".
Maybe years from today people will say that it was better then an
alternative. But it sure wasn't a smart decision, not politically and
not strategically.
On Jul 30, 5:56 pm, Word_Swordsman <Ouachitabassang...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> The attack in Iraq was preemptive per security beliefs of the Clinton
> administration. The concern with them and of course successor Bush was
> to go after any possibility of possession and willingness to use
> weapons of mass destruction. That was not a Bush invention. Many of
> the Dems in power before Bush insisted Saddam had to be stopped.
> Hillary Clinton was a chief complainer against Saddam.http://clinton.senate.gov/speeches/iraq_101002.html The task is to
Word_Swordsman
<Ouachitabassangler@gmail.com>On Jul 30, 8:36 am, rappoccio <rappoc...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Jul 30, 4:52 am, Word_Swordsman <Ouachitabassang...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > The casualties are so far about equivalent to the single event at
> > Pearl Harbor in 1941, and far below the single invasion of Normandy by
> > allies, the objective less directly concerning American security than
> > the current war on terror.
>
> So that makes it justified?
Americans accepted those losses and supported continuation of a just
war. If we faced that threat today we'd be seeing the same cowardice
being displayed today. The current numbers of lost troops is quite
acceptable considering how many years it took to reach those numbers.
If we had a D-Day loss today I figure many American doves would want
to storm the Capital, trampling themselves.
> And this doesn't count the civilian casualties on the Iraq side,
> either.
They are the ones targeted by Iranian & Syrian insurgents. If they had
stepped up to the plate to defend themselves earlier and with vigor
their losses would have been much lower. We can't help that. But, with
out presence those losses have been kept very small compared to the
mass genocide awaiting them without us.
> > On D-Day, June 6, 1941 America lost 29,000
> > killed, 106,000 wounded or missing at Normandy. Your problem is you
> > are a coward, probably willing to be the first to throw up a white
> > flag of surrender should America come under attack.
>
> Oh, I'm sorry, I guess I missed the point where Iraq attacked the
> United States. When was that, exactly?
Too bad you are so ignorant of history. Thomas online still has all
the political statements made about Iraq. You need to go read them. A
tiny minority of lawmakers wished to stay out of Iraq.
> Do you see people complaining about Afghanistan? No. Why is that?
> Because that war is actually justified (which the US summarily forgot
> about because there was not enough oil in the fields). So why do you
> think Bush stopped pursuing bin Laden (an ACTUAL threat to US
> security)?
Osama can't get around, hiding in a hole, because of special forces on
his trail. They'll take him out at the most opportune moment.
> Right. No oil involved. Can't get rich off of capturing one guy.
The guys to go after are the ones sent out by Osama and morons like
him. When we do take Osama out he will be immediately replaced, his
name elevated to a high martyr status encouraging more morons to join
that cause. If I had the button I'd plan to take out mecca and Osama
at the same hour.
> > You can't stomach
> > doing the right things at the tight times that could cause a drop of
> > your blood to spill. Under those circumstances you would be inducted
> > anyway, then promptly shot to death for cowardice as you tremble
> > between some rocks.
>
> Bullshit. You're just a fucking coward and an unintelligent dumbass
> who doesn't understand that this war is not fought about our freedom.
> It's a war to send poor young men to die so that rich old men can get
> richer off the spoils of oil.
You are deluded. Deranged. None of that has succeeded except on
American soil. Chavez is nationalizing American interests in
Venezuela, for instance. No oil men get rich over that, except those
at the top of the nationalizing move. Iraqi oil will be worthless
without constant stability there. Iraqis will be the ones getting
rich, or will lose it all to Iran.
> Ayone that tells you otherwise is a liar. Just like you.
You are ignoring current events, telling what YOU want to believe.
I'll hold off calling you a liar. The issue is just too complicated
for you, Junior. Get knowledge then some intelligence.
Jim
Word_Swordsman
<Ouachitabassangler@gmail.com>barge later when the grand daughters want to play on the lake while I
sit in the shade.
Sonny, I have you whipped on logic, knowledge, intelligence. That's
been proved many times since I joined.
Jim
Word_Swordsman
<Ouachitabassangler@gmail.com>On Jul 30, 9:32 am, "Mike L." <violinm...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> The President has faith in the only true God.
>
> This is a joke right ? You must be joking. Or just baiting the
> regulars.
Just fact. The only God is Bush's God. Any other choice would be
absurd.
> Strange but true: those who have loved God most have loved men least.
> -- Robert Green Ingersoll, speech (1881)
I know how to love men while thrusting a bayonet through them. If
given the chance with reasonable accommodation I'd happily give the
gospel to an enemy combatant before dispatching him. I can pray for my
enemy while pulling a trigger on his position. "Lord, if possible save
that man before this 50 cal tears him in half."
> Christians brought the height of
> civilization to the world as well as the Savior.
>
> This HAS to be more comedy. You can't really believe that.
Oh yeah. Look at history. Sure, some bad calls along the way, but
largely the faith of Christ changed the whole world for the better. No
other religion or movement can claim such a thing.
> The world would still be considered flat if the catholics had had
> their way.
You didn't read up on that, did you? They were soon to come around to
the science news anyway. Some people still refuse to believe men
walked on the moon. They would have to be there to believe it. They
are no different from those ancient Catholics.
But R. Ingersoll said it better so I quote
> These blessings did not fall from the skies. These benefits did
> not drop from the outstretched hands of priests.
Most of the world's knowledge did come from Christians and Jews, not
from pagans, atheists and barbarians.Muslims contributed nothing but
blood letting by the sword. Most other religions serve the largest
world populations amid continuing difficulties, not reaching out to
move the world beyond their own lands.
Jim
Turner Hayes
<lordlacolith@gmail.com>Yeehaw! Time fer a hodown!
Word_Swordsman
<Ouachitabassangler@gmail.com>On Jul 30, 9:46 am, "Mike L." <violinm...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> I am a coward ,am I ,for thinking a war is wrong?
Yep. OUR Congress authorized it after much gathering of
information.You pretend to know a lot more about that than them. That
makes you a fool. Cowards always believe war is wrong regardless of
the cause.
> I will never be fighting American wars.
No doubt. If war comes you will lay prostrate and be killed. You only
hope will probably be America coming to your rescue when Muslims crash
your party. In my opinion you are not worth saving from an enemy. You
judge our wars yet wouldn't assist even if you thought one to be just.
Wow. Never consider aiding America in a fight? OK, scratch Canada off
the list of worthy allies.
> Glad you think that 11 billion dollars plus a month is well spent while
> 50 million of your residents have no health care.
All the actual studies reveal most of those people include young
adults in good health that don't realize someday they will NEED health
insurance. For now the young adults won't buy it no matter how cheap.
Theirs is quite cheaper, ya know. It also includes the ranks of drug
abusers that want to be taken care of when they get down bad enough.
Why subsidize their habits? Our Constitution never hinted at a
requirement for government or the People to supply such services. The
desire to try that is a Democrat thing. If they have their way our
health care quality and accommodation would plunge to levels enjoyed
in Canada. I doubt most Americans would put up with the long waiting
lists. That's why so many Canadians come across for health care, even
though it is paid for at home. Here in America many communities have
"free" medical facilities that serve the poor at little or no charge,
including medicines. Due to excess pride many adults with no insurance
won't enter those facilities. They want taxpayers to hide their lack.
Some are provided by concerned physicians giving back to the
community. Some are of religious origin.
> Glad you think the blood of your young is well sacrificed.
> Are you young enough to go over there? Volunteer.
The military can't take me even though I'm a ArcView 9.0 GIS analyst
and had 4 years of Navy from the Vietnam era. Too old for that. I'm
retired. I do directly support troops there with boxes of stuff they
request.
> If your government ( as I am Canadian) had followed the Colin Powell
> doctrine outlined after the Gulf War it would not be in its next
> potential Vietnam.
Colin Powell is greatly over-rated. We have plenty of brilliant
generals capable of much more wisdom than that slacker.
> Essentially, the Doctrine expresses that military action should be
> used only as a last resort and only if there is a clear risk to
> national security by the intended target; the force, when used, should
> be overwhelming and disproportionate to the force used by the enemy;
> there must be strong support for the campaign by the general public;
> and there must be a clear exit strategy from the conflict in which the
> military is engaged.
Won't work. If that were policy in the 1940s Britain would have fallen
to Germany.But they were allies at that time and we were obligated to
help them. Strong support by the People? No wars would be fought. We'd
all be speaking Russian, German, or Chinese by now. That's why we try
to elect strong LEADERS who will always do the right thing, popular or
not.
Jim
Word_Swordsman
<Ouachitabassangler@gmail.com>> It wasn't the only mistake.
> By attacking Iraq for no real self defense reasons, US caused it to be
> much more difficult to make an attack on other countries in the area,
> even if it will be fully justified.
> Iran's undisturbed quest for nuclear weapons is the exact result from
> the attack on Iraq.
Wrong again! We will have bases in the middle of everything and be
able to quit holding in Saudi Arabia. Leaving the Saudis to defend
themselves would result in either their complete conversion to support
of terrorism and opening up to USA attacks, or put them on the begging
chain. From Iraq we will be able to strike anywhere in the Mideast
with ease. They have us at our knees for their oil. That will change
unless Democrat idiots are elected in '08.
> To make things worse, the attack weakened Iraq, and left Iran as the
> strongest threat in the area.
The invasion had to break down what little they actually had. Most of
the wealth of Iraq built palaces for Saddam. Now many provinces in
Iraq are getting their share of the wealth, including the first ever
utilities like electricity.
> A strong threat that isn't shy about
> it's intentions toward the west. And a strong threat that can now
> unite all the fanatics of the area against "the crusaders".
Iraq happens to be building a new economy not enjoyed there before.
That economy will drive a strong nation. Iran will easily be driven
back into the Stone Age and left to deal with their misery a long
time. Most of what they brag about is in a few cities. They are very
vulnerable.
> Maybe years from today people will say that it was better then an
> alternative. But it sure wasn't a smart decision, not politically and
> not strategically.
I think you are wrong. Strategy never looks right until carried out
and finished.
Jim
Dave
<dvorous@gmail.com>wrote:
> Although Bush critics claim that he is "the worst" President, future
> historians will hail him as the "best" President that America ever
Of course our resident troll gets it backwards.... but then that's
what he does best. He's not even a good troll.
Dave
<dvorous@gmail.com>> God told me to strike at al Qaida and I struck them,.....
Well... we all know he has never struck at al Qaida. If he did cannot
be a hero without the anti-hero. Also, we all know the god stuff is
just another of his lies.
Dave
<dvorous@gmail.com>> Listen dickfucker/fuckedinthehead/motherfucker/cockmouth/
> tourettekissmyass or 'yeshua' whatever the fuck your fucking fucked up
> fucking fuck hole name is, Would you like to know what the rest of
> the world thinks......
He's a troll . Don't waste your time.
Dave
<dvorous@gmail.com>wrote:
> You reprobate atheists ......
Aw..... is the little boy upset? Is all you can to is attack Atheists?
Your hypocrisy must be a great burden for you.
Ivan Karamazov
<rubinstein@planet.nl>On 30 jul, 16:56, Word_Swordsman <Ouachitabassang...@gmail.com> wrote:
> The attack in Iraq was preemptive per security beliefs of the Clinton
> administration. The concern with them and of course successor Bush was
> to go after any possibility of possession and willingness to use
> weapons of mass destruction. That was not a Bush invention. Many of
> the Dems in power before Bush insisted Saddam had to be stopped.
> Hillary Clinton was a chief complainer against Saddam.http://clinton.senate.gov/speeches/iraq_101002.html The task is to
> broaden the search to Iran and Syria, in the process neutralizing
> facilities capable of spawning and or storing such weaponry. Allowing
> such pursuits to remain unfettered would guarantee a blackmailing of
> Europe and eventually us, not to mention abusing us at the gas pumps.
> Without oil we would be dead in the water. The big mistake we made was
> not emphasizing nuclear power to make it possible to get off burning
> of fossil fuels. It's too late to fix that.
Which mas destruction weapons ? Were they found, and where ? ...
Dave
<dvorous@gmail.com>wrote:
> The casualties are so far about equivalent to the single event at
> Pearl Harbor in 1941,
Liar. The attack on Pearl Harbor had less than 4000 casualties. So far
the immoral invasion of Iraq has produced over 70,000 casualties.
Dave
<dvorous@gmail.com>wrote:
> The attack in Iraq was preemptive per security beliefs of the Clinton
> administration.
Again with the lies.
>The concern with them and of course successor Bush was
> to go after any possibility of possession and willingness to use
> weapons of mass destruction. That was not a Bush invention.
That most certainly was a total bush fabrication. That he lied is now
a proven fact.
>...The big mistake we made was
> not emphasizing nuclear power to make it possible to get off burning
> of fossil fuels. It's too late to fix that.
Do you actually believe we are stupid enough to believe that? Nuclear
power creates MORE CO2 than burning fossil fuels. Do you think they
just pick the rocks off the ground and stick then in the reactor?
Then what do you do with the waste? You get a lot of waste that is
deadly for tens of thousands of years.
Dave
<dvorous@gmail.com>wrote:
>
> Just fact. The only God is Bush's God. Any other choice would be
> absurd.
Which makes choosing bush's god absurd too.
> I know how to love men while thrusting a bayonet through them.
That has got the be the Quote of the Month.
Ivan Karamazov
<rubinstein@planet.nl>> Wrong. Check outhttp://www.adherents.com/adh_presidents.html I
It is your sort that makes Americans hated in the whole world...
rappoccio
<rappoccio@gmail.com>On Jul 30, 11:10 am, Word_Swordsman <Ouachitabassang...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> On Jul 30, 8:32 am, rappoccio <rappoc...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On Jul 30, 4:41 am, Word_Swordsman <Ouachitabassang...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
>
> > > You reprobate atheists can't tell Islam from Christianity from some
> > > dog in Boston with crap dried in his tail and called the Supreme Being
> > > Whose Butt Don't Stink.
>
> > Apparently you don't know the difference yourself, given statements
> > like below.
>
> > > The President has faith in the only true God.
>
> > Osama bin Laden shares faith in the same God. Do I really have to give
> > you a history lesson in world religions?
>
> Not so. The God of the Bible would be guilty of lying profusely if He
> is also Allah. Muslims mock the God of Israel. There is only one God,
> and His name is not Allah or anything else not indicated in the
> Bible.
<sigh>
I guess I DO have to give you a history lesson, moron.
You see, Islam and Judaism claim descent from the same person...
Abraham. They worship Yahweh, the God of Abraham, God, Allah (which
means "God" in Arabic, dumbass), etc etc. Islam claims descent from
Abraham through his first son, Ishmael. Judaism claims descent from
Abraham through his second son, Issac. They both worship the same God.
Christianity was developed later, as an offshoot from Judaism. So
Christianity also worships the same God.
Muslims believe that Muhammed was the prophet of God, and that Jesus
was also a prophet, not the son of God. But they all believe in the
same God (the God of Abraham).
I thought you actually READ the Bible. Guess not.
>
>
>
> > > Almost all Presidents
> > > shared that same God. An exception is Clinton.
>
> > And
> > Thomas Jefferson,
> > James Madison,
> > James Monroe,
> > Martin Van Buren,
> > John Tyler,
> > Zachary Taylor,
> > Chester Alan Arthur,
> > and
> > Abraham Lincoln.
>
> > Also Thomas Paine, Benjamin Franklin, and a host of other notable US
> > citizens.
>
> Wrong. Check outhttp://www.adherents.com/adh_presidents.html I
> witnessed Clinton as being the least concerned about living a
> Christian life, making a few small shows of religion to gain votes.
Actually, Clinton is a Christian (Baptist specifically). I guess that
fact passes your (meager) attention span.
> Lincoln was a deep deist, in his last days honoring Christ.
Do I have to tell you that deism is not Christianity, and they do NOT
share the same notion of God?
Of course I do, what am I talking about, your knowledge of religion is
as pitiful as your knowledge of science.
Deism: God is impersonal, created the universe and didn't touch it
since.
Christianity: God talks to people all the time, came down in bodily
form, crucified died buried, etc etc etc.
> Jefferson
> rejected the notion of miracles, but never denied Christ. Believing in
> miracles is not required.
Apparently you don't think the resurrection is a miracle. I thought
you were a Christian. Apparently not.
>
> > > Hypocrites are not
> > > numbered among the favored.
>
> > And apparently neither are the intelligent.
>
> It's one thing to have book smarts, another to be intelligent.
And you have neither.
>
> > > Islam studies a religion of death. There is no life there. Their
> > > ultimate marching order is to destroy all humans if necessary, taking
> > > their own lives.
>
> > Actually, their goal is the same as Christianity... to convert every
> > last man, woman, and child to their religion.
>
> Christianity makes no such claim to convert all.
Really? "Go and spread the good news" wasn't in the Bible? News to me.
> Islam = poverty and death
> Christianity = prosperity and life
And this concludes the contribution from "The Department of the
Ignorant". Thank you.
scooter
<scooter.leto@yahoo.com>> Ignorant". Thank you.- Hide quoted text -
Well, he did add more colorful adjectives to both Islam and
Christianity. Before he was just relying on corruption, death and
abomination to describe Muslims. Since, he has added poverty to one of
the Muslim tenets of graciousness. Meanwhile, Christianity is about
life and prosperity. He just fails to mention that Christian
prosperity, in the U.S. has come at the expense of exterminating
entire ethnic groups like the Native American Indians and the
enslavement of African natives. This might be the part wherein he now
denies that the founding fathers were actually Christians--as he had
previously claimed....lol.
Dev
<thedeviliam@fastmail.fm>On Jul 30, 1:41 am, Word_Swordsman <Ouachitabassang...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> You reprobate atheists can't tell Islam from Christianity from some
> dog in Boston with crap dried in his tail and called the Supreme Being
> Whose Butt Don't Stink.
Nice assertion. Substantiation would be appreciated for the sane.
> The President has faith in the only true God. Almost all Presidents
> shared that same God. An exception is Clinton. Hypocrites are not
> numbered among the favored.
Well, then that fucks up all Christians because all Christians are
hypocrites. Anyone who says otherwise is either mentally retarded and/
or a liar. It is proof that the right is immoral when they equate
lying about a blowjob with lying about a war.
> Islam studies a religion of death. There is no life there. Their
> ultimate marching order is to destroy all humans if necessary, taking
> their own lives.
Same as Christianity:
*If you are a Christian, death is better than life.
*Martyrdom is good (re: Jesus).
*Violence towards unbelievers is encouraged in both The Bible and The
Q'uran.
*Faith is good.
*The worst offense you can commit is not believing in God.
> Survival means nothing to them. They are uncivilized,
> corrupt, abominable fools. Christians brought the height of
> civilization to the world as well as the Savior.
Dogshit. Christians are just lying cancers who enable Islamic radicals
by defending religious faith.
> Jim
...is a douche.
> On Jul 29, 12:33 am, Dev <thedevil...@fastmail.fm> wrote:
>
> > Nice.
>
> > Yes, there is a valid argument against saying that religious delusion
> > was the motivation for the monkey with the helmet with the country
> > that God loves. It could have had something to do with oil or some
> > creepy personal legacy to get back at daddy ("I answer to the bigger
> > daddy"). Of course, if religious faith is respectable we have no
> > grounds for criticizing Osama Bin Laden or anyone else that acts on
> > faith. You can't reasonably say this religious faith is okay and that
> > is not because whenever religious faith is acceptable reason is
> > nowhere to be found anyway.
>
> > Polls say that most Americans refuse to elect an atheist president.
> > This when we are in a ideological war with the faithful. Brilliant.
>
> > On Jul 28, 9:53 pm, "Mike L." <violinm...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
Dev
<thedeviliam@fastmail.fm>THEISTIC PEOPLE R SMART. I can't keep up with the fucker.
Dev
<thedeviliam@fastmail.fm>given the chance with reasonable accommodation I'd happily give the
gospel to an enemy combatant before dispatching him. I can pray for my
enemy while pulling a trigger on his position. "Lord, if possible save
that man before this 50 cal tears him in half."
See? Theists are not harmless and we have a right to retaliate for the
good of all sane people.
Simpleton
<human@whoever.com>On Jul 30, 8:51 am, "Turner Hayes" <lordlacol...@gmail.com> wrote:
> *banjo music*
>
> Yeehaw! Time fer a hodown!
>
:-)
With or without his CD collection?
> On 7/30/07, Word_Swordsman <Ouachitabassang...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > Wow, you noticed my bio! No pontoon. Bass boat. We'll own a party
> > barge later when the grand daughters want to play on the lake while I
> > sit in the shade.
>
> > Sonny, I have you whipped on logic, knowledge, intelligence. That's
> > been proved many times since I joined.
>
> > Jim
>
> > On Jul 30, 8:44 am, bonfly <anub...@aapt.net.au> wrote:
> > > I reckon Campbell should go back to Arkansas and focus on catching
> > > bass from his pontoon. He's probably good at that. I think he's too
> > > old to begin studying Logic.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
Simpleton
<human@whoever.com>On Jul 30, 1:41 am, Word_Swordsman <Ouachitabassang...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> You reprobate atheists can't tell Islam from Christianity from some
> dog in Boston with crap dried in his tail and called the Supreme Being
> Whose Butt Don't Stink.
>
Good thing you think you can, especially since you seem to think that
one needs to have that keen sense of discernment.
random
<random.shba@gmail.com>A year? 5 years? 20 years? Forever?
How long do you thing the US SHOULD stay there?
On Jul 30, 7:24 pm, Word_Swordsman <Ouachitabassang...@gmail.com>
wrote:
Word_Swordsman
<Ouachitabassangler@gmail.com>some high ranking. I understand how you would miss important facts
like that, being of a reprobate mind.
Jim
Word_Swordsman
<Ouachitabassangler@gmail.com>On Jul 30, 11:37 am, Ivan Karamazov <rubinst...@planet.nl> wrote:
> Which mas destruction weapons ? Were they found, and where ? ...
Your pitiful mind probably can't handle this but records show Saddam
played games with UN inspectors, moving stuff out back doors while
detaining the teams. No records were found detailing Saddam's "mercy
flights" supposedly carrying huge amounts of medicine and food to aid
Syria following a big earthquake there. Authorization to airlift that
was given by the UN without proper supervision. Many of his weapons
are thought to have been taken to safety then. Between Clinton's
botched handling of Saddam and Bush waiting through 17 UN resolutions,
Saddam had plenty of time to remove most signs of the weapons. There
is no proof he didn't have them, but there was proof he used such
weapons on the Kurds. Saddam refused to submit to UN searches,
prompting the UN threats that had to be carried out or dissolve the
UN, and disgrace it's members.Facilities were found that were set up
for nuclear, chemical and biological weapons handling, but were found
emptied.
Jim
rappoccio
<rappoccio@gmail.com>On Jul 30, 11:30 am, Word_Swordsman <Ouachitabassang...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> On Jul 30, 8:36 am, rappoccio <rappoc...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On Jul 30, 4:52 am, Word_Swordsman <Ouachitabassang...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
>
> > > The casualties are so far about equivalent to the single event at
> > > Pearl Harbor in 1941, and far below the single invasion of Normandy by
> > > allies, the objective less directly concerning American security than
> > > the current war on terror.
>
> > So that makes it justified?
>
> Americans accepted those losses and supported continuation of a just
> war.
Of which Iraq is not.
> If we faced that threat today we'd be seeing the same cowardice
> being displayed today.
That's your dumbassed and ignorant opinion.
> The current numbers of lost troops is quite
> acceptable considering how many years it took to reach those numbers.
Tell that to those that died there.
> If we had a D-Day loss today I figure many American doves would want
> to storm the Capital, trampling themselves.
Actually they'd probably consider it necessary. Most people aren't
morons like you.
>
> > And this doesn't count the civilian casualties on the Iraq side,
> > either.
>
> They are the ones targeted by Iranian & Syrian insurgents.
And those killed by US forces. Which number in the tens of thousands
of people.
> If they had
> stepped up to the plate to defend themselves earlier and with vigor
> their losses would have been much lower.
Isn't that what you dumbass morons think is our job?
> We can't help that. But, with
> out presence those losses have been kept very small compared to the
> mass genocide awaiting them without us.
There have been over 50,000 civilian casualties since 2003 (4 years,
so 12,500 per year). Hussein was responsible for perhaps
100,000-200,000 deaths over a span of 27 years (so 3,703-7,407 per
year).
Looks like you're as bad at math as you are at religious studies,
science, and everything else.
>
> > > On D-Day, June 6, 1941 America lost 29,000
> > > killed, 106,000 wounded or missing at Normandy. Your problem is you
> > > are a coward, probably willing to be the first to throw up a white
> > > flag of surrender should America come under attack.
>
> > Oh, I'm sorry, I guess I missed the point where Iraq attacked the
> > United States. When was that, exactly?
>
> Too bad you are so ignorant of history. Thomas online still has all
> the political statements made about Iraq. You need to go read them. A
> tiny minority of lawmakers wished to stay out of Iraq.
You didn't answer my question.
I'll ask it again: When did Iraq attack the United States?
>
> > Do you see people complaining about Afghanistan? No. Why is that?
> > Because that war is actually justified (which the US summarily forgot
> > about because there was not enough oil in the fields). So why do you
> > think Bush stopped pursuing bin Laden (an ACTUAL threat to US
> > security)?
>
> Osama can't get around, hiding in a hole, because of special forces on
> his trail. They'll take him out at the most opportune moment.
Bullshit. They have no fucking idea where he is. He's not surrounded
by anything because if he was, he would have been caught after six
years. Unless, of course, you're saying that one half-starved Saudi
can outwit the entire US armed forces for that long?
>
> > Right. No oil involved. Can't get rich off of capturing one guy.
>
> The guys to go after are the ones sent out by Osama and morons like
> him. When we do take Osama out he will be immediately replaced, his
> name elevated to a high martyr status encouraging more morons to join
> that cause. If I had the button I'd plan to take out mecca and Osama
> at the same hour.
Good thing you don't. What a wonderful Christian you are.
Jesus must want to smack the shit out of you for being such a bigoted
hate-filled liar.
>
> > > You can't stomach
> > > doing the right things at the tight times that could cause a drop of
> > > your blood to spill. Under those circumstances you would be inducted
> > > anyway, then promptly shot to death for cowardice as you tremble
> > > between some rocks.
>
> > Bullshit. You're just a fucking coward and an unintelligent dumbass
> > who doesn't understand that this war is not fought about our freedom.
> > It's a war to send poor young men to die so that rich old men can get
> > richer off the spoils of oil.
>
> You are deluded. Deranged. None of that has succeeded except on
> American soil. Chavez is nationalizing American interests in
> Venezuela, for instance. No oil men get rich over that, except those
> at the top of the nationalizing move. Iraqi oil will be worthless
> without constant stability there. Iraqis will be the ones getting
> rich, or will lose it all to Iran.
I see, and Halliburton's record profits at this time have nothing to
do with anything?
I think that if you want to find someone "deluded and deranged" look
no further than your mirror.
>
> > Ayone that tells you otherwise is a liar. Just like you.
>
> You are ignoring current events, telling what YOU want to believe.
> I'll hold off calling you a liar. The issue is just too complicated
> for you, Junior. Get knowledge then some intelligence.
Says the guy who believes the world is 5,000 years old.
Do you know what "irony" is?
rappoccio
<rappoccio@gmail.com>lack of intelligence, a barely functioning mind, a sore miseducation
about most of the issues you blather on about, and a general hypocrisy
of not being a good Christian.
I'm sure Jesus would be proud of such a lying, bigoted, racist,
unintelligent ass like yourself parading around in his name.
On Jul 30, 11:33 am, Word_Swordsman <Ouachitabassang...@gmail.com>
wrote:
rappoccio
<rappoccio@gmail.com>misinformed, bigoted or hate-filled.
Lots of ammo there.
rappoccio
<rappoccio@gmail.com>Yeah, the "un-Christian" Christians just crack me up, personally.
Well, it's all I can do to stop from crying.
Simpleton
<human@whoever.com>On Jul 30, 1:08 pm, rappoccio <rappoc...@gmail.com> wrote:
> You have whipped no one with anything. You've demonstrated a complete
> lack of intelligence, a barely functioning mind, a sore miseducation
> about most of the issues you blather on about, and a general hypocrisy
> of not being a good Christian.
>
> I'm sure Jesus would be proud of such a lying, bigoted, racist,
> unintelligent ass like yourself parading around in his name.
>
With or without his 10 CDs?
Word_Swordsman
<Ouachitabassangler@gmail.com>By calling me a liar you defang yourself as a blithering idiot. I'm
getting a healthy laugh on you. You are comparing practically 100%
American Pearl Harbor deaths to all of Iraqi plus American deaths in
Iraq. American deaths in Iraq are not up to those of Pearl Harbor. It
IS impossible to debate with atheists. All we're doing here is
slamming atheist views to the ground while countering with good sense
facts.
Man you people are stupid! Pitiful.
Jim
Dave
<dvorous@gmail.com>> On Jul 30, 11:10 am, Word_Swordsman <Ouachitabassang...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > On Jul 30, 8:32 am, rappoccio <rappoc...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > On Jul 30, 4:41 am, Word_Swordsman <Ouachitabassang...@gmail.com>
> > > wrote:
>
> > > > You reprobate atheists can't tell Islam from Christianity from some
> > > > dog in Boston with crap dried in his tail and called the Supreme Being
> > > > Whose Butt Don't Stink.
>
> > > Apparently you don't know the difference yourself, given statements
> > > like below.
>
> > > > The President has faith in the only true God.
>
> > > Osama bin Laden shares faith in the same God. Do I really have to give
> > > you a history lesson in world religions?
>
> > Not so. The God of the Bible would be guilty of lying profusely if He
> > is also Allah. Muslims mock the God of Israel. There is only one God,
> > and His name is not Allah or anything else not indicated in the
> > Bible.
>
> <sigh>
>
> I guess I DO have to give you a history lesson, moron.
Do you really believe he'll listen or learn?
Dave
<dvorous@gmail.com>> Word_Swordsman, if he sticks around, will be the new champion on
> THEISTIC PEOPLE R SMART. I can't keep up with the fucker.
The guy is denser than a black hole.
Dave
<dvorous@gmail.com>You know the christians have a long history of doing exactly what he
described. During the Crusades they'd force people to convert at sword
point and then when they did convert they'd kill them so they wouldn't
revert back. It shows how little they actually care for their fellow
humans.
Dave
<dvorous@gmail.com>wrote:
> Bush reached out and caught a large number of Al Queda operatives,
And you little piece of shit - not one of them was in Iraq BEFORE the
immoral invasion. Only someone with shit for brains actually believes
there was any connection what so ever between Iraq and al Queda.
Dave
<dvorous@gmail.com>wrote:
> On Jul 30, 11:37 am, Ivan Karamazov <rubinst...@planet.nl> wrote:
>
> > Which mas destruction weapons ? Were they found, and where ? ...
>
> Your pitiful mind probably can't handle this but records show Saddam
Proof? Where are those WMDs? Oh, I see your problem now. You
conveniently forgot (ie lied) that Saddam used them all on his own
people.
scooter
<scooter.leto@yahoo.com>On Jul 30, 10:30 am, Word_Swordsman <Ouachitabassang...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> On Jul 30, 8:36 am, rappoccio <rappoc...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On Jul 30, 4:52 am, Word_Swordsman <Ouachitabassang...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
>
> > > The casualties are so far about equivalent to the single event at
> > > Pearl Harbor in 1941, and far below the single invasion of Normandy by
> > > allies, the objective less directly concerning American security than
> > > the current war on terror.
>
> > So that makes it justified?
>
> Americans accepted those losses and supported continuation of a just
> war. If we faced that threat today we'd be seeing the same cowardice
> being displayed today. The current numbers of lost troops is quite
> acceptable considering how many years it took to reach those numbers.
> If we had a D-Day loss today I figure many American doves would want
> to storm the Capital, trampling themselves.
>
> > And this doesn't count the civilian casualties on the Iraq side,
> > either.
>
> They are the ones targeted by Iranian & Syrian insurgents. If they had
> stepped up to the plate to defend themselves earlier and with vigor
> their losses would have been much lower. We can't help that. But, with
> out presence those losses have been kept very small compared to the
> mass genocide awaiting them without us.
Yeah, you guys keep saying that as if you cared. See your
contradictory statement below hypothetically saying, and I quote, "If
I had the button I'd plan to take out mecca and Osama at the same
hour."
What makes this extra funny is that after the continual fuck-ups and
stupid shit you morons continually employ as strategy, you actually
think you still know what you're doing.....lol. This is precisely why
policy driven by dogma is disasterous.
>
> > > On D-Day, June 6, 1941 America lost 29,000
> > > killed, 106,000 wounded or missing at Normandy. Your problem is you
> > > are a coward, probably willing to be the first to throw up a white
> > > flag of surrender should America come under attack.
>
> > Oh, I'm sorry, I guess I missed the point where Iraq attacked the
> > United States. When was that, exactly?
>
> Too bad you are so ignorant of history. Thomas online still has all
> the political statements made about Iraq. You need to go read them. A
> tiny minority of lawmakers wished to stay out of Iraq.
That might have to do with the fact that the President lied about
"mushroom clouds" ect. He's very much like you in that he uses
terrorist-style tactics of fear to get what he wants, politically.
>
> > Do you see people complaining about Afghanistan? No. Why is that?
> > Because that war is actually justified (which the US summarily forgot
> > about because there was not enough oil in the fields). So why do you
> > think Bush stopped pursuing bin Laden (an ACTUAL threat to US
> > security)?
>
> Osama can't get around, hiding in a hole, because of special forces on
> his trail. They'll take him out at the most opportune moment.
>
> > Right. No oil involved. Can't get rich off of capturing one guy.
>
> The guys to go after are the ones sent out by Osama and morons like
> him. When we do take Osama out he will be immediately replaced, his
> name elevated to a high martyr status encouraging more morons to join
> that cause. If I had the button I'd plan to take out mecca and Osama
> at the same hour.
That's because you have a reprobate mind that wants genocide. I'd like
to point out here that you're so fuckin stupid you can't even
recognize your own contradictary statements when they are a paragrapgh
apart.
>
> > > You can't stomach
> > > doing the right things at the tight times that could cause a drop of
> > > your blood to spill. Under those circumstances you would be inducted
> > > anyway, then promptly shot to death for cowardice as you tremble
> > > between some rocks.
>
> > Bullshit. You're just a fucking coward and an unintelligent dumbass
> > who doesn't understand that this war is not fought about our freedom.
> > It's a war to send poor young men to die so that rich old men can get
> > richer off the spoils of oil.
>
> You are deluded. Deranged. None of that has succeeded except on
> American soil. Chavez is nationalizing American interests in
> Venezuela, for instance. No oil men get rich over that, except those
> at the top of the nationalizing move. Iraqi oil will be worthless
> without constant stability there. Iraqis will be the ones getting
> rich, or will lose it all to Iran.
This is fuckin great. "Chavez is nationalizing American interests?"
You think the resources of Venezuela are naturally part of American
interests? Since when was Venezuela under the dominion of the U.S.?
Besides, what the fuck does Venezuela have to do with the oil in Iraq?
Goddam you're a fuckin retard. You need to stop eating the mushrooms
in the Park.
>
> > Ayone that tells you otherwise is a liar. Just like you.
>
> You are ignoring current events, telling what YOU want to believe.
> I'll hold off calling you a liar. The issue is just too complicated
> for you, Junior. Get knowledge then some intelligence.
Go get fucked by Smokey, you moron.
>
> Jim
Dave
<dvorous@gmail.com>wrote:
> On Jul 30, 11:38 am, Dave <dvor...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On Jul 30, 1:52 am, Word_Swordsman <Ouachitabassang...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
>
> > > The casualties are so far about equivalent to the single event at
> > > Pearl Harbor in 1941,
>
> > Liar. The attack on Pearl Harbor had less than 4000 casualties. So far
> > the immoral invasion of Iraq has produced over 70,000 casualties.
>
> By calling me a liar you defang yourself as a blithering idiot.
ROTFLMFAO! By calling you a liar, I'm professing the truth. Do you
have any proof that the numbers I gave were wrong and that you did not
lie? If you did, you would have posted that. Instead you tried to
derail. You are the perfect christian; deceitful, asinine, ignorant,
arrogant, and just a plain all 'round asshole.
Word_Swordsman
<Ouachitabassangler@gmail.com>On Jul 30, 11:43 am, Dave <dvor...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Jul 30, 7:56 am, Word_Swordsman <Ouachitabassang...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > The attack in Iraq was preemptive per security beliefs of the Clinton
> > administration.
>
> Again with the lies.
>
> >The concern with them and of course successor Bush was
> > to go after any possibility of possession and willingness to use
> > weapons of mass destruction. That was not a Bush invention.
>
> That most certainly was a total bush fabrication. That he lied is now
> a proven fact.
If I posted a long list of links to speeches by Bill and Hillary
Clinton, ambassadors, congressmen, and the like perfectly describing
their fears of what Saddam was up to, you would not believe them. I
know that because none of you touched that link to Hillary's speech
before Congress. Normal people adept at using search engines on the
web can easily find hundreds of hours of speeches to watch and listen
to. But I understand your predicament, being of a reprobate mind. You
must say all that, including the Congressional records, are Republican
tricks. Clinton wasn't really the first. It goes way back. Clinton
just failed to act. It takes Republicans to roll up their sleeves and
act on problems.
> >...The big mistake we made was
> > not emphasizing nuclear power to make it possible to get off burning
> > of fossil fuels. It's too late to fix that.
>
> Do you actually believe we are stupid enough to believe that? Nuclear
> power creates MORE CO2 than burning fossil fuels. Do you think they
> just pick the rocks off the ground and stick then in the reactor?
> Then what do you do with the waste? You get a lot of waste that is
> deadly for tens of thousands of years.
You don't get CO2 from heating water to make steam. Good grief. Here's
someone a LOT smarter than you about that: "In the U.S. 90% of the
carbon emissions from electricity generation come from coal-fired
generation, even though this accounts for only 52% of the electricity
produced. Taking nuclear power off the table as a viable alternative
will prevent the global community from achieving long-term gains in
the control of carbon dioxide emissions." http://web.mit.edu/nuclearpower/
Once again I prove your insanity, your total ignorance of facts,
history, of anything useful. Now go lick yourself out in the middle of
the street. You atheists are so much like dogs you might as well take
up the disgusting body things too. The days comes when dogs will lick
your blood.
Jim
Word_Swordsman
<Ouachitabassangler@gmail.com>On Jul 30, 11:46 am, Dave <dvor...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Jul 30, 8:46 am, Word_Swordsman <Ouachitabassang...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>
>
> > Just fact. The only God is Bush's God. Any other choice would be
> > absurd.
>
> Which makes choosing bush's god absurd too.
>
> > I know how to love men while thrusting a bayonet through them.
>
> That has got the be the Quote of the Month.
Thanks for the compliment. I liked it too. A Christian should make a
fine soldier in any army.
Jim
Word_Swordsman
<Ouachitabassangler@gmail.com>> It is your sort that makes Americans hated in the whole world...
Naw, you have that wrong, as usual. That we Americans tolerate people
like you
in a world full of religions that don't tolerate atheists, we are
resented. The Muslims hate us for allowing sin, hence their penchant
for destroying Hollywood and Las Vegas, among many other icons of the
American Way for many. Because we Christians follow the laws and allow
you to roam, this whole nation suffers. We are seen as hypocrites
because of our blind tolerance.
Jim
Simpleton
<human@whoever.com>On Jul 30, 8:46 am, Word_Swordsman <Ouachitabassang...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> On Jul 30, 9:32 am, "Mike L." <violinm...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> > The President has faith in the only true God.
>
> > This is a joke right ? You must be joking. Or just baiting the
> > regulars.
>
> Just fact. The only God is Bush's God. Any other choice would be
> absurd.
>
> > Strange but true: those who have loved God most have loved men least.
> > -- Robert Green Ingersoll, speech (1881)
>
> I know how to love men while thrusting a bayonet through them.
Cool, and as soon as you learn how to love women while thrusting the
same, you'll be more in compliance with The Good Book.
Incidentally, bayonets are kinda old-fashioned these days, the
confederates fell out of favor at about the same time.
Word_Swordsman
<Ouachitabassangler@gmail.com>On Jul 30, 12:46 pm, rappoccio <rappoc...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I guess I DO have to give you a history lesson, moron.
>
> You see, Islam and Judaism claim descent from the same person...
> Abraham. They worship Yahweh, the God of Abraham, God, Allah (which
> means "God" in Arabic, dumbass), etc etc. Islam claims descent from
> Abraham through his first son, Ishmael. Judaism claims descent from
> Abraham through his second son, Issac. They both worship the same God.
Ishmael was born of the bondwoman, not of a free woman acceptable
among Abraham's family as an heir. The only link he had to Abraham was
genetic. An angel of God went to escort the woman and her son safely
through the wilderness, but the family relation stops there.They co-
existed as separate nations until Muhammad began the Muslim era in AD
622. He had re-written the Old and New Testaments, fabricating
practically all facts long accepted as truth. His tampering was
absurd, the works of a mad man. What he devised is far from the God of
Abraham.
> Christianity was developed later, as an offshoot from Judaism. So
> Christianity also worships the same God.
Christianity is not out of Judaism. It is NEW Covenant from God.
Obviously you remain very ignorant of what the Bible teaches. Ever
wonder what "New Testament" means? Shoot, you are probably still
totally mystified.
> Muslims believe that Muhammed was the prophet of God, and that Jesus
> was also a prophet, not the son of God. But they all believe in the
> same God (the God of Abraham).
No they don't follow Abraham's God. They follow Muhammad's idea of
deity.
> Actually, Clinton is a Christian (Baptist specifically). I guess that
> fact passes your (meager) attention span.
I know he claimed that and carried a Bible to a church meeting
occasionally, but his lifestyle totally betrayed him as a hypocrite.
He shamed the Baptists.
> > Lincoln was a deep deist, in his last days honoring Christ.
>
> Do I have to tell you that deism is not Christianity, and they do NOT
> share the same notion of God?
Deists hold that things in nature prove the existence of one living
God. They reject supernatural events because they don't believe God
interferes with man. Most hold faith in the God of the Bible.
Again, you are so ignorant! Hoe can you take such a bashing?
> Deism: God is impersonal, created the universe and didn't touch it
> since.
> Christianity: God talks to people all the time, came down in bodily
> form, crucified died buried, etc etc etc.
> > Jefferson
> > rejected the notion of miracles, but never denied Christ. Believing in
> > miracles is not required.
>
> Apparently you don't think the resurrection is a miracle. I thought
> you were a Christian. Apparently not.
He rejected a physical resurrection, but accepted a representative
resurrection as do most Deists. By that Jesus "came alive" in the
hearts of his followers.
> Christianity makes no such claim to convert all.
Really? "Go and spread the good news" wasn't in the Bible? News to
me.
You can't possibly understand, but maybe this will carry on to sane
folks reading. It's like going out into the world trying to convince
people to sell Avon products under you. Your goal is every human
signed up? Get real. Most wouldn't. Our task is to preach the gospel
to all, that some might believe.
Jim
Word_Swordsman
<Ouachitabassangler@gmail.com>On Jul 30, 1:55 pm, scooter <scooter.l...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Well, he did add more colorful adjectives to both Islam and
> Christianity. Before he was just relying on corruption, death and
> abomination to describe Muslims. Since, he has added poverty to one of
> the Muslim tenets of graciousness. Meanwhile, Christianity is about
> life and prosperity. He just fails to mention that Christian
> prosperity, in the U.S. has come at the expense of exterminating
> entire ethnic groups like the Native American Indians and the
> enslavement of African natives. This might be the part wherein he now
> denies that the founding fathers were actually Christians--as he had
> previously claimed....lol.
Such poor understanding of history! The Church opposed both hard
treatment of Indians and slaves. The Dutch shipping merchants brought
the slaves to America. People bought them and had an investment to
work out of them. Where did the Dutch get the slaves? From African
tribal leaders that mostly captured opposing tribal members, making
them THEIR slaves. You have little or no evidence the Church was
involved in the Indian or slave problems. They were simply incapable
of turning a whole nation around before the damage was done.
Jim
ranjit_mathews@yahoo.com
<ranjit_mathews@yahoo.com>On Jul 30, 2:16 pm, Word_Swordsman <Ouachitabassang...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> On Jul 30, 11:55 am, Ivan Karamazov <rubinst...@planet.nl> wrote:
>
> > It is your sort that makes Americans hated in the whole world...
>
> Naw, you have that wrong, as usual. That we Americans tolerate people
> like you
> in a world full of religions that don't tolerate atheists, we are
> resented. The Muslims hate us for allowing sin,
No; they look down on you for that.
> hence their penchant
> for destroying Hollywood and Las Vegas, among many other icons of the
> American Way for many.
No; they do that because you guys facilitate those who find it proper
to evict people from their homes and stuff their ex-homes with
foreigners who you hope will usher in Armageddon.
Mike L.
<violinmike@hotmail.com>America going to invade them
On Jul 30, 5:07 pm, Word_Swordsman <Ouachitabassang...@gmail.com>
wrote:
scooter
<scooter.leto@yahoo.com>On Jul 30, 4:50 pm, Word_Swordsman <Ouachitabassang...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> On Jul 30, 1:55 pm, scooter <scooter.l...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > On Jul 30, 11:10 am, Word_Swordsman <Ouachitabassang...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > On Jul 30, 8:32 am, rappoccio <rappoc...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > On Jul 30, 4:41 am, Word_Swordsman <Ouachitabassang...@gmail.com>
> > > wrote:
> > > > You reprobate atheists can't tell Islam from Christianity from some
> > > > dog in Boston with crap dried in his tail and called the Supreme Being
> > > > Whose Butt Don't Stink.
> > > Apparently you don't know the difference yourself, given statements
> > > like below.
> > > > The President has faith in the only true God.
> > > Osama bin Laden shares faith in the same God. Do I really have to give
> > > you a history lesson in world religions?
> > Not so. The God of the Bible would be guilty of lying profusely if He
> > is also Allah. Muslims mock the God of Israel. There is only one God,
> > and His name is not Allah or anything else not indicated in the
> > Bible.
> <sigh>
> I guess I DO have to give you a history lesson, moron.
> You see, Islam and Judaism claim descent from the same person...
> Abraham. They worship Yahweh, the God of Abraham, God, Allah (which
> means "God" in Arabic, dumbass), etc etc. Islam claims descent from
> Abraham through his first son, Ishmael. Judaism claims descent from
> Abraham through his second son, Issac. They both worship the same God.
> Christianity was developed later, as an offshoot from Judaism. So
> Christianity also worships the same God.
> Muslims believe that Muhammed was the prophet of God, and that Jesus
> was also a prophet, not the son of God. But they all believe in the
> same God (the God of Abraham).
> I thought you actually READ the Bible. Guess not.
> > > > Almost all Presidents
> > > > shared that same God. An exception is Clinton.
> > > And
> > > Thomas Jefferson,
> > > James Madison,
> > > James Monroe,
> > > Martin Van Buren,
> > > John Tyler,
> > > Zachary Taylor,
> > > Chester Alan Arthur,
> > > and
> > > Abraham Lincoln.
> > > Also Thomas Paine, Benjamin Franklin, and a host of other notable US
> > > citizens.
> > Wrong. Check outhttp://www.adherents.com/adh_presidents.htmlI
> > witnessed Clinton as being the least concerned about living a
> > Christian life, making a few small shows of religion to gain votes.
> Actually, Clinton is a Christian (Baptist specifically). I guess that
> fact passes your (meager) attention span.
> > Lincoln was a deep deist, in his last days honoring Christ.
> Do I have to tell you that deism is not Christianity, and they do NOT
> share the same notion of God?
> Of course I do, what am I talking about, your knowledge of religion is
> as pitiful as your knowledge of science.
> Deism: God is impersonal, created the universe and didn't touch it
> since.
> Christianity: God talks to people all the time, came down in bodily
> form, crucified died buried, etc etc etc.
> > Jefferson
> > rejected the notion of miracles, but never denied Christ. Believing in
> > miracles is not required.
> Apparently you don't think the resurrection is a miracle. I thought
> you were a Christian. Apparently not.
> > > > Hypocrites are not
> > > > numbered among the favored.
> > > And apparently neither are the intelligent.
> > It's one thing to have book smarts, another to be intelligent.
> And you have neither.
> > > > Islam studies a religion of death. There is no life there. Their
> > > > ultimate marching order is to destroy all humans if necessary, taking
> > > > their own lives.
> > > Actually, their goal is the same as Christianity... to convert every
> > > last man, woman, and child to their religion.
> > Christianity makes no such claim to convert all.
> Really? "Go and spread the good news" wasn't in the Bible? News to me.
> > Islam = poverty and death
> > Christianity = prosperity and life
> And this concludes the contribution from "The Department of the
> Ignorant". Thank you.
> > Well, he did add more colorful adjectives to both Islam and
Such a poor ability to read!! Who said anything about the church?
You're changing the subject. It was you who said "Christianity=
prosperity and life". It was you who was talking about the founding
fathers being "Christian". No one said anything about any church
whatsoever until you got your ass handed to you.
You're out of your league here, Gomer. Go back to the woods and get
some from Smokey. Oh, just for clarity, I put the conversation in you
didn't want to show because you wanted to change the subject. By the
way, you can bet your ass that the church was all for slavery and the
extermination of the "heathen" Indians. where do you think the word
"heathen" came from when the colonists were referring to either
Africans or Indians? And, how about that wonderful Christian act of
burning witches?
>
> Jim
ranjit_mathews@yahoo.com
<ranjit_mathews@yahoo.com>On Jul 30, 2:50 pm, Word_Swordsman <Ouachitabassang...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> On Jul 30, 1:55 pm, scooter <scooter.l...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > Well, he did add more colorful adjectives to both Islam and
> > Christianity. Before he was just relying on corruption, death and
> > abomination to describe Muslims. Since, he has added poverty to one of
> > the Muslim tenets of graciousness. Meanwhile, Christianity is about
> > life and prosperity. He just fails to mention that Christian
> > prosperity, in the U.S. has come at the expense of exterminating
> > entire ethnic groups like the Native American Indians and the
> > enslavement of African natives. This might be the part wherein he now
> > denies that the founding fathers were actually Christians--as he had
> > previously claimed....lol.
>
> Such poor understanding of history! The Church
Which church is THE church?
> opposed both hard
> treatment of Indians and slaves.
What were churches's responses' when Andrew Jackson proposed (what is
now known as) the Trail of Tears?
ranjit_mathews@yahoo.com
<ranjit_mathews@yahoo.com>wrote:
> Christianity is not out of Judaism.
True. It is out of Judaism, Platonism and Paganism.
Turner Hayes
<lordlacolith@gmail.com>
On Jul 30, 8:51 am, "Turner Hayes" <lordlacol...@gmail.com> wrote:
> *banjo music*
>
> Yeehaw! Time fer a hodown!
>
:-)
With or without his CD collection?
Ah bet there're some good Chrischun musics on them little coaster-discs fer the cumpyutur! None of that syncopated devil-music fer reprobate atheist minds!
> On 7/30/07, Word_Swordsman < Ouachitabassang...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > Wow, you noticed my bio! No pontoon. Bass boat. We'll own a party
> > barge later when the grand daughters want to play on the lake while I
> > sit in the shade.
>
> > Sonny, I have you whipped on logic, knowledge, intelligence. That's
> > been proved many times since I joined.
>
> > Jim
>
> > On Jul 30, 8:44 am, bonfly < anub...@aapt.net.au> wrote:
> > > I reckon Campbell should go back to Arkansas and focus on catching
> > > bass from his pontoon. He's probably good at that. I think he's too
> > > old to begin studying Logic.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
Word_Swordsman
<Ouachitabassangler@gmail.com>On Jul 30, 3:38 pm, Dave <dvor...@gmail.com> wrote:
> You know the christians have a long history of doing exactly what he
> described. During the Crusades they'd force people to convert at sword
> point and then when they did convert they'd kill them so they wouldn't
> revert back. It shows how little they actually care for their fellow
> humans.
One of the Crusades did in fact act without Papal blessing, but most
were concerning recapture of Jerusalem from Persians and Muslims. The
history of it all is quite interesting, the negative aspects of the
Crusades blown out of proportion by atheists and Muslims. Christians
can and will fight an enemy army when necessary. Had they not, there
would be no Church today. Women across the globe would be slaves to
Muslim men, wearing their burkas out of the home. Lord, let these
atheists fall into the hands of Muslims!
Jim
Word_Swordsman
<Ouachitabassangler@gmail.com>You don't know what Al Queda is.
Jim
Word_Swordsman
<Ouachitabassangler@gmail.com>You are lying. It isn't a matter of simple ignorance now. You have no
excuses. Saddam expected to regain control, but was hanged. Now Syria
has his operable weapons and technology. Prove me wrong.
Jim
Word_Swordsman
<Ouachitabassangler@gmail.com>On Jul 30, 3:43 pm, scooter <scooter.l...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> On Jul 30, 10:30 am, Word_Swordsman <Ouachitabassang...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > They are the ones targeted by Iranian & Syrian insurgents. If they had
> > stepped up to the plate to defend themselves earlier and with vigor
> > their losses would have been much lower. We can't help that. But, with
> > out presence those losses have been kept very small compared to the
> > mass genocide awaiting them without us.
>
> Yeah, you guys keep saying that as if you cared. See your
> contradictory statement below hypothetically saying, and I quote, "If
> I had the button I'd plan to take out mecca and Osama at the same
> hour."
I was serious. Elimination of that black stone would end Islam. A way
to defeat the enemy is to destroy what is most precious to them. They
are asking for making Mecca into a sea of glass.
> What makes this extra funny is that after the continual fuck-ups and
> stupid shit you morons continually employ as strategy, you actually
> think you still know what you're doing.....lol. This is precisely why
> policy driven by dogma is disasterous.
Funny. So your kind might be smarter about war than our generals?
Politics has impeded them, not a lack of ability.
> > Too bad you are so ignorant of history. Thomas online still has all
> > the political statements made about Iraq. You need to go read them. A
> > tiny minority of lawmakers wished to stay out of Iraq.
>
> That might have to do with the fact that the President lied about
> "mushroom clouds" ect. He's very much like you in that he uses
> terrorist-style tactics of fear to get what he wants, politically.
He had no more intel than was available to the previous
administration. Clinton had stripped our resources for collecting
fresh intel in Iraq, and we all have paid a terrible price for it.
> > If I had the button I'd plan to take out mecca and Osama
> > at the same hour.
>
> That's because you have a reprobate mind that wants genocide. I'd like
> to point out here that you're so fuckin stupid you can't even
> recognize your own contradictary statements when they are a paragrapgh
> apart.
No contradictions except in your own feeble mind. A quick and
relatively clean solution would be to annihilate Mecca. Shaming them
concerning their supposed omnipotent immutable false god would end
most of the conflict.
> > You are deluded. Deranged. None of that has succeeded except on
> > American soil. Chavez is nationalizing American interests in
> > Venezuela, for instance. No oil men get rich over that, except those
> > at the top of the nationalizing move. Iraqi oil will be worthless
> > without constant stability there. Iraqis will be the ones getting
> > rich, or will lose it all to Iran.
>
> This is fuckin great. "Chavez is nationalizing American interests?"
> You think the resources of Venezuela are naturally part of American
> interests?
American oil companies invested heavily in that nation to develop oil
resources, drilling, pumping, and building refineries. Long before any
profit could be made Chavez takes them over. Your theory about making
rich Americans richer fails. They lost big time on that deal.
> Since when was Venezuela under the dominion of the U.S.?
The previous government invited American to come in developing the
nation. The country went communist and robbed America.
> Besides, what the fuck does Venezuela have to do with the oil in Iraq?
So now you are reduced to asking me for information? Use Google.
> Goddam you're a fuckin retard. You need to stop eating the mushrooms
> in the Park.
>
>
>
> > > Ayone that tells you otherwise is a liar. Just like you.
>
> > You are ignoring current events, telling what YOU want to believe.
> > I'll hold off calling you a liar. The issue is just too complicated
> > for you, Junior. Get knowledge then some intelligence.
>
> Go get fucked by Smokey, you moron.
You prove yourself the lowest of humanity, lower than a roach.
You are shameless and barbarian. Are you homeless and using a public
library computer to be here? That's what I believe, no doubt.
Pitiful....
Jim
Word_Swordsman
<Ouachitabassangler@gmail.com>> ROTFLMFAO! By calling you a liar, I'm professing the truth. Do you
> have any proof that the numbers I gave were wrong and that you did not
> lie? If you did, you would have posted that. Instead you tried to
> derail. You are the perfect christian; deceitful, asinine, ignorant,
> arrogant, and just a plain all 'round asshole.
We ALL know what manner of sluggard you are here. I posted the
numbers. You failed miserably to digest them.
Jim
Word_Swordsman
<Ouachitabassangler@gmail.com>On Jul 30, 4:43 pm, Simpleton <hu...@whoever.com> wrote:
> Incidentally, bayonets are kinda old-fashioned these days, the
> confederates fell out of favor at about the same time.
What total ignorance! The OKC-3S bayonet replaces the former Ka-bar
and remains a big part of infantry training and deployment. It doubles
as a utility knife and wire cutter, nice serrations near the handle to
rip deeper through armor. Bayonets have been standard issue through
all American wars beginning in WWI. They sweeten the prospect of hand
to hand mortal combat. I could rip your spine out your belly with it
mounted, piercing most body armor except our latest.
Jim
Word_Swordsman
<Ouachitabassangler@gmail.com>On Jul 30, 4:52 pm, "ranjit_math...@yahoo.com"
<ranjit_math...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> No; they do that because you guys facilitate those who find it proper
> to evict people from their homes and stuff their ex-homes with
> foreigners who you hope will usher in Armageddon.
You are reduced to gibberish. Insane.
Jim
Word_Swordsman
<Ouachitabassangler@gmail.com>On Jul 30, 6:17 pm, "Mike L." <violinm...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> You know there are WMD's in Iran and North Korea. When is
> America going to invade them
I'm not privy to the plans. My guess is Bush will set up a Democrat
president to inherit a nuclear explosion on American soil, and that
President will somehow have to invoke the faulty Powell policy the
Dems love so much. He knows it's coming. The Demoncrats have done
their best to inhibit his prevention of all that, so why not let them
take it on? The cost then will probably be in the tens of thousands of
American troops a month instead of a few hundred more to settle it
now.
Jim
Word_Swordsman
<Ouachitabassangler@gmail.com>On Jul 30, 6:22 pm, scooter <scooter.l...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Such a poor ability to read!! Who said anything about the church?
> You're changing the subject. It was you who said "Christianity=
> prosperity and life". It was you who was talking about the founding
> fathers being "Christian". No one said anything about any church
> whatsoever until you got your ass handed to you.
The "Church" is all of Christiandom, all church denominations involved
in mainline Christianity. Individual Christians don't change the world
and solve national problems apart from the powers of the Church.
Neither individual Christians nor the Church universal could stop
slavery or wrongs against native American indians. None backed any
abuses, but in fact complained vehemently to no avail. The problem was
just too old, cumulative, and widespread, results of the depravity of
selfish men.
Nobody has succeeded in besting me. None of you can handle me, not all
combined. I have all of you atheists bewildered. You stand shamed and
defeated.
> You're out of your league here, Gomer. Go back to the woods and get
> some from Smokey. Oh, just for clarity, I put the conversation in you
> didn't want to show because you wanted to change the subject. By the
> way, you can bet your ass that the church was all for slavery and the
> extermination of the "heathen" Indians. where do you think the word
> "heathen" came from when the colonists were referring to either
> Africans or Indians? And, how about that wonderful Christian act of
> burning witches?
Talk about changing the subject! BTW, the word "heathen" appeared in
the KJV Bible long before the West saw European pilgrims. Ha. You
totally messed up doing what you accused me of! It's a shame you are
not an orangutan. Had you been representing them this would not be so
terrible an experience. But to think you actually represent any group
of humans!
Jim
Dave
<dvorous@gmail.com>wrote:
> On Jul 30, 11:43 am, Dave <dvor...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On Jul 30, 7:56 am, Word_Swordsman <Ouachitabassang...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
>
> > > The attack in Iraq was preemptive per security beliefs of the Clinton
> > > administration.
>
> > Again with the lies.
>
> > >The concern with them and of course successor Bush was
> > > to go after any possibility of possession and willingness to use
> > > weapons of mass destruction. That was not a Bush invention.
>
> > That most certainly was a total bush fabrication. That he lied is now
> > a proven fact.
>
> If I posted a long list of links to speeches by Bill and Hillary
> Clinton
I wouldn't read them. No doubt you'd twist their meanings or
completely misunderstand what they were talking about.
> > >...The big mistake we made was
> > > not emphasizing nuclear power to make it possible to get off burning
> > > of fossil fuels. It's too late to fix that.
>
> > Do you actually believe we are stupid enough to believe that? Nuclear
> > power creates MORE CO2 than burning fossil fuels. Do you think they
> > just pick the rocks off the ground and stick then in the reactor?
> > Then what do you do with the waste? You get a lot of waste that is
> > deadly for tens of thousands of years.
>
> You don't get CO2 from heating water to make steam.
Are you really that stupid? Where did I say anything about water or
steam?
> Once again I prove your insanity
No, you have proven your's.
Dave
<dvorous@gmail.com>wrote:
That is the quote of the month because only someone that is a total
moron could have said it.
Dave
<dvorous@gmail.com>wrote:
> On Jul 30, 3:38 pm, Dave <dvor...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > You know the christians have a long history of doing exactly what he
> > described. During the Crusades they'd force people to convert at sword
> > point and then when they did convert they'd kill them so they wouldn't
> > revert back. It shows how little they actually care for their fellow
> > humans.
>
It seems you don't know the history of your own religion. That's
probably why you still believe in the silly idea of gods. I pity you.
Dave
<dvorous@gmail.com>On Jul 30, 7:32 pm, Word_Swordsman <Ouachitabassang...@gmail.com>
wrote:
ROTFLMFAO! You really do need to start taking the medications your
psych gave you.
Dave
<dvorous@gmail.com>wrote:
> On Jul 30, 3:42 pm, Dave <dvor...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On Jul 30, 1:05 pm, Word_Swordsman <Ouachitabassang...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
>
> > > On Jul 30, 11:37 am, Ivan Karamazov <rubinst...@planet.nl> wrote:
>
> > > > Which mas destruction weapons ? Were they found, and where ? ...
>
> > > Your pitiful mind probably can't handle this but records show Saddam
> > > played games with UN inspectors....
>
> > Proof? Where are those WMDs? Oh, I see your problem now. You
> > conveniently forgot (ie lied) that Saddam used them all on his own
> > people.
>
> You are lying.
Of course you need to see me as lying. You have no proof those WMD
ever existed. You have no concept of what was actually going on over
there. You blindly believe the pabulum they spoon feed you. It must
suck to be you.
Dave
<dvorous@gmail.com>wrote:
The only reason I haven't plonked you is that you are so funny. I find
it amazing that someone that knows how to turn on their own computer
can be so stupid.
The numbers I posted were that of the PEOPLE that have died in those
events. I don't give a shit if they were American or not - they are
still people. But we'll continue with your moronic comparison.... When
Japan attacked Oahu, who did the US attack in retaliation? Japan. When
al Qaeda attacked us who did we attack? Al Quaeda? No, we attacked
someone that had nothing to do with it. Who financed the attack on
Oahu? Japan. Who financed the 9/11 attacks? Saudi Arabia. Did we
attack them? No. Where are most of the "suicide bombers" in Iraq
coming from? Iran? No. Saudi Arabia. There is only one reason we
attacked Iraq - the ego of president bush.
Word_Swordsman
<Ouachitabassangler@gmail.com>On Jul 30, 6:50 pm, "ranjit_math...@yahoo.com"
<ranjit_math...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> What were churches's responses' when Andrew Jackson proposed (what is
> now known as) the Trail of Tears?
The Cherokees, Creeks, Seminoles and other tribes moved to Oklahoma
actually adopted Christian teachings as a close fit to their customs
and beliefs. They built churches and schools toward the end of the
Trail of Tears era, and have continued to accept Christianity.
Missionaries from various churches in the East went to the tribes with
aid. The churches favored a Georgia law forbidding white men from
entering reservations there, but that was struck down as
unconstitutional by the USSC. The Church just wasn't well equipped or
motivated to engage in conflict over the problems. It was mostly
Christians (Quakers and prominent northern black churches) who
operated the Underground Railroad that moved slaves from the South to
Canada. Much more could have been done, but it just wasn't. It took
the Civil War to do the job.
Jim
Word_Swordsman
<Ouachitabassangler@gmail.com>On Jul 30, 6:52 pm, "ranjit_math...@yahoo.com"
So you want to flip flop now, caught in your ignorance? First the
atheist mindset says "out of Judaism", then comes back adding two
philosophies. This is proof you don't have a clue. List the elements
of JUDAISM that apply to New Testament Christianity. This should be
comical. I don't think you can separate Judaism in the OT from parts
having nothing to do directly with Judaism. You are too ignorant of
the Bible to do it.
Next, let's see you compare Christianity to Platonism then to Paganism
without nullifying one with the other. Christianity can stand up
opposed to both, and by pitting paganism with Platonism you would
destroy one or both. You can't do it, stupid. You lack knowledge of
those too, else you would not have put yourself in a difficult corner.
You are laughable, ignorant, and pitiful.
Jim
Dev
<thedeviliam@fastmail.fm>On Jul 30, 9:07 pm, Word_Swordsman <Ouachitabassang...@gmail.com>
wrote:
Word_Swordsman
<Ouachitabassangler@gmail.com>On Jul 30, 10:33 pm, Dave <dvor...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > If I posted a long list of links to speeches by Bill and Hillary
> > Clinton
>
> I wouldn't read them. No doubt you'd twist their meanings or
> completely misunderstand what they were talking about.
You just lost the last remnant of this "debate". The links are to
simple to understand Congressional Record entries covering what was
spoken in Congress. There are also lots of videos published by major
news networks covering Pres. Clinton, Hillary, cabinet members,
congressmen, etc. You are AFRAID to see the truth. This is a cause
similar to refusal of atheists to examine creation science facts lest
they are forced to change. You are a COWARD, not a man, only a partial
human, child of the Devil.
> > > >...The big mistake we made was
> > > > not emphasizing nuclear power to make it possible to get off burning
> > > > of fossil fuels. It's too late to fix that.
>
> > > Do you actually believe we are stupid enough to believe that? Nuclear
> > > power creates MORE CO2 than burning fossil fuels. Do you think they
> > > just pick the rocks off the ground and stick then in the reactor?
> > > Then what do you do with the waste? You get a lot of waste that is
> > > deadly for tens of thousands of years.
>
> > You don't get CO2 from heating water to make steam.
>
> Are you really that stupid? Where did I say anything about water or
> steam?
You failed to mention how nuclear power plants work. You very
mistakenly asserted they contribute MORE CO2 than burning fossil
fuels, which is the EXACT opposite of the truth according to that MIT
link I gave. You belong in a nursing home, tied to a bed. Nuclear
power heats water to make steam. No CO2 there. So where in the
processing of fuels does your CO2 come about? OH, I get it. Workers in
hot rugged uranium mines would breathe harder and emit more CO2? Or
maybe you think a few modern mining vehicles emit too much, more than
cars on one highway in a major city?
> > Once again I prove your insanity
>
> No, you have proven your's.
I'll believe the scientists and experts out of Massachusetts Institute
of Technology.YOU are NOBODY in the mater. Burning fossil fuels
accounts for the vast majority of CO2, while nuclear power plants, AND
the processing of the fuels, contribute practically NOTHING but water
vapor to the atmosphere.You are out of the tree on that one, so bad
you should just leave and curl up in some dark alley.
Jim
Word_Swordsman
<Ouachitabassangler@gmail.com>It's true and quite reasonable. I could hate my enemy and rip his gut
open with a bayonet, hating him more. Or I can pray a little prayer
for him before ripping his belly open. Only a moron would stop and
tell the guy "I LOVE you in Jesus." and give him some mercy, holding
off an attack. You wouldn't finish the saying before he had your gut
opened. War is rotten, but all too necessary for civilizations to
survive. So it is I could dispatch the man without hating him. It's
just a soldier doing his job, but not loving the job.Ah, but you
COWARDS can't possibly comprehend soldier stuff, MAN stuff, and
certainly not the things of my God who has always been a God of war on
the side of people obeying Him or serving His purposes.He is the
Master strategist, able to cause one angel to kill an army, or 300 men
to rout thousands of an enemy army, their weapons mere lit torches.
Jim
Word_Swordsman
<Ouachitabassangler@gmail.com>On Jul 30, 10:37 pm, Dave <dvor...@gmail.com> wrote:
> It seems you don't know the history of your own religion. That's
> probably why you still believe in the silly idea of gods. I pity you.
OK, so lets get going on it. How many Crusades over what period of
time? While you look that up be sure to read about each mission, who
started the trouble, which involved Christians, and which involved
westerners or other people taking inspiration from the Christian
Crusaders, etc. I'll have to rub your nose in this after all. YOU will
be the one having to prove atheists wrong. I'll just point to history
sources.
Jim
Word_Swordsman
<Ouachitabassangler@gmail.com>On Jul 30, 10:38 pm, Dave <dvor...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > You don't know what Al Queda is.
>
> ROTFLMFAO! You really do need to start taking the medications your
> psych gave you.
Huh, No response with actual information. Just denial and derision.So
far, so typical of atheists with reprobate minds.
Jim
Word_Swordsman
<Ouachitabassangler@gmail.com>On Jul 30, 10:39 pm, Dave <dvor...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Of course you need to see me as lying. You have no proof those WMD
> ever existed. You have no concept of what was actually going on over
> there. You blindly believe the pabulum they spoon feed you. It must
> suck to be you.
Again, no substance in your post. You are wrung out, undone, wiped
out, shamed. Yes, there were WMDs, used on the Kurds. The Saddam trial
proved that. Intel sources proved it. The lost answer for now is where
Saddam sent the remaining arsenal in those years he defied the UN and
America.
Jim