WWIII

This is something a found a while back. It's a high ranking officers speach. I just want to know how many of you really think these wars are unjustified. And don't think for a second that good ol sadam didnt have any money in it!


When WW III Started

A must read historical account of Terrorism against the US ~

This is not very long, but very informative. You have to read the
catalogue of events in this brief piece. Then, ask yourself how
anyone can take the position that all we have to do is bring our
troops home from Iraq, sit back, reset the snooze alarm, go back to
sleep, and no one will ever bother us again. In case you missed it,
World War III began in November 1979... that alarm has been ringing
for years.

US Navy Captain Ouimette is the Executive Officer at Naval Air
Station, Pensacola, Florida. Here is a copy of the speech he gave
last month. It is an accurate account of why we are in so much
trouble today and why this action is so necessary.

AMERICA NEEDS TO WAKE UP!

That's what we think we heard on the 11th of September 2001 (When
more than 3,000 Americans were killed -AD) and maybe it was, but I
think it should have been "Get Out of Bed!" In fact, I think the
alarm clock has been buzzing since 1979 and we have continued to hit
the snooze button and roll over for a few more minutes of peaceful
sleep since then.

It was a cool fall day in November 1979 in a country going through a
religious and political upheaval when a group of Iranian students
attacked and seized the American Embassy in Tehran. This seizure was
an outright attack on American soil; it was an attack that held the
world's most powerful country hostage and paralyzed a Presidency.
The attack on this sovereign U. S. embassy set the stage for events
to follow for the next 25 years.

America was still reeling from the aftermath of the Vietnam
experience and had a serious threat from the Soviet Union when then,
President Carter, had to do something. He chose to conduct a
clandestine raid in the desert. The ill-fated mission ended in ruin,
but stood as a symbol of America's inability to deal with terrorism.

America's military had been decimated and down sized/right sized
since the end of the Vietnam War. A poorly trained, poorly equipped
and poorly organized military was called on to execute a complex
mission that was doomed from the start.

Shortly after the Tehran experience, Americans began to be kidnapped
and killed throughout the Middle East. America could do little to
protect her citizens living and working abroad. The attacks against
US soil continued.

In April of 1983 a large vehicle packed with high explosives was
driven into the US Embassy compound in Beirut When it explodes, it
kills 63 people. The alarm went off again and America hit the Snooze
Button once more.

Then just six short months later in 1983 a large truck heavily laden
down with over 2500 pounds of TNT smashed through the main gate of
the US Marine Corps headquarters in Beirut and 241 US servicemen are
killed. America mourns her dead and hit the Snooze Button once more.

Two months later in December 1983, another truck loaded with
explosives is driven into the US Embassy in Kuwait, and America
continues her slumber.

The following year, in September 1984, another van was driven into
the gate of the US Embassy in Beirut and America slept.

Soon the terrorism spreads to Europe. In April 1985 a bomb explodes
in a restaurant frequented by US soldiers in Madrid.

Then in August 1985 a Volkswagen loaded with explosives is driven
into the main gate of the US Air Force Base at Rhein-Main, 22 are
killed and the snooze alarm is buzzing louder and louder as US
interests are continually attacked.

Fifty-nine days later in 1985 a cruise ship, the Achille Lauro is
hijacked and we watched as an American in a wheelchair is singled
out of the passenger list and executed.

The terrorists then shift their tactics to bombing civilian airliners
when they bomb TWA Flight 840 in April of 1986 that killed 4 and the
most tragic bombing, Pan Am Flight 103 over Lockerbie, Scotland in
1988, killing 259.

Clinton treated these terrorist acts as crimes; in fact we are still
trying to bring these people to trial. These are acts of war.

The wake up alarm is getting louder and louder.

The terrorists decide to bring the fight to America. In January 1993,
two CIA agents are shot and killed as they enter CIA headquarters in
Langley, Virginia.

The following month, February 1993, a group of terrorists are
arrested after a rented van packed with explosives is driven into
the underground parking garage of the World Trade Center in New York
City. Six people are killed and over 1000 are injured. Still this is
a crime and not an act of war? The Snooze alarm is depressed again.

Then in November 1995 a car bomb explodes at a US military complex in
Riyadh, Saudi Arabia killing seven service men and women.

A few months later in June of 1996, another truck bomb explodes only
35 yards from the US military compound in Dhahran, Saudi Arabia. It
destroys the Khobar Towers, a US Air Force barracks, killing 19 and
injuring over 500. The terrorists are getting braver and smarter as
they see that America does not respond decisively.

They move to coordinate their attacks in a simultaneous attack on two
US embassies in Kenya and Tanzania.. These attacks were planned with
precision. They kill 224. America responds with cruise missile
attacks and goes back to sleep.

The USS Cole was docked in the port of Aden, Yemen for refueling on
12 October 2000, when a small craft pulled along side the ship and
exploded killing 17 US Navy Sailors. Attacking a US War Ship is an
act of war, but we sent the FBI to investigate the crime and went
back to sleep.

And of course you know the events of 11 September 2001. Most
Americans think this was the first attack against US soil or in
America. How wrong they are. America has been under a constant
attack since 1979 and we chose to hit the snooze alarm and roll over
and go back to sleep.

In the news lately we have seen lots of finger pointing from every
high officials in government over what they knew and what they
didn't know. But if you've read the papers and paid a little
attention I think you can see exactly what they knew. You don't have
to be in the FBI or CIA or on the National Security Council to see
the pattern that has been developing since 1979.

The President is right on when he says we are engaged in a war. I
think we have been in a war for the past 25 years and it will
continue until we as a people decide enough is enough. America needs
to "Get out of Bed" and act decisively now. America has been changed
forever. We have to be ready to pay the price and make the sacrifice
to ensure our way of life continues. We cannot afford to keep
hitting the snooze button again and again and roll over and go back
to sleep.

After the attack on Pearl Harbor, Admiral Yamamoto said "... it seems
all we have done is awakened a sleeping giant." This is the message
we need to disseminate to terrorists around the world.
g
Support Our Troops and support President Bush for having the courage,
political or militarily, to address what so many who preceded him
didn't have the backbone to do, both Democrat and Republican. This
is not a political thing to be hashed over in an election year. This
is an AMERICAN thing. This is about our Freedom and the Freedom of
our children in years to come.

Amen

so we are fighting a war on terrorism by being in Iraq how, exactly? please lay it all out for me again because perhaps i missed something the first time.

oh yeah, Iraq attacked us on 9-11.... I'd forgotten about how much they hate our freedom and deep fried potatoes.

you can't send a message to extremists.....

...very much in the same way that you cannot convince Dumbya's supporters that he is an idiotic, imbecilic moron.

support our troops by discontinuing sending them to a needless slaughter in an unnecessary, ill advised, unwinnable war.

h2o I'm just curiose have you served in the military? At this vary moment I am serving in Afg for the 3rd time sence the war started. Frome what I have seen on this war front is the fact their are wepons here from all countrys killing friends of mine. For as knowledgeable as you sound to me it would be nieve to think for a second that the man that can kill thousands of his own countrymen ( which I feel is reason enough to remove him by force from power) would never harber terrists. I know we went to war with the asumption of WMD. But could it be possible that maybe the man was smart enough to remove them from his country prior to a US lead attack? God know's his niebors would be more the happy to get their hands on a little more fire power. It would be like saying packastan would not help terrists in Afg. Well I'm not the smartest man here I'm just a high school grad with too much combat time under my belt I'm not a history buff or nothing of the sort. Dam it's bright in this sand box

no, i have never served but like most american families mine has sacrificed more than one good man in the name of 'freedom'. I have both family and friends fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan.

you guys still lookin for osama over there or has the mission changed?

the terrorists of 9-11 were saudi, not Iraqi. the money that funded the entire enterprise was saudi.

if we had attacked Korea after pearl harbor, that would look just as stupid in hindsight as attacking Iraq after 9-11 will.

well as far as ol bin, I personally think he's dead but who really knows.

As for the mission it has never changed hunt and kill the bad guy ( gotta love a hunting season like that )

Finally with Iraq, I still think sadam had a hand in it somehow. Do I have proff? S@it no. Just one of them things that all bad guys stick together when they have a common enemy. Weather or not we went into that war for the right reasons don't mater much no more from my point of view. I'm just here to make sure the job get finished.

I do think that we are in a bigger war then most want to admit and it's not going to stop at sadam and bin. We are at war with terrests in general where ever they want to call home.

You not only have no proof, you have ignored the findings of the 9/11 Commission altogether. They had access to info that none of us will see and their conclusion was that Iraq was not involved in the 9/11 WTC attack.

Draw your own conclusions.

------------------------------------------------------------

How can anyone draw any conclusions about what the 9/11 Commision concluded?

Have you been following the 'Able Danger' story?

"They had access to info that none of us will see"

What did Sandy Burgler... I mean Burger 'stuff down his pants'--take home and destroy?

I don't know and thanks to Sandy Burgler the 9/11 commision couldn't see/and or know to help make their findings either.

The 'Warren Commision' concluded that Lee Harvey Oswald was the lone assassin of JFK--despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary that later negated many of the Warren Commisions's findings--does that still mean that the Warren Commision got it 100% right?

'The Warren Coverup Commission'. What a scam. And you don't get to open the file for 75 years. Wonder why that is so. Probably the statute of limitations runs out on prosecuting the commission members.

Steelieosus,

Kudos to you for service to the U.S.

As for finishing the job, what does the finished job look like? That is, how will I know when the U.S. has won? What will winning look like?

So your job is to hunt the bad guys? Good work if you can get it, I guess. Who are the bad guys? And how can you tell them apart from innocent civilians?

Unfortunately, this is looking more and more like Viet Nam all the time. Only way to be sure about winning is to kill 'em all and let God sort 'em out, as far as I can tell.

And since the people and the money that attacked the WTC were Saudi, are you gonna' stay the course and kill all Saudis while you're at it? If not, how can the U.S. be safe?

Good luck, with a job like yours, you're gonna' need it, unfortunately.

Sincerely,

Salmo g.

I think they, our troops, have been killing Saudis, Syrians, Iranians, Jordanians and not a few Palestinians in Iraq. Jihad, you know. Definitely some Hezbollah martyr wanna bes.
Too bad they can't just give them all a number and accomodate their death wish.

salmo g,

It's really easy, if they got a gun and point it at you " bad guy shoot him" Oh he's setting up a rocket in the hills to shoot at me " bad guy shoot him" It's cutt and dry, a lot easyier then one might think.

Their is more good civilians over here that want to see a free country that they will suply plenty of intel to get yourself into a fire fight. More fire fights we get into = less extreamests around to kill your family at home. I think we are a long ways from winning this though becouse terrists are not limited to one country and don't wear a set uniform. It's a war that will take a lot of time and blood and YOU will know we are winning on the day that you don't have to worrie about flying or sending your kids to school or any of the other things you take for granted. I would rather be over here keeping them F**kers busy in their own countrys then have them keeping my family busy in our country. Of course I am just one of those kill or be killed types though.

Not to throw cold water on your parade or anything but this quote, while I don't disagree with the sentiment, Is in fact a fabrication.
Checke it out at snopes.com.
Steelie, I am a 10 year Navy Vet by the way.
I couldn't agree more with the current mission but I do believe that the civilians (and the political hacks in charge at the pentagon) at the higher levels are blowing this one badly and wasting the lives of our servicemen and women.
Now that the Iraqi's have shown that they cannot reach a compromise, I believe it is time to sterilize the oozing pustulating hole that is Bahgdad and the Sunni Triangle. Cleanse the ******* with fire and turn the ashes over to the Kurds. The only reason in my mind to remain in Iraq is to kill the Iranians and Syrians pouring across the desert to Jihad against the "Satan" that is us.
I am in favor of peace in the middle east, and I don't care if we have to kill every last Muslim on earth to achieve it.
G

Grumpy,

About 1 out of every 6 people on earth is Muslim, and they're scattered across regions other than the mid-east. That's a lot of potential killing to achieve peace in the middle east. Have you got any remedies to add some efficiency to the process. I'm concerned about breaking the bank if the U.S. is gonna' sponsor killing one billion people.

Salmo g.

They are either with us or agin us. Start by killing the ones who are agin us and go from there.

------------------------------------------------------------

------------------------------------------------------------

Actually, I have have extended you and others here respect. While I disagree with the emotionally charged feel good liberal answers to any number of questions--Hoping it would be reciprocated, I have tried (in vain) for close to a year to only address PP board members by their monikers or repsectfull acronyms there of and only address the politics of people (PP board members) and not personally attack the people (PP BM's) who subcribe to those politics.

I've even tried to pay you (AuntyM) complements when I thought you were right on a given issue or made particularly cogent points.

I wish there were more liberals/none-repulicans on PP like 4Salt, Eddie and Jeff"E"d that you could have intellegent exchanges of ideas/debates with who addressed/attacked ideas and not people. They have the mature ability to debate issues without resorting to childish name calling and personal attacks. Unfortunatley they are the exceptiion and not the rule for representatives here on the left and it seems that many 'non-republicans' here would rather just personally defame conservative PP board members the second they don't agree with them or just because they've become frustrated because they're unable to refute one of their points.


I wish people here (on every side) could just debate and when they find no middle ground agree to just disagree without becoming disagreeable.

If nothing else , with regards to Steelieosus,
we can agree on this:

-----------------------------------------------------------

Good one! That was funny right there!

------------------------------------------------------------


-----------------------------------------------------------

------------------------------------------------------------
Third Source Backs 'Able Danger' Claims About Atta

Sunday, August 28, 2005


WASHINGTON — A third person has now come forward to verify claims made by a military intelligence unit that a year before the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, it had information showing that lead hijacker Mohamed Atta (search) and other terrorists were identified as being in the United States.

J.D. Smith, a defense contractor who claims he worked on the technical side of the unit, code-named "Able Danger" (search), told reporters Friday that he helped gather open-source information (search), reported on government spending and helped generate charts associated with the unit's work. Able Danger was set up in the 1990s to track Al Qaeda activity worldwide.

"I am absolutely positive that he [Atta] was on our chart among other pictures and ties that we were doing mainly based upon [terror] cells in New York City," Smith said.

Smith said data was gathered from a variety of sources, including about 30 or 40 individuals. He said they all had strong Middle Eastern connections and were paid for their information. Smith said Able Danger's photo of Atta was obtained from overseas.

Rep. Curt Weldon (search), R-Pa., arranged the media roundtable with Smith. Weldon drew attention to Able Danger by speaking about it on the House floor months ago and has publicly called for the Sept. 11 commission to explain why the intelligence information wasn't detailed in its final report.

Besides Smith, Lt. Colonel Anthony Shaffer (search) and Navy Captain Scott Philpott (search) have also gone on the record, saying they were discouraged from looking further into Atta, and their attempts to share their information with the FBI were thwarted because Atta was a legal foreign visitor at the time.

"This story needs to be told. The American people need to be told what could have been done to prevent 3,000 people from losing their lives," Weldon told FOX News this week.

Shaffer and Philpott claim that in October 2003, they told Sept. 11 commission staffers of the presence of Al Qaeda operatives in the United States in 2000 yet little was included in the panel's final report about those conversations.

During Friday's roundtable with Smith, he was asked by reporters about Atta, who was using another name during 1999-2000. Smith said the charts Able Danger was using had identified him through a number of name variations, one being "Atta."

Two sources familiar with Able Danger told FOX News that part of its investigative work focused on mosques and the religious ties between known terrorist operatives such as Omar Abdul Rahman (search), who was part of the first World Trade Center bombing plot in 1993.

An independent terrorism analyst pointed out to FOX News that German intelligence had no record of Atta before the Sept. 11 attack; that's significant because Atta headed up the Sept. 11 Al Qaeda cell in Hamburg. The analyst also questioned how Atta could be connected to Rahman, who was in prison by the mid-1990s.

Smith claims that one way the unit came to know Atta was through Rahman. Smith said Able Danger used data mining techniques — publicly available information — to look at mosques and religious ties and it was, in part, through the investigation of Rahman that Atta's name surfaced.

Aides to Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Arlen Specter (search), R-Pa., are actively discussing scheduling a hearing on Able Danger and the larger issue of information-sharing between the Pentagon and the FBI.

One of the central Able Danger claims — that military lawyers blocked the sharing of the Atta information from the FBI in the late summer and early fall of 2000 — will be a focus of the committee if a hearing takes place, FOX News has confirmed.

Specter sent a letter to FBI Director Robert Mueller on Wednesday asking the agency to provide to the committee "all information and documents it has in connection with Able Danger, , Lt. Colonel Anthony Shaffer, Captain Scott Philpott or any other persons having any connections with Project Able Danger, including, but not limited to, e-mail communication, notes, phone message slips, memos or any other supporting documentation."

Specter also asked Mueller to make available FBI agent Xanthig Mangum to meet with his staff. Mangum is reported to have corresponded in 2000 with Shaffer, who helped run Able Danger's mission and has offered to testify on its findings, about scheduling a meeting between Able Danger and FBI staffs. No meeting ever took place.

The Pentagon has been looking into what it knew and when it knew it, but defense officials have not been able to verify the Able Danger claims so far. A Pentagon spokesman confirmed Thursday that the department has interviewed both Shaffer and Philpott.

"There's something very sinister going on here that really troubles me," Weldon told FOX News on Thursday, blasting the Sept. 11 commission (search) for not taking the claims more seriously. He said some panel members were trying to smear Shaffer and Able Danger.

"What's the Sept. 11 commission got to hide?" Weldon asked. "The commission is trying to spin this because they're embarrassed about what's coming out. In two weeks with two staffers, I've uncovered more in this regard than they did with 80 staffers and $15 million of taxpayer money."

Sept. 11 commission Chairman Thomas Kean recently told FOX News that the panel is waiting for a response from the Pentagon. Until then, the commission has stood by its work, maintaining that no documents they received from the military backed up the Atta claims.

Weldon added that at least five people on the federal payroll will testify under oath about the validity of the Able Danger intelligence.

When this is over, the Sept. 11 commission is going to have egg all over their face," he said.

FOX News' Catherine Herridge, Molly Hooper and Liza Porteus contributed to this report.

Just consider the prime movers, Greed and Fear. On those two emotions you can explain most human behaviour. Love unfortunately is a weak third. I say love , not lust.. Lust is a subset of Greed.

congratulations...

...you just nailed the two reasons we are in Iraq.

The amusment on PP is what make's this forum so great

Rory said something that most need to take to hart on this board "just agree to disagree" but then agin what fun would that be on this board if we all did that

From: "Zepp"
Date: Wed, 31 Aug 2005 05:29:10 -0700
Subject: [Zepps_News] Guardian Unlimited Politics | Bush is the real
threat


http://politics.guardian.co.uk/comment/story/0,9115,1559617,00.html

Bush is the real threat

Tony Benn
Wednesday August 31, 2005
The Guardian

Now that the US president has announced that he has not ruled out an
attack on Iran, if it does not abandon its nuclear programme, the Middle
East faces a crisis that could dwarf even the dangers arising from the
war in Iraq.

Even a conventional weapon fired at a nuclear research centre - whether
or not a bomb was being made there - would almost certainly release
radioactivity into the atmosphere, with consequences seen worldwide as a
mini-Hiroshima.

Article continues
We would be told that it had been done to uphold the principles of the
nuclear non-proliferation treaty (NPT) - an argument that does not stand
up to a moment's examination.

The moral and legal basis of the NPT convention, which the International
Atomic Energy Agency is there to uphold, was based on the agreement of
non-nuclear nations not to acquire nuclear weapons if nuclear powers
undertook not to extend nuclear arsenals and negotiate to secure their
abolition.

Since then, the Americans have launched a programme that would allow
them to use nuclear weapons in space, nuclear bunker-busting bombs are
being developed, and depleted uranium has been used in Iraq - all of
which are clear breaches of the NPT. Israel, which has a massive nuclear
weapons programme, is accepted as a close ally of the US, which still
arms and funds it.

Even those who are opposed, as I am, to nuclear weapons in every country
including Iran, North Korea, Britain and the US, accept that nuclear
power for electricity generation need not necessarily lead to the
acquisition of the bomb.

Indeed, many years ago, when the shah - who had been put on the throne
by the US - was in power in Iran, enormous pressure was put on me, as
secretary of state for energy, to agree to sell nuclear power stations
to him. That pressure came from the Atomic Energy Authority, in
conjunction with Westinghouse, who were anxious to promote their own
design of reactor.

It is easy to understand why president Bush might see the bombing of
Iran as a way to regain some of the political credibility he has lost as
a result of the growing hostility in America to the Iraq war due to the
heavy casualties suffered by US forces there .

It is inconceivable that the White House can be contemplating an
invasion of Iran, and what must be intended is a US airstrike, or
airstrikes, on Iranian nuclear installations, comparable to Israel's
bombing of Iraq in 1981. Israel has publicly hinted that it might do the
same again to prevent Iran developing nuclear nuclear weapons.

Such an attack, whether by the US or Israel, would be in breach of the
UN Charter, as was the invasion of Iraq. But neither Bush, Sharon nor
Blair would take any notice of that.

Some influential Americans appear to be convinced that the US will
attack Iran. Whether they are right or not, the build-up to a new war is
taking exactly the same form as it did in 2002. First we are being told
that Iran poses a military threat, because it may be developing nuclear
weapons. We are assured that the President is hoping that diplomacy
might succeed through the European negotiations which have been in
progress for some months.

This is just what we were told when Hans Blix was in Baghdad talking to
Saddam on behalf of the UN, but we now know, from a Downing Street
memorandum leaked some months ago, that the decision to invade had been
taken long before that.

That may be the position now, and I fear that if a US attack does take
place, the prime minister will give it his full support. And one of his
reasons for doing so will be the same as in Iraq: namely the fear that,
if he alienates Bush, Britain's so-called independent deterrent might be
taken away. For, as I also learned when I was energy secretary, Britain
is entirely dependent on the US for the supply of our Trident warheads
and associated technology. They cannot even be targeted unless the US
switches on its global satellite system.

Therefore Britain could be assisting America to commit an act of
aggression under the UN Charter, which could risk a major nuclear
disaster, and doing so supposedly to prevent nuclear proliferation, with
the real motive of making it possible for us to continue to break the
NPT in alliance with America.

The irony is that we might be told that Britain must support Bush, yet
again, because of the threat of weapons of mass destruction, thus
allowing him to kill even more innocent civilians.

· Tony Benn will be talking about War; Religion and politics; and
Democracy, at the Shaw Theatre in London on September 7, 8 and 9

Tony@tbenn.fsnet.co.uk

I think we should let the Israelies hit Iran's nuke facilities for us. They have experience.

Don't hold your breath. They let us do all the heavy lifting as well as write the checks. Sure they feel it's better our blood than their's, since we are such willing cannon fadder for protecting their interest. Sad that so many are completely blind to that fact.

Haven't you noticed that we take better care of them than we do our own U. S. citizens. The neocon complain when Veteran's, the elderly and poor in this country, ask for health care and economic assitance, but are always there with the check book and a welfare check, paid to the order of Isreal, amounting to billions annualy.

Fishy!

When the Israelis blew up the Osiraq nuclear plant in Iraq, we gave them a hard time about it.

Newsmax has linked the US to the WTC attacks based on this evidence.

Okay, I guess I'll jump into the fray and offer my own slanted opinion as to why the world is so F***ed up... The answer is RELIGION!!!It all began with the holy wars, or crusades as they have been called, pitting Christianity against the Muslim faith. Not to say that christians are more righteous in their beliefs than muslims , but had the christians bested the muslims in the crusades, there would not be any of this crap happening now. So , in my humble opinion, had the christians prevailed and wiped out islam years ago, none of the problems we are facing now would exist. If the muslim world wants to hang on to ancient notions about how to live in the modern world, (camel dung fires and veiled, stifeled women).. OK!! If they want to hang on to old world ideals, so be it! The rest of the world will progress and leave them in the backwater of humanity.. OK I've said it, so I await the flames and wrath of any and all of those who disagree with my post.

" If the muslim world wants to hang on to ancient notions about how to live in the modern world, (camel dung fires and veiled, stifeled women).. OK!! If they want to hang on to old world ideals, so be it! The rest of the world will progress and leave them in the backwater of humanity.. "

Substitute Evangelical Christian for Muslim and it still rings true. Women without choice, psuedo-science, anti-freedom, anti-democracy, etc.

Thanks Stlhead I needed a reminder of what an idiot you are.

Nookie Dreamin,

The flip side of the coin is probably equally valid. If the Muslims had only wiped out Christians and Christianity during the crusades, then Islam would be the dominant world religion today, and none of these present-day problems would be happening either?

Not flaming you, or even disagreeing, just suggesting that rational thought examines all sides of issues.

Sincerely,

Salmo g.

"Thanks Stlhead I needed a reminder of what an idiot you are."

You are reminded of an idiot every morning when you look in the mirror. I know, I know....hard to see yourself with your head in the sand.

TK, you need a bigger soap box cause nobody can see you standing on that one.

Good response, by the way. Keep that brain cell working over time.

Stlhd, I only need one reminder you can stop now , really!

Is today your day off from Christianity?

Maybe if stlhead and Salmo used the "right" interpretation of history, you know the only one true way to interpret history then you could understand our friend with the sparkly helmet!

"Is today your day off from Christianity?"

Why you feeling froggy?

Oh yeah I forgot that you like to dwell on gay issues from the closet.

STlhead, I am not by definition an" Evangelical christian" as a matter of fact, i guess the term used to describe someone like me would be "agnostic", but I still believe that had the "Christians" prevailed, we would not be seeing the senless slaughter of innocents all over the globe in the name of Islam...My humble opinion..

Salmo, I agree with you that , had the coin been flipped, we would all be muslims... but the point was, historically , islam is a dying religion, and the more modern way of thinking is going to inherit the earth. While I personally do not embrace a lot of the "Christian" ideals, I do have morals and know right from wrong. However, "Christian " ideals reflect a more modern way of thinking, in comparison to the Islam faith' which dictates subjugation of the masses and blind faith in Allah, who may or may not grant them life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness. That being said, I would much rather live as an agnostic in a "Christian" world, where I can disagree with the popular opinion, than live in the world of Islam, where the mere thought of individualism can result in DEATH!

Quote:
I still believe that had the "Christians" prevailed, we would not be seeing the senless slaughter of innocents all over the globe in the name of Islam...My humble opinion..

Nookie Dreamin,
It many not be for the name of Islam, but man has always found a reason to kill another. The Indians didn't believe in the Islam faith and look how many we killed for land, Hitler wasent either. I'm just saying to think for a second that the world would be peaceful without that religon on earth is just a dream. But ofcourse that's just my point of view.

Yeah, people are just dieing to be a part of it.

Sorry for the late reply, but I have'nt been able to get around to posting more on this subject the last few days... Yes, Aunty, I see more people converting to the muslim faith, as a matter of fact one of my newest customers is a convert to the "ONLY TRUE FAITH"! This guy has abandoned his family and heritage, it seems because he lacks the ability to form independent opinions and convictions, and this inability has FORCED him to adopt a religious belief that allows that all followers of the "TRUE FAITH" be nothing more than mindless, spineless sheep, to be led to their own slaughter by nothing more than zealotry and pagan idolatry, rather than having to adapt to what we all have been able to adapt to, the modern, western way of life.. That being said, I have to admit that living in our modern world is no piece of cake,(a daily struggle, to be sure), IMHO, Islam is nothing more than an excuse to be as mediocre a person as you can possibly be, with a minimum of effort. I know that some of my opinions may seem extreme to some folks, but I am not so wrapped up in my beliefs that I would willingly become a suicide bomber or hijack an aircraft to punish other people who do not posess the "herd beast mentality" that is required by Islam.. Let the flames begin!