Text 42505, 129 rader
Skriven 2006-11-11 18:06:00 av bob klahn (1:275/311)
     Kommentar till en text av shannon talley
Ärende: Insults
===============
 st> Hello Bob,

>> Radical Islam views every opportunity that way. And Radical
>> Christianity sees the war in Iraq as an opportunity to break
>> Islam.

 st> I'm Christian from the evangelical side of the house and I
 st> respectfully disagree with your statement regarding how
 st> Christianity sees the war in Iraq.

 Are you a radical Christian? I specifically specified Radical
 Christianity. You have heard of the Christian extremists, the
 rapture oriented ones, who support Israel as a step to the last
 days, when the Jews they support in establishing Israel will
 either convert or be destroyed, haven't you?

 IOW, they support a Jewish nation as a step in the elimination
 of Judaism.

 st>    I can also say the same
 st> about my peers. It's unfortunate, and I'm sure you didn't
 st> intend this, but Al Jazeera publishes the same propoganda.

 IOW, they publish the truth. I did intend to speak the truth. If
 Al Jazeera publishes the same truth that doesn't change the fact
 that it is truth.

 st> Can you cite another source for your information?  In all
 st> seriousness, I'd like to know if there are real U.S.
 st> Christians who intend to persecute members of Islam simply
 st> for being Islamic.

 Start with Ann Coulter who said we should kill the leaders of
 Islamic countries and conver them to Christianity. The go to the
 fellow who wrote a letter to the editor of the local paper
 saying we should deal with the insurgents in Iraq like WW2,
 where you wipe out the whole village. Only he forgot, it was the
 Nazis who dealt with them like that.

 BTW, I note that you changed the direction of the discussion. I
 did not say persecute Muslims, for being Muslims, I said they
 want to break Islam. Not exactly the same thing. Also note,
 adherents to Islam are Muslims.

 st> We aren't against Islam, but it's "Radical Islam" that we
 st> need to protect ourselves from.  You know the kind of
 st> Radical Islamics that I'm referring to -- the kind who fly
 st> planes into buildings in NY.  (reference:
 st> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/September_11,_2001_attacks)

 Uh... did you think a wikipedia reference was necessary? We all
 know about Radical Islam, but all to many do not want to
 admit to Christian radicals. We need to protect ourselves from
 Christian radicals. There are no Muslims in this world who
 constitute a significant threat to the survival or freedom of
 the US. The Christian radicals would love to take a lot of our
 freedom away.

>>So, why do we let the radicals set our agenda?

 st> Since they have an agenda to kill all Judeo Christians, I

 So? Why do we let them set our agenda? Oh, the radicals who want
 to kill all Judeo Christians are a small minority. The vast
 majority would be happy if we just went away and left them
 alone. Remember, much of the tyranny that now rules Muslim
 countries was instituted by Christian Europeans.

 st> propose we fight back....  I don't know what side of the
 st> fence you are on Bob,

 My own side. Your side is appearing as intolerant as theirs.
 Perhaps that's not how you intend it, but that's how it's coming
 across. Remember Bush's you're either with us or against us?
 That's more or less what I am hearing from you.

 I've heard interviews with Muslims who say something on the
 order of, "What's with this?" Or, as I have said, why can't a
 lot of them be neither with us nor against just, just not care
 one way or the other?

 st> and it's great to live in a country
 st> where we can honestly and truthfully voice our opinions

 Until the patriot act enforcers start checking out your library
 loans and video rentals.

 st> (unlike most Middle Eastern Countries [like Iran for
 st> instance]),

 Or Saudi Arabia or Kuwait, who we protected and liberated,
 respectively, in the first Gulf war, and neither of whom
 protects religious freedom. Your evangilical Christianity would
 get you thrown out of the country, or, very likely, in prison in
 Saudi Arabia. You would have had more freedom in Iraq under
 Saddam than you would in Saudi Arabia today. And more than you
 will be likely to under the new Shia rule.

 st>    but should the liberals propose we do like the
 st> French and offer them a table setting for 1.3 billion?

 You really don't know much about what's happening over there, do
 you? Aside from the fact that the French have consistently
 backed us more than the British have, including in Afghanistan,
 there is the fact that they had no obligation to lift a finger
 with us in Iraq. They knew then Iraq had done nothing to us.

 And you appear not to be well informed on Islam. There are about
 1 billion muslims in this world. I believe your 1.3 bill is a
 bit high. The great majority of them are not Arabs, and Arab
 Muslims are the only ones we are having a lot of problems with.
 Ok, also Afghan Muslims, after we invaded. Even the Muslims in
 Afghanistan who gave us problems before and on 9-11 were Arabs.
 Saudis, mostly. Saudi Arabia is the home of the most extreme
 Islam. Yet they are Bush's buddies. Try going there and
 practicing your evangelicism.

 Don't complain about the French not backing us when the whole
 world knew it is Saudi Arabia who is the source of the
 extremists, not Iraq. The French didn't see a reason to follow
 us into a war of choice, and error.


BOB KLAHN bob.klahn@sev.org   http://home.toltbbs.com/bobklahn

... How do you know you're not immortal until you die?
 * Silver Xpress V4.5/P [Reg]
--- Platinum Xpress/Win/WINServer v3.0pr5a
 * Origin: FidoTel & QWK on the Web! www.fidotel.com (1:275/311)