Would another contry be justified attacking the US?

At least you guys know who POTUS is. We Americans couldn't name the current Dutch Monarch or Prime Minister if our lives depended on it.

 

Sure, but IMO that's the same as the medical community saying "we have a push to eliminate cancer by the end of 2005". It may be possible to force the appearance of an election where all are represented, but I doubt that they will be able to live under the same government.

1-888-322-1414

 

I have often thought about that same question. Those who used the Bush doctrine to justify invading Iraq because he was killing his own people, yet those same people say that we just need to wait for governement to end abortion, and they think they will do that by supporting pro-abortion politicians in Washington. There have been over 189,000 babies tortured and butchered here in the United States since the November 2nd elections.

 

Abortion is only an emergency when the Democrats are in power.

 

Even sadder that the President of the United States is a socialist and gay-sympathizer, and millions of "Christians" voted for him.

 

Conservative Christian???? Have you seen the President's "voting card??" Last time I went to vote----there was a place on the register where I could sign my name---one column said--Republican party---the other column said, Democratic party----but there was no column that said Socialist party!

 

Even sadder that the President of the United States is a socialist and gay-sympathizer, and millions of "Christians" voted for him. </font>[/QUOTE]I did not vote for Bush, but it totally unfair to question with inverted commas whether those who voted for him are Christian or not.

 

What is totally unfair is your presumptuousness, by attributing a meaning to my commas which I in no way intended.

I must formally request that you and Church Mouse Guy stop making false representations about what you THINK I mean, when neither of you have a clue.

 

Perhaps it would settle this situation, CC, if you explained the meaning of your use of " " around the word Christians.

 

My opinion is we wouldn't want another country to invade America unless we asked them to come in and help. We asked France to help us againt Great Britain in the Revolutionary War. I expect other countries want to be treated the same. The South Vietnamese asked us to intervene in what was essentially a civil war. To my knowledge nobody asked us to invade Iraq and overthrow Hussain.

Can any one country defeat the U.S.? Probably not but the whole rest of the world can and if we don't stop acting like the big bully on the block that will happen.

 

1. www.womenforiraq.org

2. The current leader of Iraq has asked us to stay.

Saddam was perfectly happy with his rape rooms, torture chambers, oil for food corruption, and WMD program that he was certainly at the very least planning to restart. The people who were under him, certainly longed to live without fear. Their relatives who escaped Iraq gave them a voice. I don't think you seem to understand that Saddam was the bully not us. We are the ones who have freed the oppressed from a brutal tyrant.

Joseph Botwinick

 

What is totally unfair is your presumptuousness, by attributing a meaning to my commas which I in no way intended.

I must formally request that you and Church Mouse Guy stop making false representations about what you THINK I mean, when neither of you have a clue. </font>[/QUOTE]I think it is funny that you linked cmg and I together to start with - that must be a first.

If you are not questioning the salvation of those who voted for President Bush, what do the inverted commas (quotation marks) mean around the word Christian?

Perhaps I could apologise if I knew what you really meant.

I don't think you realise that I voted CP in the last election. Yet I don't doubt the salvation or spiritual standing of those who did otherwise.

 

"I think it is funny that you linked cmg and I together to start with - that must be a first."

I never stated or suggested that there was general overall agreement between you and CMG on various issues.

However, you were both in agreement (and error) that my commas were meant to question the salvation of Christians who voted for Bush.

"If you are not questioning the salvation of those who voted for President Bush, what do the inverted commas (quotation marks) mean around the word Christian?

Perhaps I could apologise if I knew what you really meant."

I don't recall asking for an apology, nor do I expect one. I simply requested that you and CMG stop bearing false witness against me. Bearing false witness is a sin against God, it is He that you should &lt;personal attack questioning a member's spiritual standing as violation of BB rules&gt;.

"I don't think you realise that I voted CP in the last election. Yet I don't doubt the salvation or spiritual standing of those who did otherwise."

I'm well aware you're a CP supporter. I'm also aware that you are still engaging in making unfounded presumptions. I repeat, I have never doubted the salvation of Christians who voted for Bush.

Please stop being presumptuous.

Thank you.

[ January 10, 2005, 01:48 AM: Message edited by: C4K ]

 

Accidental double post deleted by CC.

 

Conservative Christian sez:

What I find interesting is that a typical symbol of doubt is interpreted as such, yet the author not only denies such a meaning, but declines to explain his meaning!

Surely CC, you meant to clarify your reasoning for the " " 's in your reply, did you not?

 

Back to topic. Another country has already attacked the US. It's called Saudi Arabia. 14 of the 19 hijackers were Saudi citizens.

 

Saudi Arabia did not attack America anymore than America did not attack Oklahoma City. That argument is silly and what we have come to expect from the CP party faithful, along with their looney tune conspiracy theories that Bush is the one who attacked the Pentagon and the WTC.

Joseph Botwinick

 

BTW, UBL and Al Quaeda attacked America.

Joseph Botwinick

 

Mr. Botwinick once again proves he knows very little of what he speaks.



Hatred's Kingdom: How Saudi Arabia Supports the New Global Terrorism

by Dore Gold, Former Israeli Ambassador to the U.N.

FROM THE PUBLISHER

"In Hatred’s Kingdom, Dore Gold has the goods on Saudi Arabia, proving how it is actively supporting terrorism. Using previously unpublished documents, Gold, former Israeli Ambassador to the U.N. and internationally known Middle East strategy expert, pieces together the links between the current wave of global terrorism—from the World Trade Center to Bali, Indonesia—and the ideology of hatred taught in the schools and mosques of Saudi Arabia.

Gold reveals:

How September 11 was only the most dramatic example of a new breed of terrorism, even now poised to strike again, that was born and nurtured in Saudi Arabia and quietly unleashed on the international community.

The deadly recipe that creates the new terrorism: a broad financial and military network mixed together with a strong motivating ideology that could compel people to sacrifice their lives and commit mass murder. Both of these ingredients grew together in Saudi Arabia, in a movement called Wahhabism.

How Wahhabi preachers in the main mosques of Saudi Arabia justify and support continued hostile acts against the U.S. and the West (translated sermons included).

How prominent Saudi Wahhabi clerics actually justify the 9/11 attacks in publications, which are revealed here and translated.

Shocking evidence of how the Saudis have financed the world’s most dangerous terrorist organizations, including Al-Qaeda and Hamas. Gold reveals the discovery of cancelled Saudi checks found in a Hamas headquarters in the West Bank. Internal Palestinian intelligence and political reports explicitly tie Saudi Arabia to radical Palestinian terrorist groups engaged in suicide bombings. Similar proof of Saudi backing for Islamic militants in Afghanistan, Chechnya, the Balkans, and the U.S. are presented.

Dore Gold connects the dots. He combines a rich knowledge of the history of the Middle East with a decade of hands-on diplomatic experience. If there is a single book that clearly explains Saudi Arabia, the complexities of the Middle East, and the rise of the new global terrorism in one volume, this is the one.

SYNOPSIS

Written by a former Israeli ambassador to the United Nations (1997-1999), this text for the general reader aims to uncover the links between the nation of Saudi Arabia and ideological terrorism. Gold argues that the current wave of global terrorism has its roots in Saudi Arabia's dominant religious creed, a radical offshoot of Islam known as Wahhabism. He further contends that the Saudis have provided both manpower and financial support to terrorists."

http://search.barnesandnoble.com/booksearch/isbnInquiry.asp?userid=0Y3redjAv8&isbn=0895260611&itm=3