So who are You Training?

[Mega-Foot]

You mean it's not god's autobiography?

I still think the bible needs a disclaimer at the beginning like the one mentioned on a Red Dwarf episode. All charactors mentioned are fictional....

Why would you say something so slanderous?

Excuse me for disagreeing, but God inspired the authors of the Bible to write His Story. Get it? History.

Why can't you respect others' opinions? Clearly, what you have said is wrong, libelous, and meant to hurt the feelings of others who are better informed than yourself on this subject.

[Sang Feng Fan]

1)America attacked Iraq.

2)America admitted it did it under false pretext and therefor admitted that what they are doing is wrong.

3)Iraq never attacked America and nevre had plans to do so.

4)Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11

5)America is fanning the flames of hatred onto itself through its own actions and inaction.

6) trying to blame the islamic faith for the woes of America is erroneous.

a. Iraq violated violated it's people, international treaties, refused to comply with inspection, financed terrorism abroad and got herself invaded.

b. America invaded because of the sanction violations, while the press pushed the subject of weapons of mass destruction to the foreground to make money off of fear.

c. Terror groups financed by Iraq have attacked American interests and citizens abroad for over 20 years.

d. Iraq had little to do with 9-11 aside from funding and since they were invaded for violating sanctions bringing up 9-11 is only important as a war drum song or leftist whining point.

e. The military, civilian and government of Iraq all have a completely different view of the war than that painted by the media.

f. Trying to blame America, USA, for the woes of Islam ignores that the West has suffered from unprovoked terrorist attacks since the fifties. Lebanon, Libya, Syria, Egypt, Somalia, Iraq and Iran have all committed acts of war against the USA/England/Germany/Israel and each other over 60 years and Iraq was the first to taste any justice.

[Black Jack II]

Excellent post Sang Feng Fan.

But like most logic it will fall on deaf ears.

[charp choi]

David,
I understand your point. However, it is very much like sticking your head in the sand. Every Friday, around the world (including here) Jihad theology is taught. On TV all across the Middle east this vileness is taught not only on religous programs but in kids cartoons.

Look at France or Britain. Look at Sweden, where there are now muslim - majority cities that the police will not even enter. Look at Holland and the murder of Van Goghs grandson in the name of Allah.


There is an old saying - something like "You will know them by the fruits of thier labor."

A.

Hi, I live in Britain and we have NO muslim majority cities that the police will not even enter. My sis lives in Sweden and I visit there 3 times a year and guess what? Same thing NO muslim majority cities again.
AS we say here you are talking cobblers mate. Get your facts right before you post 'em.

All I see is a fair bit of bigoted paranoia.

[charp choi]

Why would you say something so slanderous?

Excuse me for disagreeing, but God inspired the authors of the Bible to write His Story. Get it? History.

Did he?

say's who?

[lkfmdc]

There are nuts and fanatics in every religion, historically it seems to run in cycles. During the "crusades" the wack jobs were Christians...

Has very little to do with the religion, most of these morons don't even know much about their religion, they just nod their heads at what they are told

Is Islam anti-Jewish? Mohammed himself lived next door to Jews in Medina and his children and their children played together and the families were friends.

Did Mohammed teach cutting off the heads of captices? Hardly, he mandated they be treated like guests in your home until a ransom to return them

More violence and evil has been done in the name of religion than any other cause PERIOD

[RD'S Alias - 1A]

Hmm, how much violence has been cause by Satan?

[charp choi]

There are nuts and fanatics in every religion, historically it seems to run in cycles. During the "crusades" the wack jobs were Christians...

Has very little to do with the religion, most of these morons don't even know much about their religion, they just nod their heads at what they are told

Is Islam anti-Jewish? Mohammed himself lived next door to Jews in Medina and his children and their children played together and the families were friends.

Did Mohammed teach cutting off the heads of captices? Hardly, he mandated they be treated like guests in your home until a ransom to return them

More violence and evil has been done in the name of religion than any other cause PERIOD

the key phrase is ISLAMIC EXTREMISM

In society this occurs. Does it mean all muslims are such? No.

[charp choi]

There are nuts and fanatics in every religion, historically it seems to run in cycles. During the "crusades" the wack jobs were Christians...

Has very little to do with the religion, most of these morons don't even know much about their religion, they just nod their heads at what they are told

Is Islam anti-Jewish? Mohammed himself lived next door to Jews in Medina and his children and their children played together and the families were friends.

Did Mohammed teach cutting off the heads of captices? Hardly, he mandated they be treated like guests in your home until a ransom to return them

More violence and evil has been done in the name of religion than any other cause PERIOD

Hooray! Sense at last.
the key phrase is ISLAMIC EXTREMISM

In society this occurs. Does it mean all muslims are such? No.

[Scott R. Brown]

Since war began (3/19/03):3334 American Service people have died. Of those 2727 have died in combat.

The murder rate in the usa....16,692

in other words, you have an even chance of getting offed at home, if not a better chance of it if you live in the usa.

Hi David,

You are incorrect here. According to your death rates:

Based upon an approximate soldier population in Iraq of 250,000, one has about a 1.09% of dying. The percentage is actually higher because not all soldiers are in or move about the danger zones.

Based upon an approximate population of 700 million one has about a .00238% chance of being murdered in the U.S.A.

Perhaps doing some simple math first would help!

[David Jamieson]

a. Iraq violated violated it's people, international treaties, refused to comply with inspection, financed terrorism abroad and got herself invaded.

b. America invaded because of the sanction violations, while the press pushed the subject of weapons of mass destruction to the foreground to make money off of fear. I'm sorry, you are incorrect. This is what they may be saying, but america pre-emptively invaded based on the pretext that Irawq had WMD. Which they did not

c. Terror groups financed by Iraq have attacked American interests and citizens abroad for over 20 years. can you indicate any solid evidence of that? I believe it's been found that this is not true. The terror groups get their financing from all over, even from within America itself

d. Iraq had little to do with 9-11 aside from funding and since they were invaded for violating sanctions bringing up 9-11 is only important as a war drum song or leftist whining point. Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11 period. The greatets number of the terrorist accused of it were Saudi citizens

e. The military, civilian and government of Iraq all have a completely different view of the war than that painted by the media. and you are one of these? you share this different view? what is that diferent view? does it have anything to do with the fall of the government and the spiral into civil war? what are you saying here?

f. Trying to blame America, USA, for the woes of Islam ignores that the West has suffered from unprovoked terrorist attacks since the fifties. Lebanon, Libya, Syria, Egypt, Somalia, Iraq and Iran have all committed acts of war against the USA/England/Germany/Israel and each other over 60 years and Iraq was the first to taste any justice. I don't think I'm blaming America exclusively. I am saying taht American foreign policy in the region has consistently failed the peoples of the region yet america benefits despite the strife of others.

Your points are mostly invalid although slightly long winded. I find them odd.

Hi David,

You are incorrect here. According to your death rates:

Based upon an approximate soldier population in Iraq of 250,000, one has about a 1.09% of dying. The percentage is actually higher because not all soldiers are in or move about the danger zones.

Based upon an approximate population of 700 million one has about a .00238% chance of being murdered in the U.S.A.

Perhaps doing some simple math first would help!

I'm not stating odds Scott. I am pointing out something to give perspective. You are simply skewing it by pointing at my incorrect odds.

the data are correct in regards to the numbers of people in the usa who died by another Americans hands vs your chances of getting killed in the occupation. My main point was that each of you has a better chance of being killed by an American than by an Iraqi insurgent.

It is clear that many of you are incapable of reconciling with yourselves the fundamental error in thinking that is presented in the first post here. And frankly, I'm ok with that and even expected it. Especially here where sentimentalist emotional alarmism on the topic runs rampant every now and then.

I am more than a little surprised that even though there has been a big push in getting the facts straight, many are hanging onto the myths and lies they were fed in '03 by the then Bush administration. What can we say about thiose folks though other than they are likely an active part of the problem more so than a small part of the solution.

anyway, gotta go to work.

[Scott R. Brown]

Is Islam anti-Jewish? Mohammed himself lived next door to Jews in Medina and his children and their children played together and the families were friends.

Did Mohammed teach cutting off the heads of captices? Hardly, he mandated they be treated like guests in your home until a ransom to return them

Hi lkfmdc,

You have missed some facts here:

1) Mohammed killed and assassinated the Jews of Medina who ridiculed him or Islam and then ran most of them out of town and confiscated their property. The tribe Banu Ḳuraiẓa was the only tribe left. Mohammed concocted a reason to attack them. After a siege he killed all the men (by be-heading) and enslaved all the women and children.

2) He then exterminated the Jewish community of Quraiza approximately 600-900 men (by be-heading) and once again enslaved the women and children.

3) Following that he killed some Jews (by be-heading) who had fled to the oasis of Khaibar after enticing them to negotiate a treaty.

4) After the death of Mohammed Omar the caliph instituted dhimmi law. If a non-muslim broke the law he was subject to death or persecution:

a) Dhimmitude is the status that Islamic law, the Sharia, mandates for non-Muslims, primarily Jews and Christians. Dhimmis, "protected people," are free to practice their religion in a Sharia regime, but are made subject to a number of humiliating regulations designed to enforce the Qur'an's command that they "feel themselves subdued" (Sura 9:29).

b) Non-Muslims paid a fifty-percent "tribute," or tax
.
c) Jews and Christians were forced to wear a distinctive (sometimes dark blue or black) habit with sash; compelled to wear a yellow piece of cloth [this is where the Nazi's got the idea by the way!] as a badge (blue for Christians);

d) Dhimmis were forbidden to touch the Qur'an and not allowed to perform their religious practices in public;

e) Dhimmis were not allowed to own a horse because horses were deemed noble;

f) Dhimmis were not permitted to drink wine in public;

g) Dhimmis were required to bury their dead without letting their grief be heard by the Muslims;

h) If Dhimmis complained about their inferior status, institutionalized humiliation, or poverty, their masters voided their contract and regarded them as enemies of Islam, fair game as objects of violence;

i) Dhimmis had no legal rights. They could not testify in court against a Muslim and had no legal right to dispute or challenge anything done to them by Muslims. There is no such thing as a Muslim raping a non-Muslim woman; there is no such thing as a Muslim murdering a a non-Muslim (at most, it can be manslaughter). In contrast, a non-Muslim who strikes a Muslim is killed.

j) Dhimmis were generally cowed into silence and worse. It was almost unheard-of to find Dhimmis speaking out against their oppressors; to do so would have been suicide. (Kind of like how today even moderate Muslims are afraid to speak out against the Islamists for fear of being murdered.)

[Scott R. Brown]

I'm not stating odds Scott. I am pointing out something to give perspective. You are simply skewing it by pointing at my incorrect odds.

The data are correct in regards to the numbers of people in the usa who died by another Americans hands vs your chances of getting killed in the occupation. My main point was that each of you has a better chance of being killed by an American than by an Iraqi insurgent.

Nice try David, you said:

in other words, you have an even chance of getting offed at home, if not a better chance of it if you live in the usa.

You don't understand that what you have said is that the chances are greater for getting murdered in the U.S. than dying in Iraq. This is clearly NOT the case. If this was not your intent then you should have been more precise!

If your intent is to say that Americans in general have a better chance of being killed by another American than an Islamist terrorist then you were very unclear. However, an American has a greater chance of being killed in Iraq than in America and that was my point!

I am more than a little surprised that even though there has been a big push in getting the facts straight, many are hanging onto the myths and lies they were fed in '03 by the then Bush administration. What can we say about those folks though other than they are likely an active part of the problem more so than a small part of the solution.

It is you that is foolishly hanging onto the myths and lies, David. You have not studied the facts very well and have fallen prey to the anti-Bush re-writers of history. This has been the Liberal method for decades, that is, smear your opponent with lies then repeat them until the dim-witted public believes them. Liberals have no ideas or solutions; their solution to every problem is to lie and whine.

Everything Sang Feng Fan has said is accurate and well said! Stating it is "long-winded" is back to your old foolishness of "attacking the man" and not addressing the argument.

Forget that the Clinton administration, the U.N. and most or all intelligence services around the world believed that Saddam had WMD's; Forget that they believed this years BEFORE Bush took office, thus negating the assertion that Bush lied.

A lie is an intentional telling of a falsehood. For the MINOR inclusion of the WMD's in his lengthy LIST of reasons for going into Iraq to be a lie you must demonstrate he KNEW before hand they were not there. This has not and cannot be demonstrated since EVERYONE else, EVEN the Clinton administration, thought they were there as well! Just because they have not been found does not mean they were not or are not there!

So who is the one following mythological truths here? The ones who see the clear logic that the belief in the existence of WMD's has neither been demonstrated to be false nor a lie, or the ones who blindly follow scurrilous media and liberal smears and the re-writing of history?

Forget WMD's were only ONE of the reasons that the Bush administration listed anyway! Who is ignoring established facts here? Try going back and reading his original speech! But to do so would shatter your own quaint little mythology wouldn't it?

Forget that Hillary gave a speech to Code Pink prior to the invasion stating her expertise and understanding of the matter, agreeing with Bush and giving support to the White House intelligence reports. I know you could look up the speech on the internet and find out for yourself, but that might shatter your own happy little world of ill-informed bias and ignorance!

Forget that a leading Iraqi General has publicly stated that the weapons were secreted out of Iraq to Syria BEFORE the war by the Russians. You could look that up as well, but I know you won't. That is because is it easier to have self-righteous pride in your own ignorance rather than risk informing yourself with facts that would demonstrate you to be pwned by the liars on the left.

Forget that America has not benefited by lower gas prices and that the major Iraqi oil contracts just last week or the week before were given to China, Russia and France. Thus negating the argument that Bush did it for oil.

I could go on, but I will leave you to your own mythology and allow others to join in the feeding frenzy!

Etc. so on an so forth, ibid ibid ibid and all that rot!!

[Scott R. Brown]

Ok I have a bit more time so I will take one more shot:

america pre-emptively invaded based on the pretext that Irawq had WMD. Which they did not

Wrong! It was one of a list of reasons. This was the reason that was focused on the most by the media and Bush haters thus giving the false impression that is was the only reason. Anyone paying attention at the time would know this. Don’t listen to the re-writers of history. Go back and read the Bush administration statements.

I believe it's been found that this is not true. The terror groups get their financing from all over, even from within America itself

Wrong again! It is well-known by those who are IMFORMED on the subject that Al-Zarqawi (sp?) was IN Iraq setting up and getting financing. Look it up yourself! It is easy to find! Yes, they also got financial support and material support else where. Al Qaeda is NOT a nation-state it is a belief system.

Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11 period. The greatets number of the terrorist accused of it were Saudi citizens

Mis-information! We didn’t go into Iraq for the purpose of avenging 9-11. Again go back and read the statements by the Bush administration. Al Qaeda is a nation-less organization so your point is null concerning the majority being Saudis. It is likely they were easier to recruit because of the Wahabi organization there or perhaps because it was easier for Saudis to get into America. Our stated goal was to go after those who gave material support to terrorists and that included Saddam. This is well established by the presence of Al-Zarqawi in Iraq receiving financial and material support.

and you are one of these? you share this different view? what is that diferent view? does it have anything to do with the fall of the government and the spiral into civil war? what are you saying here?

In any society there are those who agree and disagree with any military action. In America only 33% of the settlers support the revolutionary war, 33% supported the British, and 33% chose to wait and see. If you are unaware of those who support our presence then you do not want to find them. This is merely accepting evidence that supports your preconceived view and ignoring evidence to the contrary. Just last week I read 4 or so articles on the net regarding the appreciation the Iraqi’s have for the American presence.

If you search you will find!

I am saying taht American foreign policy in the region has consistently failed the peoples of the region yet america benefits despite the strife of others.

EVERYONE’S foreign policy has failed in the region for millennia. We have suffered no other terrorist attacks on America since the war began. How many occurred with the “stick your head in the sand” Clinton administration? 3? 4? 5? I don’t remember, but it was more than none and more than two! Chaos always precedes Order. However, order must be imposed with a strong hand. You cannot reason with the unreasonable, you cannot reason with selfish, self-centered people. You cannot reach agreement with people who refuse to compromise. You cannot have a successful treaty with those who believe that any treaty with an infidel is non-binding.

As a last parting note: This weekend over 1 million Turks protested against the new Muslim president of Turkey. The country although primarily Muslim was set up with a secular government and they fear the Muslim powers in the government will impose dhimmi-like laws. The military is supporting the public. I recommend everyone look it up and read about it!

[RD'S Alias - 1A]

Forget that a leading Iraqi General has publicly stated that the weapons were secreted out of Iraq to Syria BEFORE the war by the Russians.

Reply]
I had heard this before, from a freind who fought in Falujia during the initial invasion when he returned home from his tour of duty. If this is the case, then I am sure the Syrians would use them if we went in there right?