FAQFAQ
   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 
#1 In Identity Theft Protection



Your Maine Forum Forum Index -> Around The Water Cooler

Jihad Against Jews and all of America
Goto page 1, 2, 3  Next

Post new topic   Reply to topic
  Author    Thread
whynot
Official Mainah


Joined: 02 Aug 2004
Posts: 3622



 Reply with quote  
Jihad Against Jews and all of America

Jihad Against Jews and Crusaders
World Islamic Front Statement
23 February 1998

Shaykh Usamah Bin-Muhammad Bin-Ladin
Ayman al-Zawahiri, amir of the Jihad Group in Egypt
Abu-Yasir Rifa'i Ahmad Taha, Egyptian Islamic Group
Shaykh Mir Hamzah, secretary of the Jamiat-ul-Ulema-e-Pakistan
Fazlur Rahman, amir of the Jihad Movement in Bangladesh

Praise be to Allah, who revealed the Book, controls the clouds, defeats factionalism, and says in His Book: "But when the forbidden months are past, then fight and slay the pagans wherever ye find them, seize them, beleaguer them, and lie in wait for them in every stratagem (of war)"; and peace be upon our Prophet, Muhammad Bin-'Abdallah, who said: I have been sent with the sword between my hands to ensure that no one but Allah is worshipped, Allah who put my livelihood under the shadow of my spear and who inflicts humiliation and scorn on those who disobey my orders. The Arabian Peninsula has never -- since Allah made it flat, created its desert, and encircled it with seas -- been stormed by any forces like the crusader armies spreading in it like locusts, eating its riches and wiping out its plantations. All this is happening at a time in which nations are attacking Muslims like people fighting over a plate of food. In the light of the grave situation and the lack of support, we and you are obliged to discuss current events, and we should all agree on how to settle the matter.

No one argues today about three facts that are known to everyone; we will list them, in order to remind everyone:
First, for over seven years the United States has been occupying the lands of Islam in the holiest of places, the Arabian Peninsula, plundering its riches, dictating to its rulers, humiliating its people, terrorizing its neighbors, and turning its bases in the Peninsula into a spearhead through which to fight the neighboring Muslim peoples.

If some people have in the past argued about the fact of the occupation, all the people of the Peninsula have now acknowledged it. The best proof of this is the Americans' continuing aggression against the Iraqi people using the Peninsula as a staging post, even though all its rulers are against their territories being used to that end, but they are helpless.

Second, despite the great devastation inflicted on the Iraqi people by the crusader-Zionist alliance, and despite the huge number of those killed, which has exceeded 1 million... despite all this, the Americans are once against trying to repeat the horrific massacres, as though they are not content with the protracted blockade imposed after the ferocious war or the fragmentation and devastation. So here they come to annihilate what is left of this people and to humiliate their Muslim neighbors.

Third, if the Americans' aims behind these wars are religious and economic, the aim is also to serve the Jews' petty state and divert attention from its occupation of Jerusalem and murder of Muslims there. The best proof of this is their eagerness to destroy Iraq, the strongest neighboring Arab state, and their endeavor to fragment all the states of the region such as Iraq, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, and Sudan into paper statelets and through their disunion and weakness to guarantee Israel's survival and the continuation of the brutal crusade occupation of the Peninsula.
All these crimes and sins committed by the Americans are a clear declaration of war on Allah, his messenger, and Muslims. And ulema have throughout Islamic history unanimously agreed that the jihad is an individual duty if the enemy destroys the Muslim countries. This was revealed by Imam Bin-Qadamah in "Al- Mughni," Imam al-Kisa'i in "Al-Bada'i," al-Qurtubi in his interpretation, and the shaykh of al-Islam in his books, where he said: "As for the fighting to repulse [an enemy], it is aimed at defending sanctity and religion, and it is a duty as agreed [by the ulema]. Nothing is more sacred than belief except repulsing an enemy who is attacking religion and life."

On that basis, and in compliance with Allah's order, we issue the following fatwa to all Muslims:

The ruling to kill the Americans and their allies -- civilians and military -- is an individual duty for every Muslim who can do it in any country in which it is possible to do it, in order to liberate the al-Aqsa Mosque and the holy mosque [Mecca] from their grip, and in order for their armies to move out of all the lands of Islam, defeated and unable to threaten any Muslim. This is in accordance with the words of Almighty Allah, "and fight the pagans all together as they fight you all together," and "fight them until there is no more tumult or oppression, and there prevail justice and faith in Allah."

This is in addition to the words of Almighty Allah: "And why should ye not fight in the cause of Allah and of those who, being weak, are ill-treated (and oppressed)? -- women and children, whose cry is: 'Our Lord, rescue us from this town, whose people are oppressors; and raise for us from thee one who will help!'"

We -- with Allah's help -- call on every Muslim who believes in Allah and wishes to be rewarded to comply with Allah's order to kill the Americans and plunder their money wherever and whenever they find it. We also call on Muslim ulema, leaders, youths, and soldiers to launch the raid on Satan's U.S. troops and the devil's supporters allying with them, and to displace those who are behind them so that they may learn a lesson.

Almighty Allah said: "O ye who believe, give your response to Allah and His Apostle, when He calleth you to that which will give you life. And know that Allah cometh between a man and his heart, and that it is He to whom ye shall all be gathered."

Almighty Allah also says: "O ye who believe, what is the matter with you, that when ye are asked to go forth in the cause of Allah, ye cling so heavily to the earth! Do ye prefer the life of this world to the hereafter? But little is the comfort of this life, as compared with the hereafter. Unless ye go forth, He will punish you with a grievous penalty, and put others in your place; but Him ye would not harm in the least. For Allah hath power over all things."

Almighty Allah also says: "So lose no heart, nor fall into despair. For ye must gain mastery if ye are true in faith."

Yes they are talking about YOU.

Post Wed 18 May, 2005 6:39 pm 
 View user's profile Send private message
wanderer
Official Mainah


Joined: 05 Nov 2004
Posts: 1747



 Reply with quote  

You don't think that there is any reason for the muslim world to be pissed at the US? None at all?

All of this could have been avoided. Our lousy foreign policy in the past few decades is to blame.

If there were muslim invaders in the US, killing Americans, telling us what to do and how to live....you can be sure there would be Christian jihadists as well. Hell, there already are - see Chuck, exhibit 1. I know empathy isn't your thing whynot, but try to look at it from another perspective...if you're capable.

Post Thu 19 May, 2005 8:22 am 
 View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
whynot
Official Mainah


Joined: 02 Aug 2004
Posts: 3622



 Reply with quote  

We didn't need to look at things thru Japans or Hitlers eyes. I don't have to have a "understanding " towards the scumbags that killed the innocent people on 9/11 and all the other terrorist acts from the 1970's on down.(There is no understanding for thoses acts) Their goal is to Murder our families.. I do not care to truck them all down to the Dr.Phil show and see if he can make them feel all warm and fuzzy. Iam not nutty as Sir Chuck-alot to think ALL muslims feel this way but iam not foolish as to not be concern that this is the hate they are being taught and if allowed that is what they will do. I rather the fight be on iraqi soil then ours.

Post Thu 19 May, 2005 10:16 am 
 View user's profile Send private message
wanderer
Official Mainah


Joined: 05 Nov 2004
Posts: 1747



 Reply with quote  

Look at the hate being taught right here in America. A blind hatred, a bloodlust that requires vengeance. Not just for terrorists, but for people who had nothing to do with attacking us. Just about any blood will do, as long as someone is dying, we will be happy. It will make us feel better to know that someone has paid for the crime, even if they didn't do it.

Post Thu 19 May, 2005 3:19 pm 
 View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
whynot
Official Mainah


Joined: 02 Aug 2004
Posts: 3622



 Reply with quote  

Don't be silly..most people do not feel that way. (Just chuck) but most people do not go around with their head in the sand either. There should be hate for osama and his henchmen. If you do not feel it ...you have issues.

Post Thu 19 May, 2005 3:38 pm 
 View user's profile Send private message
wanderer
Official Mainah


Joined: 05 Nov 2004
Posts: 1747



 Reply with quote  

Sometimes, one must take the high road. I am not a real religious guy, but I thought this was a great article. Enjoy.


quote:
New Pope Benedict XVI a Strong Critic of War
by Michael Griffin of the Catholic Peace Fellowship

The election of Benedict XVI as pope brings hope for the continuation of peacemaking as central to the papacy. Just as John Paul II cried out again and again to the world, "War never again!" the new pope has taken the name of the one who first made that cry, Benedict XV, commonly known as "the peace pope."

The name is no coincidence. In fact, Cardinal Justin Rigali, Archbishop of Philadelphia said Tuesday that the new pope told the cardinals he was selecting Benedict because "he is desirous to continue the efforts of Benedict XV on behalf of peace ... throughout the world."

As a Cardinal, the new pope was a staunch critic of the U.S. led invasion of Iraq. On one occasion before the war, he was asked whether it would be just. "Certainly not," he said, and explained that the situation led him to conclude that "the damage would be greater than the values one hopes to save."

"All I can do is invite you to read the Catechism, and the conclusion seems obvious to me…" The conclusion is one he gave many times: "the concept of preventive war does not appear in The Catechism of the Catholic Church."

Even after the war, Cardinal Ratzinger did not cease criticism of U.S. violence and imperialism: "it was right to resist the war and its threats of destruction...It should never be the responsibility of just one nation to make decisions for the world."

Yet perhaps the most important insight of Ratzinger came during a press conference on May 2, 2003. After suggesting that perhaps it would be necessary to revise the Catechism section on just war (perhaps because it had been used by George Weigel and others to endorse a war the Church opposed), Ratzinger offered a deep insight that included but went beyond the issue of war Iraq:

"There were not sufficient reasons to unleash a war against Iraq. To say nothing of the fact that, given the new weapons that make possible destructions that go beyond the combatant groups, today we should be asking ourselves if it is still licit to admit the very existence of a 'just war'."

Along with his actual criticism of war, we take heart in the theological principle behind such criticism. While many Catholics, most notably Weigel, have advocated deference to the heads of state in determining issues such as war and peace, the new pope has consistently taught that the Church "cannot simply retreat into the private sphere."

He is skeptical of the view that politics can be done without reference to the Gospel. Appeals to neutral language that does not refer to religion-popular as they are among many neoconservative Catholics-forget some of the "hard sayings" of Jesus that don't seem quite "rational" enough for public discourse. Sayings like "Love your enemies" and "turn the other cheek" and "put away the sword," these are dismissed as impractical at best, sectarian at worst.

Not by our new pope…He signals an invigorated contiuance of the Church speaking the truth to power. In a talk on "Church, Ecumenism, and Politics," he insisted that "The Church must make claims and demands on public law....Where the Church itself becomes the state freedom becomes lost. But also when the Church is done away with as a public and publicly relevant authority, then too freedom is extinguished, because there the state once again claims completely for itself the jurisdiction of morality.

He follows his namesake in refusing to let the Gospel become irrelevant to politics. Elected directly after the outbreak of WWI, Benedict XV sent a representative to each country to press for peace. On August 1, 1917, he delivered the Plea for Peace, which demanded a cessation of hostilities, a reduction of armaments, a guaranteed freedom of the seas, and international arbitration.

Interstingly, on August 15, 1917, the Vatican sent a note to James Cardinal Gibbons, leader of the Church in the U.S. The request was that Gibbons and the U.S. Church "exert influence" with President Wison to endorse the papal peace plan to end the war. Cardinal Gibbons never contacted Wilson. (Nor does he seem to have lobbied on behalf of Benedict XV's call for a boycott on any nation that had obligatory militarey conscription.) On August 27, President Wilson formally rejected Benedict's plan.

But Gibbons and the U.S. Catholic archbishops were not about to reject Wilson's war plans. They had promised the president "truest patriotic fervor and zeal" as well as manpower: "our people, as ever, will rise as one man to serve the nation" and exhorted young men to "be Americans always." Cardinal Gibbons had even written when war was declared that "the duty of a citizen" is "absolute and unreserved obedience to his country's call."

Such unreserved obedience was not endorsed by Benedict XV, nor is it by Benedict XVI. This was perhaps what upset U.S. neoconservatives most, that John Paul II and Cardinal Ratzinger did not show more deference to the state. Perhaps because of their own experience with violent regimes, they seemed to grasp the biblical axiom from the Acts of the Apostles: "we must obey God rather than men." (Acts 5:29)

Such a decision to not obey men nearly cost the young Jospeh Ratzinger his life. In 1945 he made the decision to desert his post in the German army. When he was spotted and stopped by SS troops, he could have been shot on the spot. They did not, using his wound (his arm was in a sling) as an excuse. Yet in his memoir, Milestones, Ratzinger gives the deeper reason for his escape from death. Those soldiers, he wrote, "had enough of war and did not want to become murderers,"

Our world, Pope Benedict XVI knows well, has had enough of war. We join the chorus of hopes that his ministry as pope will help put an end to war and hasten along God's kingdom of peace.

Post Thu 19 May, 2005 4:03 pm 
 View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
whynot
Official Mainah


Joined: 02 Aug 2004
Posts: 3622



 Reply with quote  

What do you think the pope would say????Really Wanderer...I do like you Rolling Eyes but thats like asking Michael Moore if he likes food. We all know what his answer would be.

Post Thu 19 May, 2005 6:38 pm 
 View user's profile Send private message
wanderer
Official Mainah


Joined: 05 Nov 2004
Posts: 1747



 Reply with quote  

It's just high time that Americans, Christian Americans specifically, started taking the high road, instead of the dirt road to hell (the same one many muslims are taking).

They are happy to yell and scream and protest against two gay people being married. Happy to yell and scream about how the government should be able to tell women what to do with their own bodies. Yet, where were they when it came time to protest this unjust war against Iraq? Nowhere to be found. In fact many of them were zealous about going to war. To kill people and seek vengeance. How is that being a Christian?

The pope has massive power to influence and persuade people. Perhaps he will smack some sense into this world, into this country. Perhaps he will convince his followers to support all portions of the bible, not just the ones psuedo-Christians Karl Rove and George Bush say are important.

Michael Moore likes food? What ever gave you that impression? Very Happy

Post Fri 20 May, 2005 8:12 am 
 View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
whynot
Official Mainah


Joined: 02 Aug 2004
Posts: 3622



 Reply with quote  

Wanderer for a raging liberal your ok. Now back to iraq... we didn't go in for revenge for what Osama did...or if you listen to Bagdad Auntie (poor Osama was framed). The world is better off without Sadam and his bloody....boys. Right now we are fighting terroists....that are murdering iraqis..as well as our forces. Save your tied-dyed protest until after the war is over.

Now your dragging gays into the mix. I have never taken an anti-gay stand, nor iam a christian radical. You can have different views on different issues you know.

The pope likes peace? What ever gave you that impression?

Post Fri 20 May, 2005 9:24 am 
 View user's profile Send private message
wanderer
Official Mainah


Joined: 05 Nov 2004
Posts: 1747



 Reply with quote  

Smile I wasn't specifically targeting you. It was more a general statement about Christians in this country and how morally corrupt many of them are.

The people we are fighting right now are mostly insurgents whom of which were created by the war we brought to them. Iraqis wouldn't be dying from "terrorist" actions, if we hadn't invaded the country. You are familiar with Newtons 3rd law? Yes? Well this reaction derives from our actions. We aren't killing these Iraqi civilians with car bombs, but their blood is on our hands. We created those terrorists.

Post Fri 20 May, 2005 9:41 am 
 View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
whynot
Official Mainah


Joined: 02 Aug 2004
Posts: 3622



 Reply with quote  

Bull....I guess you are one of the ones that thought the murders by sadam don't count.

Okay Lefties, Let’s Compare Some Numbers


Since the media and prominent self-promoting politicians like to paint the war in Iraq as one of the worst guerilla wars we have ever seen, let’s consider a few statistics in an attempt to better understand their portrayal. Of course it goes without saying that our troops are invaluable, and each death is heart wrenching. But if you look at the war in Iraq (the “quagmire”), and compare it to every day life in the United States, you might see things a little differently than Kennedy, Kerry, Boxer, Jennings and their ilk.
Iraq has an estimated population of roughly 25 million. In 2004, 7,837 troops were injured and 713 were killed in action. In 2000 (the most recent data from the US Census Bureau), the population of California was about 33.5 million. In that same year, there were 210,531 violent crimes and 2,079 murders. The population in New York in 2000 was a little more than 19 million. In New York in 2000, there were 124,890 violent crimes and 952 murders. In one year, we lost 713 very brave soldiers who were fighting in a war, which obviously is a dangerous environment. In one year, California lost over 2,000 citizens to murder, and New York lost over 950. That said, would the Democrats assume that it is more dangerous to live in the U.S. than it is to fight in Iraq? Is driving a car more dangerous than fighting in Iraq? In 2001 over 42,000 people died in the U.S. because they took the risk of driving. Is having the flu more dangerous than promoting freedom? The CDC estimates that 20,000 people die each year from the flu. It is estimated that Hussein released over 70,000 hardened criminals from prison before the war. If you compare terrorists in Iraq, who are nothing more than criminals, to our own criminal element, it would seem that it is much more dangerous to simply live in America than it is to fight terrorism in Iraq.

It is the position of many on the left that we are losing the war in Iraq. Some say that we should pull our troops out immediately, as it is just too violent and the death toll of American soldiers is at an unacceptable rate. Let’s compare the war in Iraq to some of our other conflicts to see if the war really is the losing proposition that the left portrays it to be. Years ago, the U.S. was attacked by foreign men who used airplanes to murder thousands of American citizens. A madman halfway around the world was murdering his own people and threatening the countries around him. If that scenario sounds familiar, it should. It describes 9/11, as well as WWII. Would today’s lefties have fought WWII? I think we all know the answer to that question. Hitler did not attack us. Hitler, just like Hussein, had signed numerous useless pieces of paper assuring the world that he would behave. Hitler, just like Hussein, had no intention of following his word. On D-Day alone, the Allies dropped 156,000 troops in ten hours on the beaches of Normandy, and 73,000 of them were American. Total Allied casualties for that one day are estimated at 10,000 with 2,500 of those killed in action. Out of that 10,000, 6603 were U.S. casualties. Can you imagine what the Democrats of today would have thought of Eisenhower’s plan? I think I can guess.

In the case of WWII, 16.1 million U.S. armed forces personnel served during a five year period. The United States lost 292,000 troops in action, another 114,000 died of other causes, and 671,000 were wounded. The U.S. fought for many years, then began reconstruction in various countries which took many more years, and we still maintain a military presence in those countries as a result. In the case of Viet Nam, 2.59 million armed forces personnel served. Of those, over 47,000 died in combat, another 9,000 died of other causes, and 304,000 were wounded. In the Civil War, 620,000 Americans lost their lives. How can one look at those numbers and think the current war is too costly? How can one reflect on our military history and conclude that the War on Terror is not worth fighting, that the casualty numbers are too high? How can the Lefties continually disparage the war, our President, and the cause for which our troops make so many sacrifices? And how is it that so many people buy it?

Post Fri 20 May, 2005 10:10 am 
 View user's profile Send private message
wanderer
Official Mainah


Joined: 05 Nov 2004
Posts: 1747



 Reply with quote  

If murdering your own civilians is a case for going to war, well I guess we better shine up our boots because we have a lot more countries to visit.

What this gutless wonder you cut n paste doesn't understand is that people accept death when it is necessary. They don't accept it when it is in vain. The WW2 comparison is tired and pathetic. Comparing powerless Saddam with Hitler, Hirihito, Stalin, Mussolini or any other leader who had an army of their calibre is just ridiculous. It was called a world war because it affected the world. Saddam, trapped within his own borders, powerless to attack even his closest neighbors, was no threat to America, let alone the world.

Yes, America is one of the most violent countries in the world. Yes it has major problems, which is all the more reason we have to take care of our own first and foremost. Instead of wasting resources overseas, on our liberal do gooder projects, how about using those countless billions on something that might actually benefit the AMERICAN people? What a concept. Spending American money on....America! Wow! (I know this is a foreign concept to you and lennie)

1 death, 1 father, mother, brother, sister, daughter or son is 1 too many for a war that will not benefit this country. It's a shame you and your little author lack the empathy to understand that and hide behind the facade of machismo.

Post Fri 20 May, 2005 10:30 am 
 View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
whynot
Official Mainah


Joined: 02 Aug 2004
Posts: 3622



 Reply with quote  

Wanderer you aren't the weak-knee,lilly-liver type that would keep his head in the sand while the bombs were dropping on pearl harbor and yell they don't mean it. These aren't real bombs,are you???? If you do not think that we have to fight these terrorist either now in far-away lands or wait and hide till they arrive at our front doors AGAIN you are living in "chuckie world"...no i take that back..even Chuckie knows we have a war on terror.

No one wants one life lost to war....but no one wanted to be on the planes that the terrorist crashed on 911 either. We are in place and time now that we can not walk up and down Maine roads with peace signs and a bowl of hash, "yelling hell no..fightings not nice"

You don't want lives lost then it is time to suport our troopes not aid the terrorist by tearing down your own country. To say what the troops are doing will help no one is about as cold and insensitive as anything i have ever heard Rolling Eyes

Post Fri 20 May, 2005 10:42 am 
 View user's profile Send private message
whynot
Official Mainah


Joined: 02 Aug 2004
Posts: 3622



 Reply with quote  

HOW MANY LIBERALS

How many Liberals does it take to win a war?

How many of you Liberals does it take to win a war?

Well how the hell can we tell? You won’t fight one anymore.

You say that you support the troops, but the truth’s plain as your face,

You’d pull us from the battle, march us home in full disgrace.

You’ve no stomach for the fighting, got no mettle, got no pluck;

If you ran this war on terror, we’d be a very well plucked duck.

The wolves of Jihad smell your dread, can smell your craven breath,

And emboldened by the fear they scent, lust for our bloody death.

“But wait,” you protest piously, “We are fighters for the poor.”

Might we suggest you start to fight, before wolves come through the door?

Do you think they’ll still believe in you, your poor, your gays, your blacks,

When the wolves run wild among them, sinking fangs into their backs?

Think then that they’ll be caring, when they’re counting out their dead,

We inflict pain on a captive wolf to learn what’s in his head?

Do you really think, you bleeding hearts, when they bleed in scarlet torrents,

They’ll care we cage the savage wolves, search lairs without signed warrants?

For years we watched your “feel good” courts defang our criminal laws,

Handcuff our police, give felons rights, espouse the criminals’ cause.

Felonious wolves were freed to prey, and we suffered their wild rages

Till “thinking” men took back the courts, put the wolf packs back in cages.

With your same old clueless “feelings” you now decry this war;

And with your same old fuzzy logic, common sense you still ignore.

We must look into “root causes” and we must try to “feel their pain;”

Pardon if our eyes start rolling, at your same old lame refrain.

It’s hard to fathom whence you come, perhaps some flawed eugenics,

That begets utopian pessimists, sires optimistic cynics.

Thanks be the power to rule the land remains beyond your means;

A regime of yours, would be like, no doubt, being ruled by pimpled teens.

Your quixotic quest for a world love nest, denies some truths quite real,

Like the need to have some “thinking” folks to preserve your right to “feel.”

Abhorring blood on your own hands, there’s a hard truth you’ve ignored,

Someone else must take your plowshare, and beat it back into a sword.

So how many of you Liberals does it take to win a war?

Or is there simply nothing you believe worth fighting for?

How is it that you’ve never learned, like most when they grow older,

That appeasing badness is a bad idea, only makes the bad guys bolder.

Has your fear of spilling human blood made you Jihad’s useful fools,

Ignoring that their wolf packs never fight within the rules?

By your demand we stay our hand, you weaken and you bind us;

Forcing us to fight off wolf attacks with that hand tied behind us.

So we bend some rules, in war you fools; so what? Show some respect,

When it’s your fuzzy-headed “feelings", “thinking” men fight to protect.

Russ Vaughn

2d Bn, 327th Parachute Infantry Regiment

101st Airborne Division

Vietnam 65-66

Post Fri 20 May, 2005 10:57 am 
 View user's profile Send private message
wanderer
Official Mainah


Joined: 05 Nov 2004
Posts: 1747



 Reply with quote  

Did Iraq bomb Pearl Harbor? Your logic might have some relevancy if it pertained to the current conflict. Very Happy

Please, there are already terrorists among us. You can't kill them all. You can't prevent them all from coming to America (especially when you open the borders up and say Ole! as Bush does - the minutemen who actually tried to prevent people from coming into the country illegally he deemed "vigilantes").

We are not in place and time when we have to accept blind allegiance to war and it's perpetrators. The pied piper of war has lulled many people into a mindless trance of death and destruction, but not everyone. Some people still have a conscience.

I do support the troops as I said in my "blanket statement". Again it is the war I do not support. It still appears you feel just the opposite. Again I reaffirm, the neocons support the war, but not the troops.

You and your author try to convince me that "it's not that bad" in Iraq. Well if it's not that bad, what's the big deal if we have a few dozen people killed every day in car bombings here in the states? It shouldn't bother us if a guy goes into a mall and blows up a bunch of children. Bah! Who cares? In the land of 300 million people, that's only .0000001% of the population. Stop crying!

It's not the troops fault that the government gave them such a raw deal. They are doing their mission and doing a fine job of it as well. Unfortunately, in the scheme of things, their sacrifices will not benefit the AMERICAN people, which ultimately is the whole point.

I'm cold and insensitive? Please. Cold and insensitive is part of your schtick (though I'd bet you're more personable in real life).

Post Fri 20 May, 2005 11:16 am 
 View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
  Display posts from previous:      

Your Maine Forum Forum Index -> Around The Water Cooler



Forum Jump:
Jump to:  

Post new topic   Reply to topic
Page 1 of 3

Goto page 1, 2, 3  Next

Forum Rules:
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You can attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum

 

Last Thread | Next Thread  >
Powered by phpBB: © 2001 phpBB Group