Thank You, President Bush

[BillyBob]

AiCan'tFindMyDentures;
Bush has presided over one of the most catastrophic failures in U.S. intelligence history.

Billy;
Yes, Clinton handed him quite a mess. It was Clinton, after all, who drastically reduced the way that covert information was allowed to be gathered.

AiAmInsane;
He has opposed and blocked evidence for an inquest into what happened September 11, and then had the gall to name Henry Kissinger--that mortician of truth--to head the committee.

Billy;
We already know what happened. Osama Bin Laden attacked the World Trade center for the 2nd and 3rd time. If Clinton had done something with Osama after he attacked the Trade Center in 1993, there wouldn't have been a 2nd and 3rd attack!

AikoAikoAiYay;
He has gotten us into an unnecessary war that has killed hundreds of our men and women and some 10,000 in "collateral damage" who don't seem to have hopes, dreams or greiving relatives who will never forget.

Billy;
Yes, we lost a mere couple hundred of our troops verses the tens of thousands of Iraqi troops that we killed. Those are good odds!

AiCan'tFindMyBrain;
Bush and his government have done this even without a plan to get Baghdad's traffic lights working, much less restore civil order.

Billy;
LIES! The power is restored, air conditioners are running, business is booming. There are hundreds of Iraqi owned newspapers popping up all over the place because of their new found freedom that we provided. The oil is flowing and over 70% of Iraqi citizens openly declare their pleasure that American troops are in Iraq.

AiStillCan'tFindMyBrain;
The ones who now say "I told you so" were dismissed as un-American and pawns of the enemy.

Billy;
You are un-American!

AiWishAiWasSmarterThanAHammer;
Bush has not only made Americans sitting ducks in Iraq, but taunts the murderers of our young women and men to "bring it on."

Billy;
Yeah, our troops are the best equipped in the world. They are not sitting ducks. And of course we want the terrorists to pop their heads up so me can shoot it off. The whole point of this is to fight terrorism. Hell yes, BRING IT ON!!!!!!!!!!!!!

AiCan'tFindMyHead-ItMustBeUpMy***;
Bush is spending billions of dollars on "nation building" (breaking another campaign promise) and will pass the bill to our kids and their kids.

Billy;
Yes, you libs would rather ignore terrorism and hope it will go away on it's own. Clinton tried that strategy and it didn't work.

AiCan'tFindAJob;
Since he has been president, America has presided over the largest job loss figures since Herbert "Great Depression" Hoover.

Billy;
The economy is cranking!!!!!!!! Every indicator is proving that. Not bad, considering Bush was handed the Clinton/Gore recession and made it disappear in less than 2 years. Woo Hoo!

AiAmAnIdiot;
He cut police and firehouse budgets, afterschool programs, Pell grants and housing allowances for the poor to give millionaires their extra helping of tax cuts. Bush has wrecked our nation's finances by running up the largest deficit in history.

Billy;
Those millionaires pay more taxes tan you do, they deserve a tax cut, moron.

AiWishIWasAMillionaire;
He has let close to 20,000 power plants to increase air pollution in our breathable air.

Billy;
Yes, I saw him go to the power plants, find the valve that increases pollution and turn it up!

AiNeedToBeInAMentalInstitution;
He has lowered the prestige of America in just about every other country by his unilateral "us vs. them" rhetoric.

Billy;
LIES! The UN Resolution 1441 was unanimous. There were also more than 40 countries giving us support in our war against Saddam. That is hardly unilateralism, you friggin idiot.

AiWishSomeoneWouldJustShootMeNow;
He has lied our way into war and when those lies were exposed, if a majority still prefers ignorance and obedience to civic responsibility, he will be re-elected.

Billy;
Woo Hoo, Bush in '04!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[Aimiel]

Originally posted by BillyBob
Yes, Clinton handed him quite a mess.

It was also the Clinton administration that allowed a law to pass preventing State-Certifed Police Officers from carrying their service weapons on-board commercial flights. Perhaps 9/11 could have been stopped, by simple common sense.

 

[aikido7]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Thank you, President Bush

Re: Re: Re: Re: Thank you, President Bush

Originally posted by Aimiel
I'm glad that I could help to expose this to you, and to the public.Well, I don't see him as shallow; nor unremarkable. It takes a remarkable person just to get into that office, much more to make a go of it, and even more remarkable is his steadfast witness (as well as testimony) which is the first time that I can remember a President who is Godly, in my lifetime. I remember thinking that Kennedy was too worldly for my tastes, and he was the most Godly man in the White House since I have been alive. You chose, instead of making headway toward defending your position, to once again throw out another off-the-wall left-handed compliment against our President, once again. Don't get me wrong, I fought for your right to do just that, but this is one of the 'good guys' and you have him confused with someone that is against God. You need to pick your battles a little differently, is

all.Well, if you made an idol out of him and are now disappointed that he did not measure up to your projection of him, I can see why you are sore. I believe that God allowed this war, to draw people together and to draw men unto Him. He did, they are and He is.Regardless of your opinion of him, President Bush was put in office by The Lord, and he will answer to The Lord and not necessarily to your leftist 'fringe-element' bitter opinion of him (thank God).

Is it "Godly" to use filthy language in private and try to look righteous in public? That is a good example of the word "hypocrite." Take it from the Bible, Bud, that is not godly. George Bush has mastered the politics of lies and deception. That's not "Godly." You are misinformed.

He might not be against your God who carries a gun and believes in revenge--But he is against mine as revealed in Jesus.

 

[aikido7]

Billy;
Yes, Clinton handed him quite a mess. It was Clinton, after all, who drastically reduced the way that covert information was allowed to be gathered.

Let's talk about George Bush here. You can open a thread about Clinton anytime you want. Stay on track. After 9-11, Bush became the most powerful president in decades and his aides continually insinuated that the president's decisions were informed by intellignece that could not be shared with the public. Democracies are not supposed to operate that way. Intelligence was gathered on Bush's watch. It was made up of lies. He knew it. And he lied about knowing it. And continues to lie.

Billy;
We already know what happened. Osama Bin Laden attacked the World Trade center for the 2nd and 3rd time. If Clinton had done something with Osama after he attacked the Trade Center in 1993, there wouldn't have been a 2nd and 3rd attack!

There is a public and increasingly private record about what Clinton did or did not do while in office. What are you afraid of if you actually stick to the thread here and focus on the public and private record of what Bush did, does and did not do? If we "already know what happened" why do we have two or three different stories from Bush himself as to how he found out about the attack? Why are Republicans in Congress upset by the administration's refusal to provide some basic documentation about its knowledge of 9-11? Why are some of the victim's families feeling betrayed by Geroge Bush?

Billy;
Yes, we lost a mere couple hundred of our troops verses the tens of thousands of Iraqi troops that we killed. Those are good odds!

Score keeping with body counts gets us nowhere, as Vietnam taught us. This is beyond body counts.

Billy;
LIES! The power is restored, air conditioners are running, business is booming. There are hundreds of Iraqi owned newspapers popping up all over the place because of their new found freedom that we provided. The oil is flowing and over 70% of Iraqi citizens openly declare their pleasure that American troops are in Iraq.

The power is restored, then it goes out. Air conditioners run, then stop. Any careful monitoring of the liberal and conservative media will tell you that! Business is booming? What business are you talking about? There are a lot of newspapers--you are right about that. But they aren't always on the side of the coalition. There are a lot of competing voices shouting out from the pages of those new journalistic efforts. Oil flows, when it does. But it's not going to be enough for the long-term (this may prove to be wrong, but that is the latest news). Any right-thinking American would agree with the question "Are you glad that coalition troops have Saddam on the run?" Well--yes! (duh!)



Billy;
You are un-American!

noted!...Even though I fought a war for your sort, pay my taxes, and do my civic duty to be as informed about the world as I can be!

Billy;
Yeah, our troops are the best equipped in the world. They are not sitting ducks. And of course we want the terrorists to pop their heads up so me can shoot it off. The whole point of this is to fight terrorism. Hell yes, BRING IT ON!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Best equipped? Tell America during the Vietnam war or the British during our War for Independence. Equipment means NOTHING. Firepower shows the power of fire, shock and awe, and little else. And I suppose you pay no attention to those who know (including Jesus our Lord) that you cannot "fight" terrorism?

Billy;
Yes, you libs would rather ignore terrorism and hope it will go away on it's own. Clinton tried that strategy and it didn't work.

You are misinformed. Clinton again, huh? There is a wealth of public and emerging private record as to what Clinton did--including telling Bush before 9-11 TO HIS FACE that Osama was the biggest problem. And where do you get the idea that liberals would rather "ignore terrorism"? Or "hope it will go away on it's[sic] own?" More specifically, where do you get that idea from THIS tree-huggin' liberal?

Billy;
The economy is cranking!!!!!!!! Every indicator is proving that. Not bad, considering Bush was handed the Clinton/Gore recession and made it disappear in less than 2 years. Woo Hoo!

CRANKING? "CRANKING"? My conclusions stand. There are some areas of the economy that appear improved, but we are talking about Bush and job loss--not Clinton and Gore. What prevents you from keeping to the subject and looking at facts and data? Finding someone to blame instead of taking responsiblity is a dodge of the truth.

Billy;
Those millionaires pay more taxes tan you do, they deserve a tax cut, moron.

Why is Bush's main argument for tax cuts is that it would help the economy, but most of his package was slated to kick in in five years (so much for this "urgent" task as he called it!). And how could he claim that a plan that ends most dividend taxes and lowered the top income tax rates would not reward the rich? What makes that fair? Luckily, his lies did not help him in getting what he wanted, but he still claimed victory for getting Congress sto adopt $300 billion in tax cuts--especially when the true cost of those cuts could very well be three times that! Bush the economist hides behind math and accounting tricks and he uses phony averages to show that tax cuts help revenue--even after his own economists declared otherwise! You, like most Americans, fell for it my friend.

Billy;
Yes, I saw him go to the power plants, find the valve that increases pollution and turn it up!

Bush's advance team knows what it is doing. Every public stop is planned and rehearsed--even down to the color of the backdrops and the placement of the flags. You probably bought the line that Bush flew his own jet to the aircraft carrier because a helicopter was too far away. Bush was FLOWN in by a pilot and the ship was positioned so that when he spoke on the deck there would be no nearby land showing. That was the speech Bush declared the major operations in Iraq were over. What he counted on was people like you seeing a statue of Saddam Hussein being pulled down over and over again.

When he went to the power plants, I would be looking very carefully and questioning what is going on--not to tear down the President but to discover the truth. We can't be afraid of the truth, no matter where it leads us. Not all conservatives are stupid and redneck, but most stupid people and rednecks tend to be conservative.

Billy;
LIES! The UN Resolution 1441 was unanimous. There were also more than 40 countries giving us support in our war against Saddam. That is hardly unilateralism, you friggin idiot.

(Sigh)--name calling is the last refuge of a soundrel who is angry he is surrounded by facts. Did you actually pay attention to what was going on at the UN in April? Educate yourself instead of insulting others! 1441 mandated a deadline. Bush acted unilaterlly AFTER that.

Billy;
Woo Hoo, Bush in '04!!!!!!!!!!!

Why not "Hilary is a Whore, Bush in '04"? At least that rhymes and includes name-calling and juvenile education at the same time!

 

[Aimiel]

Aikido7,

You have your priorities screwed up.

2 Peter 2:10
But chiefly them that walk after the flesh in the lust of uncleanness, and despise government. Presumptuous are they, selfwilled, they are not afraid to speak evil of dignities.

Jude 1:8
Likewise also these filthy dreamers defile the flesh, despise dominion, and speak evil of dignities.

You need to keep your ignorance under wraps.

 

[aikido7]

mmm--Is that Peter talking, Jude talking, or Jesus talking? Paul stood up for obedience to government as well (slavery included). I think it is a good thing our Founding Fathers chose to ignore Paul, Peter and Jude on this point and overthrew the government they were citizens of--don't you think?

And how do You separate what Jesus said from what others said he said?

Do you believe in a Jesus who practiced what he preached? A Jesus who "walked his talk?"

A Jesus that--if we are to believe the canonical gosples--taught everything in parables and aphorisms?

In Matthew 5:39 Jesus is made to say:
"If any one strikes you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also."

In Revelations 2:22-23, Jesus is made to say:
"Behold, I will throw the woman on a sickbed, and those who commit adultery with her I will strike her children dead."

Because I distinguish between the words origniating from Jesus and the words that came into the tradition from common lore or were created by the early Christian community, you're saying that--first--my priorities are wrong and, second, that I somehow need to HIDE my lack of knowledge???

I think I hear what you are saying and I am sorry you feel that way. I think you and I have a difference of opinion as to what Jesus was telling us about the Kingdom of God.

I make certain discriminations when reading the Bible and I usually confine my study to words reported in written documents in the first three centuries. You may be holding a naiive view of the Bible--which is okay. Mother Theresa didn't know about biblical scholarship, either, but that didn't make her any less of a Christian in my opinion.

Of course she didn't have a gun permit or harbor revenge fantasies, either.

 

[BillyBob]

Aikido;
1441 mandated a deadline. Bush acted unilaterlly AFTER that.

Billy;
Tell that to Tony Blair.

 

[BillyBob]

Billy;
The economy is cranking!!!!!!!! Every indicator is proving that. Not bad, considering Bush was handed the Clinton/Gore recession and made it disappear in less than 2 years. Woo Hoo!

Aikido;
CRANKING? "CRANKING"? My conclusions stand. There are some areas of the economy that appear improved, but we are talking about Bush and job loss--not Clinton and Gore. What prevents you from keeping to the subject and looking at facts and data? Finding someone to blame instead of taking responsibility is a dodge of the truth.

Billy;
Uh, the truth is that Bush was handed a crashed stock market and a recession from his predecessor, not to mention the worst attack on our soil since Pearl harbor. That is the TRUTH. The only dodging going on here is by you. As for jobs, anybody willing to work can get a job, simple as that.

 

[BillyBob]

Aikido;
Bush's advance team knows what it is doing. Every public stop is planned and rehearsed--even down to the color of the backdrops and the placement of the flags.

Billy;
Oh, now there's a first! I am so glad that no other President had a PR person taking all these things into consideration. :kookoo:

Aikido;
You probably bought the line that Bush flew his own jet to the aircraft carrier because a helicopter was too far away.

Billy;
You're just mad because he made it look good!

Aikido;
Bush was FLOWN in by a pilot and the ship was positioned so that when he spoke on the deck there would be no nearby land showing.

Billy;
So? Clinton gave 2 speeches from an aircraft carrier, what's your point?

Aikido;
That was the speech Bush declared the major operations in Iraq were over.

Billy;
Yes, and he was right. Woo Hoo!!!!!!!!!

 

[BillyBob]

Aikido;
Clinton again, huh? There is a wealth of public and emerging private record as to what Clinton did--including telling Bush before 9-11 TO HIS FACE that Osama was the biggest problem.

Billy;
The fact that Clinton told Bush about Osama doesn't let him off the hook for not doing anything about him!!!!!!! Clinton actually admitted that Osama is a problem that he did NOTHING about and passed the baton to Bush! Oh, and don't forget that Osama blew up the Trade Center in 1993, leaving Clinton 7 YEARS TO DO SOMETHING ABOUT HIM!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! :madmad:

Bill Clinton is a CRIMINAL!

 

[aikido7]

No one is letting Clinton off the hook. Someone is letting Bush off the hook. Clinton did try to do a lot about him. His response is in the public record now and we can compare that with what the Republicans in congress did to help Clinton as well. A former president is supposed to pass the baton; there is a race to be won and George Bush needed to damn sure start running it! Bin Laden did not blow up the World Trade Center in 1993. A bomb exploded in the 2nd level parking garage basement, causing extensive damage and smoke harm.

There is a lot of information out there. You might be stunned if you saw it. You might be stunned if you wanted to know about it. Clearly, you do not. When people refuse to learn, they become stunned on their own, I suppose.

 

[Aimiel]

Aikido,

If you don't have enough sense to recognize the difference between allowing someone to slap you (personally) and allowing someone to destroy the lives of the citizens of your country, then you really do have a lot to learn, and your so-called 'Biblical scholarship' is worthless. We need to be supportive of a President who is a Christian, an maintains his witness in spite of persecution from people like yourself. When you attack him, you're attacking Christ, who lives inside of him. We don't agree on anything, simply because you have chosen to oppose The Lord, Who is making use of our President, whether or not you believe He is.

 

[BillyBob]

AiCan'tGetMyStoryStraight;
Bin Laden did not blow up the World Trade Center in 1993.

Billy;
Sure he did.

AiWishIHadn'tPostedThis;
A bomb exploded in the 2nd level parking garage basement, causing extensive damage and smoke harm.

Billy;
Yeah, Bin Ladens Bomb! Bin Laden had vowed to take down the Trade Center years ago. When his attempt in '93 failed, Clinton should have arrested him when he had the chance. Actually, he had at least three chances where Osama could have been handed to him on a plate. But, Clinton chose to put MY life in danger and let that sonnofaterrorist remain free rather than showing some ballz and a little bit of leadership.

Bill Clinton is a criminal.

 

[SOTK]

Originally posted by BillyBob
AiCan'tGetMyStoryStraight;
Bin Laden did not blow up the World Trade Center in 1993.

Billy;
Sure he did.

AiWishIHadn'tPostedThis;
A bomb exploded in the 2nd level parking garage basement, causing extensive damage and smoke harm.

Billy;
Yeah, Bin Ladens Bomb! Bin Laden had vowed to take down the Trade Center years ago. When his attempt in '93 failed, Clinton should have arrested him when he had the chance. Actually, he had at least three chances where Osama could have been handed to him on a plate. But, Clinton chose to put MY life in danger and let that sonnofaterrorist remain free rather than showing some ballz and a little bit of leadership.

Bill Clinton is a criminal.

:thumb:

 

[aikido7]

If you don't have enough sense to recognize the difference between allowing someone to slap you (personally) and allowing someone to destroy the lives of the citizens of your country, then you really do have a lot to learn....

If you cannot follow the teachings of Jesus and don't have enough sense to recognize the difference between a revolutionary, abiding faith versus recognizing Ceasar, the world of prinicpalities and everything else throughout history that we blindly repeat again and again and again--then what value is the Cross, Amiel?

You don't know what persecution is until you study accounts of what crucifixion were really like and let God enter into you when you read the Bible accounts and try to imagine what it must have been like for Jesus.

You had better get straight on the difference between attacking a man's failed actions and shortcomings and attacking Jesus or I just might use the same narrow defense of YOUR actions toward me.

I had to shake my head in a confused sigh when you said: "you have chosen to oppose The Lord, Who is making use of our President, whether or not you believe He is."

I guess that settles that, huh?

And by the way, what is "Godly" about personal insults, filthy ways of talking (in a hypocrticially private way at that!) or using sarcasm and ridicule to ape the pleas of a Christian on death row?

("Your honor, the witness will not or is unable to answer my previous questions. No doubt he has a great excuse for not doing so. If they are uncomfortable for him in their present form, I shall ask them in such a way that he directs me to so that this fair hearing can continue.")

 

[Aimiel]

Originally posted by aikido7
If you cannot follow the teachings of Jesus and don't have enough sense to recognize the difference between a revolutionary, abiding faith versus recognizing Ceasar, the world of prinicpalities and everything else throughout history that we blindly repeat again and again and again--then what value is the Cross, Amiel?

If you believe that because a human being makes mistakes, and is not perfect, that God could not possibly be at work in their life, or even making use of them, then you have no clue as to what the cross means. You seem to deny others the protection that you claim.

You don't know what persecution is until you study accounts of what crucifixion were really like and let God enter into you when you read the Bible accounts and try to imagine what it must have been like for Jesus.

You don't know what I don't know or whether your 'imagination' has led to to The Truth or not. If you had ever, "...let God enter into you..." then we would have no differences.

You had better get straight on the difference between attacking a man's failed actions and shortcomings and attacking Jesus or I just might use the same narrow defense of YOUR actions toward me.

You had better recognize The Truth, or one day It will judge you:
When the Son of man shall come in his glory, and all the holy angels with him, then shall he sit upon the throne of his glory: and before him shall be gathered all nations: and he shall separate them one from another, as a shepherd divideth his sheep from the goats: and he shall set the sheep on his right hand, but the goats on the left. Then shall the King say unto them on his right hand, Come, ye blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world: for I was an hungred, and ye gave me meat: I was thirsty, and ye gave me drink: I was a stranger, and ye took me in: naked, and ye clothed me: I was sick, and ye visited me: I was in prison, and ye came unto me. Then shall the righteous answer him, saying, Lord, when saw we thee an hungred, and fed thee? or thirsty, and gave thee drink? When saw we thee a stranger, and took thee in? or naked, and clothed thee? Or when saw we thee sick, or in prison, and came unto thee? And the King shall answer and say unto them, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me. Then shall he say also unto them on the left hand, Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels: for I was an hungred, and ye gave me no meat: I was thirsty, and ye gave me no drink: I was a stranger, and ye took me not in: naked, and ye clothed me not: sick, and in prison, and ye visited me not. Then shall they also answer him, saying, Lord, when saw we thee an hungred, or athirst, or a stranger, or naked, or sick, or in prison, and did not minister unto thee? Then shall he answer them, saying, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye did it not to one of the least of these, ye did it not to me. And these shall go away into everlasting punishment: but the righteous into life eternal.

Maybe in your book, someone who professes Jesus as Lord is a viable target of your criticism, but, in mine, I am told how to treat my bretheren. We believe, hope and pray, because of the love we have toward one another. The love is our sign to the world of our Christianity. They know whether or not we are Christians by it. I think yours needs a check-up.

I had to shake my head in a confused sigh when you said: "you have chosen to oppose The Lord, Who is making use of our President, whether or not you believe He is."

I guess that settles that, huh?

I guess that settles your faith in a fellow-Christian's word and allows you to choose who you get to tear down and call a liar.

 

[aikido7]

Originally posted by BillyBob
Aikido;
Clinton again, huh? There is a wealth of public and emerging private record as to what Clinton did--including telling Bush before 9-11 TO HIS FACE that Osama was the biggest problem.

Billy;
The fact that Clinton told Bush about Osama doesn't let him off the hook for not doing anything about him!!!!!!! Clinton actually admitted that Osama is a problem that he did NOTHING about and passed the baton to Bush! Oh, and don't forget that Osama blew up the Trade Center in 1993, leaving Clinton 7 YEARS TO DO SOMETHING ABOUT HIM!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! :madmad:

Bill Clinton is a CRIMINAL!

This just shows how you need to keep your words soft and sweet--because you'll never know when you may have to eat them! Maybe you don't pay attention to words, defined by:

Liberal news reports
Conservative news reports
Independent news reports
Underground press
West coast papers
East coast papers
European, Asian, Middle Eastern news
Common sense.

To put it bluntly, BillyBob, you have no idea what you are talking about. If you are too intellectually lazy to find the laundry list of what Clinton did or did not do fight bin Laden and terrorism, I certainly won't do it for you. But you need to look at what is really going on rather than the echoes of El Rushbo still ringing in your ears! You can sit back and mindlessly repeat brain dead mantras from the Republican and the conservative side all you want. You're not fooling me or anyone else who takes the time to not only dig a little, but to pay attention to what is before your own eyes!

Liberals may be too evil for your tastes, but at least they didn't blame George Bush Sr. for the World Trade Center bomb. There was not one insinuation that Bush Sr. was a criminal. After all, he had only been out of office only [six weeks when THAT went down.

I wonder how long it would take for the terrorists to scope out their target, pick and groom their operatives, get the money, make that bomb and set it off? Maybe, uh, seven weeks? It's a good thing they didn't do it in a record five, huh?

 

[aikido7]

Originally posted by Aimiel
If you had ever, "...let God enter into you..." then we would have no differences.You had better recognize The Truth, or one day It will judge you

The Christian religion has always had differences, as any careful reader of the New Testament knows. Presently there are over 40,000 different church groups and denominations in America alone. The fact is, we will have differences with our brothers and sisters. Your quote above--in one form or another--has been used by the medieval church and the Branch Davidians to encourage dissention and conflict, which, by my reading, is a far cry from Jesus' praxis.

When the Son of man shall come in his glory, and all the holy angels with him, then shall he sit upon the throne of his glory: and before him shall be gathered all nations: and he shall separate them one from another, as a shepherd divideth his sheep from the goats: and he shall set the sheep on his right hand, but the goats on the left. Then shall the King say unto them on his right hand, Come, ye blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world: for I was an hungred, and ye gave me meat: I was thirsty, and ye gave me drink: I was a stranger, and ye took me in: naked, and ye clothed me: I was sick, and ye visited me: I was in prison, and ye came unto me. Then shall the righteous answer him, saying, Lord, when saw we thee an hungred, and fed thee? or thirsty, and gave thee drink? When saw we thee a stranger, and took thee in? or naked, and clothed thee? Or when saw we thee sick, or in prison, and came unto thee? And the King shall answer and say unto them, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me. Then shall he say also unto them on the left hand, Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels: for I was an hungred, and ye gave me no meat: I was thirsty, and ye gave me no drink: I was a stranger, and ye took me not in: naked, and ye clothed me not: sick, and in prison, and ye visited me not. Then shall they also answer him, saying, Lord, when saw we thee an hungred, or athirst, or a stranger, or naked, or sick, or in prison, and did not minister unto thee? Then shall he answer them, saying, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye did it not to one of the least of these, ye did it not to me. And these shall go away into everlasting punishment: but the righteous into life eternal.

This is not a parable as Jesus would have told but a story about the last judgement. The only figurative language used is with the sheep and the goats, and since sheep are usually white and goats are black, it is surely a black/white view. This approach fits well with rational dogma and propostional theology but does not cohere with parable, metaphor and humor which is so unique and characteristic of Jesus' speech. If the language is dense, theological, or atacking it is all-to-human and needs to go into history's dustbin--for it is not Jesus' way of speaking. The verses from Matthew 25 all fit quite coherently into Matthew's theological scheme which became popular after the turmoil of the Roman War. Matthew's community was feeling the heat from within and without. The Temple was obliterated, for gosh sake's! Roman It is not characteristic of Jesus' speech and, in fact, goes against much of what he spoke about.

Maybe in your book, someone who professes Jesus as Lord is a viable target of your criticism, but, in mine, I am told how to treat my bretheren. We believe, hope and pray, because of the love we have toward one another. The love is our sign to the world of our Christianity. They know whether or not we are Christians by it. I think yours needs a check-up.I guess that settles your faith in a fellow-Christian's word and allows you to choose who you get to tear down and call a liar.

To be honest, I have not recognized in your posts your self-congratulatory treatment of bretheren, the love you have toward others and thus the sign to the world of your faith. But postings on message boards are a flimsy excuse for judging others and I hope the rest of your (off-line) life bears out your witness.

We don't agree on anything, simply because you have chosen to oppose the Lord...

Well, I don't know what to say to that... What's next? A heresy trial? Or just shunning? Or maybe a good old apocalyptic religious war with the blood up to the horses' bridles! With an attitude like that, maybe you need to be mugged on the road to Jerhico and rescued by one of your "brethern" who "oppose the Lord." I am refering to the Samaritan Parable in Luke. It is quite instructive and has many layers....

 

[BillyBob]

AiCan'tFigureAnythingOut;
To put it bluntly, BillyBob, you have no idea what you are talking about.

Billy;
Over your head, eh? If I had some crayons, I'd draw you a picture.

AiAmNotVeryGoodAtThis;
If you are too intellectually lazy to find the laundry list of what Clinton did or did not do fight bin Laden and terrorism, I certainly won't do it for you. But you need to look at what is really going on rather than the echoes of El Rushbo still ringing in your ears! You can sit back and mindlessly repeat brain dead mantras from the Republican and the conservative side all you want. You're not fooling me or anyone else who takes the time to not only dig a little, but to pay attention to what is before your own eyes!

Billy;
You are quite full of yourself, aren't you? Actually, Mansoor Ijaz was the guy who brokered the deal to hand over Bin Laden to Clinton that Clinton rejected. I would suggest that you do some research yourself, you friggin idiot. I do, however, find you amusing as you attempt to convince yourself that you are the only person here who pays attention to the news.

AiAmMakingAFoolOfMyself;
Liberals may be too evil for your tastes, but at least they didn't blame George Bush Sr. for the World Trade Center bomb.

Billy;
I never said that Clinton was responsible for the first Trade Center Bombing. I said that it was Osama, and Clinton did nothing about it for the remaining 7 years of his term. There were other attacks against the US during Clinton's watch and he did nothing. Oh yeah, I almost forgot, he told GW that Osama is a terrorist. That was a big help. :kookoo:

Oh, by the way. There are plenty of Liberal sources claiming that the Attacks on 9-11 were Bush's fault.

AiHaveReallyLostThePointOfThisDebate;
There was not one insinuation that Bush Sr. was a criminal. After all, he had only been out of office only [six weeks when THAT went down.

Billy;
Uh, what's your point?

AiWonderIfICanGetMyEntireFootIntoMyMouth;
I wonder how long it would take for the terrorists to scope out their target, pick and groom their operatives, get the money, make that bomb and set it off?

Billy;
What are you trying to say? Try taking that foot out of your mouth, sober up, hide the crack pipe and turn off the Cartoon Channel.

AiLearnedToCountWatchingSesameStreet;
Maybe, uh, seven weeks? It's a good thing they didn't do it in a record five, huh?

Billy;
You are insane.

 

[BillyBob]

Clinton Let Bin Laden Slip Away and Metastasize


By MANSOOR IJAZ
President Clinton and his national security team ignored several opportunities to capture Osama bin Laden and his terrorist associates, including one as late as last year.

I know because I negotiated more than one of the opportunities.

From 1996 to 1998, I opened unofficial channels between Sudan and the Clinton administration. I met with officials in both countries, including Clinton, U.S. National Security Advisor Samuel R. "Sandy" Berger and Sudan's president and intelligence chief. President Omar Hassan Ahmed Bashir, who wanted terrorism sanctions against Sudan lifted, offered the arrest and extradition of Bin Laden and detailed intelligence data about the global networks constructed by Egypt's Islamic Jihad, Iran's Hezbollah and the Palestinian Hamas.

Among those in the networks were the two hijackers who piloted commercial airliners into the World Trade Center.

The silence of the Clinton administration in responding to these offers was deafening.

As an American Muslim and a political supporter of Clinton, I feel now, as I argued with Clinton and Berger then, that their counter-terrorism policies fueled the rise of Bin Laden from an ordinary man to a Hydra-like monster.

Realizing the growing problem with Bin Laden, Bashir sent key intelligence officials to the U.S. in February 1996.

The Sudanese offered to arrest Bin Laden and extradite him to Saudi Arabia or, barring that, to "baby-sit" him--monitoring all his activities and associates.

But Saudi officials didn't want their home-grown terrorist back where he might plot to overthrow them.

In May 1996, the Sudanese capitulated to U.S. pressure and asked Bin Laden to leave, despite their feeling that he could be monitored better in Sudan than elsewhere.

Bin Laden left for Afghanistan, taking with him Ayman Zawahiri, considered by the U.S. to be the chief planner of the Sept. 11 attacks; Mamdouh Mahmud Salim, who traveled frequently to Germany to obtain electronic equipment for Al Qaeda; Wadih El-Hage, Bin Laden's personal secretary and roving emissary, now serving a life sentence in the U.S. for his role in the 1998 U.S. embassy bombings in Tanzania and Kenya; and Fazul Abdullah Mohammed and Saif Adel, also accused of carrying out the embassy attacks.

Some of these men are now among the FBI's 22 most-wanted terrorists.

The two men who allegedly piloted the planes into the twin towers, Mohamed Atta and Marwan Al-Shehhi, prayed in the same Hamburg mosque as did Salim and Mamoun Darkazanli, a Syrian trader who managed Salim's bank accounts and whose assets are frozen.

Important data on each had been compiled by the Sudanese.

But U.S. authorities repeatedly turned the data away, first in February 1996; then again that August, when at my suggestion Sudan's religious ideologue, Hassan Turabi, wrote directly to Clinton; then again in April 1997, when I persuaded Bashir to invite the FBI to come to Sudan and view the data; and finally in February 1998, when Sudan's intelligence chief, Gutbi al-Mahdi, wrote directly to the FBI.

Gutbi had shown me some of Sudan's data during a three-hour meeting in Khartoum in October 1996. When I returned to Washington, I told Berger and his specialist for East Africa, Susan Rice, about the data available. They said they'd get back to me. They never did. Neither did they respond when Bashir made the offer directly. I believe they never had any intention to engage Muslim countries--ally or not. Radical Islam, for the administration, was a convenient national security threat.

And that was not the end of it. In July 2000--three months before the deadly attack on the destroyer Cole in Yemen--I brought the White House another plausible offer to deal with Bin Laden, by then known to be involved in the embassy bombings. A senior counter-terrorism official from one of the United States' closest Arab allies--an ally whose name I am not free to divulge--approached me with the proposal after telling me he was fed up with the antics and arrogance of U.S. counter-terrorism officials.

The offer, which would have brought Bin Laden to the Arab country as the first step of an extradition process that would eventually deliver him to the U.S., required only that Clinton make a state visit there to personally request Bin Laden's extradition. But senior Clinton officials sabotaged the offer, letting it get caught up in internal politics within the ruling family--Clintonian diplomacy at its best.

Clinton's failure to grasp the opportunity to unravel increasingly organized extremists, coupled with Berger's assessments of their potential to directly threaten the U.S., represents one of the most serious foreign policy failures in American history.

*

Mansoor Ijaz, a member of the Council on Foreign Relations, is chairman of a New York-based investment company.