MiddleEast ALWAYS at war! Mohammad violent SINFUL Murderer! Jesus Healed/Blessed/ Peace/Salvation/GOD! All MUSLIMS who converted to Christianity ARE HAPPY/FREE OF ABUSE/MISERY! Your leaders are killing you! All Christians LOVE YOU! PLEASE accept JESUS CHRIST as your SAVIOR! John 3:16 He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life: and he that believeth not the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him! PLEASE REBEL/ACCEPT JESUS! Be free of this horror! Visit wlix radio.com
keith ellison is former member (and still supporter) of the very racist "nation of islam" group and puts the koran above the American Constitution and other founding documents as he has stated.
Charles, I'd like to recommend again the James Fallows article on the war on terror, in the Sept. 06 issue of the Atlantic. "Declaring Victory: a New Strategy for the Fight Against Terror." I don't know if you can get it on-line, you may have to go to a library, but it's worth it. Check it out, and let me know what you think.
SL 2: That quote from was taken from "The Life of Saint Louis" by Jean de Joinville, who was a friend of Louis and fought with him in the Crusades. I read it a while back, remembered being shocked by it, and went back to the book this afternoon to check the quote. So should we be suspicious of all Catholics because they continue to deify a man with such an obvious taste for violence? Wouldn't that be an absurd thing to argue?
This is similar to the literalism debate. Quotes such as that were not out of the moral standard of the day. Muhamad was a ordinary 7th century warlord, but the idea of his example being the literal right from wrong for all times along with the quranic literalism has produced societies virtually unchanged since then.
Christianity does not have a perfect history but there is a fundemental difference between it and Islam. Something like 70% of the violence in the world today is caused by Muslims.
I'm not sure where you get your figures from. "90% of the world's press" "80% of American mosques" "70% of the world's violence." I'm not sure it's even possible to measure such things. Hundreds of thousands have died in the Congo these past years-the world hardly notices. Chinese campaigns against Tibet, the civil war in Nepal, drug wars in Columbia, insurgency in Peru, Tamil war in Sri Lanka, massive gang violence in Brazil etc. etc. etc. How can any accurately measure all that?
Your right, it was something I heard and wasn't too sure of the exact number. But there are a billion something muslims and basically everywhere they live they are fighting somebody, Palestine, Kashmir, Sudan, Thailand, France, Chechnya, Nigeria, ivory coast, Afghanistan, Phillipeans, Indonesia, Turkey/Greece, Kosovo, Papua New Guinea, Chad etc.
Charles, we can go round and round like this forever, I'm not sure to what purpose. Tell you what. I'll read one of Robert Spencer's books say, if you read James Carroll's "Constantine's Sword" and the James Fallows article in the Atlantic I keep mentioning. We can meet on this thread in 2 months (I have lots of work I should be doing too!) March 11, and compare notes. Deal?
Charles-I imagine if I googled long enough I'd be able to find at least one crusader, or some other Christian of another era, quoting that phrase of the Bible to justify killing. Like I said, people will use anything to justify their actions. Certainly, Pope Urban's call for the First Crusade is filled with Scriptural quotes, and the Book of Joshua was used to justify crusaders slaughtering women and children after cities had been taken. A crusader slogan was "Deus vult1" ("God wills it!")
The idea of liberating the Holy Land is distinct from killing any non-believer. The pope also condemned the atrocities against the jews by crusaders. You really won't find anyone quoting that line and mainstream christians have never interpreted it to be an invitation to kill. Mainstream Islam, however, does take chapter 9 and Allah's commands to kill.
I posted this before, I think, but I don't see it. The Crusaders cited Joshua, chapter six, 17-21, to justify slaughtering civilians, women and children included, even after cities had surrendered. Joshua 6:21 was used to kill "by the edge of the sword all in the city, both men and women, young and old." I know it's Old Testament, but it was used by Christians to justify slaughter.
Joshua is about the caananites fighting the israelis I think. Not a open command to commit violence or kill non-believers. Maybe if you were a caananite, but even then, there is no command here.
Charles, do you know what "Convivencia" means? It refers to Spain before the Christian reconquest. This was the time when Maimonides, the great Jewish philosopher, lived. Ruled by Muslims, Spain at that time was a thriving community of Jews, Muslims, and Christians. It wasn't until the "reconquista" by Christian monarchs that all Jews-and Muslims-were expelled from Spain.
Again, I believe this a a rewriting of History, mainly by protestants in their day to try and convert away catholics. Terrible things were done, but its recognized now that all the figures were overblown and that idea of peaceful muslim rule wasnt so much.
Sorry to butt in, BUT-- It is absolutely NOT a rewriting of history. The royal decree from Fernando and Isabel gave non-Christians a succinct choice: 1)Convert to Christianity, or 2) Leave Spain. Many converted (many falsely). Many left. Cont-
Where did they go? To Muslim countries, which is why you find TO THIS DAY large Jewish communities in Tangier, Cairo, and Istanbul. These are the so-called "Sephardic Jews." The Jews enjoyed FAR more religious freedom in Muslim Spain than in Christian Spain, at least in that supposedly more barbaric era.
Read how Islamic law treats Christians and Jews living under it. Read Bat Ye'or's books. More people are killed by Islamist every year than in the 350 years of Spanish Inquisition.
I am. Read Abu Yusuf's 8th-cen. KITAB AL-KHARADJ (BOOK OF TAXES). Money quote: "If you take the poll tax from them, you have no claim on them or rights over them...do not enslave them and do not let the Muslims oppose them or harm them or devour their property except as permitted." It was rarely permitted. The Jews had a "Golden Age" in Muslim Spain, abruptly ended by the Christian Reconquista.
If you are reading Abu Yusuf and think his message is one of tolleance and respect for all religions than you are nuts. Move to Saudi Arabia. Read about what he say about war too, even more good stuff.
If you think that what the Roman Catholic popes and bishops were saying in that era was tolerance for other religions, then YOU are nuts. It was every bit as bad and militaristic.
It is undeniable that the Jews were FAR, FAR better off under the Muslims in Spain than under the Christians, who forced them to convert or expelled them.
No, they weren't as bad. Your relativism is ridiculous. Besides what theological basis does being "militaristic" and hating jews have? With Christians it was a matter of power. The Quran equates Jews to apes and pigs on a few occasions and all major schools of Islamic jurisprudence teach war to bring the world under Islamic law.
Yes, they were just as bad or worse in many cases. The Jews had FAR, FAR more freedom under the Muslims than under the Christians then. They claim biblical basis for this. Your prejudice is ridiculous, charlesmartel3. Muslims, as a whole, do NOT believe in aggressive, preemptive war to spread their religion.
There is no theological basis for hating Jews or being militaristic in Christianity. In Islam there is a well established theology, doctrine and law mandating war against non-believers.
According to many denominations, there IS Biblical basis for militarism. There are many interpretations of the KORAN. It is undeniable that the Jews of Spain were FAR, FAR better off under the Muslims than under the Christians. The historical evidence does not single out Muslims as being the only religious conquistadores. Review the history of Christianity.
HAHAHA sure you are. Pick up some of the mainstream scholars of Islam writings to learn about how they teach warfare to spread Islamic law over the world.
"Jane S. Gerber is (2003) Professor of Jewish History and Director of the Institute for Sephardic Studies at the Graduate Center of the City University of New York. She is the author of numerous books and articles on the history of Sephardic and Middle Eastern Jewry including The Jews of Spain, which won the National Jewish Book Award in Sephardic Studies in 1993. She is past President of the Association for Jewish Studies..." Mainstream enough for you, charlesmartel3? Ha-ha.
Spencer doesn't argue based upon his credentials, and neither do I. My commentary is based upon what the scholars of Islam say and teach. Yours are based on some encyclopedia written by western types who certainly suffer from the RoP delusion.
JFK pt. 1: "Fear of Catholics was based in bigotry" is exactly right. But the people who expressed this fear used pretty much the same arguments then that you use against Muslims now. For instance, you say you can't be a Muslim and share Am. values "unless you're willing to reform" Islam. JFK ran prior to the major reforms of Vatican II. He never said anything about "reforming" Catholicism.
There was never anything political about catholism or catholic doctrine. So as an elected official, the worry was that he would not respect the constitutoin and take orders from the pope. Here, we have Ellison with his political religion insisting on the quran. Why wouldn't he take orders from that book?
I doubt Ellison "takes orders" from the Quran, just as I doubt Goode "takes orders" from the Bible. Anyway, as long as our elected leaders obey the laws of the nation and swear allegiance to the Constitution, I think where they go for religious or spiritual guidance is their own business. I still don't see why Muslims should be held to any standard-higher or lower-than any other politician.
Its not a different standard I am arguing for. If a mormon ran for office we should ask him if he wanted to introduce polygamy. And even then, if goode obeys the bible bad things won't happen, if ellison does than he would be striving for sharia.
pt. 6: Put it this way:it was one thing, in the context of 1960, to ask JFK about his loyalty to Rome, as ignorant as that might sound today. But it would have been far worse to write a letter implying that Catholics can't be good citizens, or are inherently alien to American values, and then cry foul when called on it. Can't you see the difference there?
Not quite because that fear of Catholics was based in bigotry, whereas there are legitimate questions to ask all Muslims who want to come to this country or serve in government.
JFK 2:a central tenet of Catholicism is the Pope's infallibility. Pope Gregory XVI declared the idea of "liberty of conscience" to be "false and absurd." He said "liberty of the press" was "the most dangerous liberty" which "can never inspire sufficient horror." Isn't that antiAmerican values? Then why not ask every Catholic coming into the country "legitimate questions" about his or her allegiance to the Pope?
Fine ask about allegiance to the Pope, because this is not a political allegiance. Remember, the most famous advocate of "separation of church and state" is Christ himself. "Render therefore unto Caesar the things which are Caesar's; and unto God the things that are God's", "My kingdom is not of this world..." etc.
Didn't Christ also say, "Do not think I have come to bring peace to the earth:I have not come to bring peace, but a sword"? Anyway, of course allegiance to the Pope is spiritual, not political, at least it is for the vast majority of American Catholics. That's my point. The same is true for the vast majority of American Muslims, and to assume something different just because they're Muslim is bias. That's why Goode's letter was so offensive.
Yes but if you read after that it looks like hed want us to kill our own family. That verse and completely symbolic, but more importantly, no crusader has ever quoted that or used it to justify killing, whereas everyday Muslims act out 9:5,9:29.
You say this part of the Gospel is meant to be taken symbolically, and I agree. But aren't there Muslims who say that difficult parts of the Koran are also meant as allegory? Why shouldn't they be allowed the same sort of "poetic license" as Christians?
You see thats exactly what I am arguing for. Unfortunately quranic literalism is absolutely supreme. All the major schools of jurisprudence teach it strictly. Rejection of quranic literalism is one step we need to moderate Islam.
Okay, so it sounds like what you're saying is that the problem isn't Islam or the Koran as such, so much as Islamic fundamentalism with its strict, literal intepretations. I can accept that. I've heard of Islamic scholars make the same argument, trying to counteract the more conservative teachings. I've also heard that the American community is at the forefront of that effort(which is why bin Laden counts them as infidels).
Well, Islam is the problem because the mainstream of it is "strict, literal interpretations". Someday, hopefully, Islam can be transformed so that the guys we call "radicals" really are radical. Untill then there really is no hope for peaceful coexistance.
SL 1: "So I tell you, that no one, unless he is an expert...should venture to argue with these people [Jews]. But a layman, whenever he hears the Christian religion abused, should not attempt to defend its tenets except with his sword, and that he should thrust into the scoundrel's belly as far as it will enter." Saint Louis.
Spencer pt. 2: There are lots of reasons for my impression of Spencer-guilt by association being one. But my first and easiest objection to explain is that Spencer misrepresents both what Goode wrote, and why people are responding in the way they have. He (and you, in previous posts) want to turn this into an issue of "political correctness" when that isn't the case at all.
Spencer part 1: these posts are in response to charlemartel's request that I read the R. Spencer article on Goode/Ellison, which I did. It'll take more than 500 cts. to respond. Sorry Charles, but after reading Spencer, and re-reading the Goode letter, I have to say I'm not impressed by either.
In 1945, a young girl named Katu Lata Kulu came over to America in a grey boat from Africa. A mysterious man killed her by cutting the word "LATUALATUKA" into her back. Now that you have read this message, she will come to your house on a full moon and steal your soul unless you follow these directions:
1. Retype this message as a comment for 3 other videos
It looks like Rep. Dennis Kucinich of Ohio's 10th is mending some fences, or poking the tiger, depending on your viewpoint. We need for these guys to cut the sh*t and go to work. There are far better things to discuss in Congress than disagreements about religion.
The liberal media including some of Fox News shepard the liberal Smith is hammering the citizens each day with bad is good hate-talk disquised as news. The focus is always on humanism and celebrity. To me, that is hate talk because it takes the focus off of Jesus Christ.
I challenge anyone to a debate on the goodness of Jesus! Thank God at least Bush is still in the White House to counter the liberals. This signing in with a Koran was just another charade to get the focus off Islama Facism.
You have it...I fully beleive that Jesus was a Sinner, and that came from the moment he was born. In fact, Bush is a man who represents the highest expectations of christians and that is nothing less than the destruction of Planet Earth so we may finally have Judgement Day and enter Heaven.
Liberals only care about advancing their own power. They are corrupt, incompetent, and can only win elections because of the media. If you notice, Democrats never forwarded a positive plan this past election. It was always "Bush is dumb" or "Bush is evil".
I love being a liberal....if nothing else. to hear you conservatives whine about losing. Grow up-YOU LOST! Deal with it. Now maybe we can get out of this misguided war in Iraq, increase the minimum wage, reform health care, and re-establish our credibility in the eyes of the world. LIBERALS!!!!
Increase the minimum wage? Great. You volunteering to pay for that? Health care? Great. You volunteering to pay for that? You mean please the backward socialist hell holes like France, Germany, and Russia with their 25% unemployment? No thanks.
When you have the CEO of Goldman Sachs(one of my company's clients) receiving a 55 million dollar bonus, I don't thing raising the minimum wage is going to hurt the system of capitalism in America. I also live in Mpls, proudly cast my vote for Keith Ellisonl, and am very proud to see him as the first Muslim in congress.
Only 2% of workers make minimum wage and they are mostly teenagers. The truth is minimum wage hurts the poor people. Its a price control saying you can't employ below this level. Increases unemployment and increases inflation, both hurting mostly the poor. Its really a politician's issue, it just gets votes. And I am definetly no CEO.
Goldman Sachs had an incredible year. The CEO earned his bonus. But when you raise the minimum wage, you are asking business owners, both large and small to swallow the cost. They can't. They'll have to lay off workers. Damn, I wish liberals could all get a course in basic economics.
I'll pay for national health care, no problem. Now, about this billion $ a week Iraq war: are you willing to see your taxes raised for that? During WWII taxes went up, gas was rationed, and we had a draft. FDR told us: "Taxes and bonds, bonds and taxes" and all 4 of his sons served. Bush tells us "Go shopping" while his kids party in Argentina. As for Germany being a "hell hole," right now I'd take Berlin over New Orleans. Last time I saw it the Potsdammerplatz was jumping!
No, FEMA and the bush admin are why people got screwed. We've seen it in iraq and we see it at home. Repugs ruin everything and never progress. Thats why they are known as regressives.
Invading Iraq had nothing to do with retaliating for 9-11 or protecting the US from a future attack. It's as if the US invaded Spain after Pearl Harbor. Check out "Declaring Victory" by James Fallows in the Sept. 2006 issue of the Atlantic, on why attacking Iraq was exactly the wrong thing to do. But from your comments about "liberal hell holes" and such I guess your mind is pretty closed.
Iraq made perfect sense to attack. Saddam was a patron of international terrorism; he paid the families of suicide bombers. He always had had plans to develop nuclear weaponry as soon as he could, and he was openly hostile to the U.S. calling for more attacks just like the one on 9-11. Plus Iraq was the preeminent Arab power in the middle east. Going after Iraq made perfect sense. And you know what? It's working. No attacks since 9-11.
No attacks since 9/11? Why does everyone forget the biological attack on DC politicians and US media happened after 9/11? Many people died from this terrorism. Convenient memory lapse...
There has been other acts of terrorism, but the perpetrators aren't Muslim, so no one cares. But this war isn't about terrorism; it's about bigots' fear of the brown hoard.
That's right, biological weapons of mass destruction released into our postal system to attack American politicians and media figures couldn't possibly be an act of terrorism.
That's two stupid comments and one false comment from you. Consider yourself on my ignore list. Your comments are low-hanging fruit and a waste of my time. That is, unless you decide to join the rest of us in reality.
Honestly, that comment about the brown hoard is a typical libral tactic designed to stifile free debate. How much have you read about Islamic terrorism? Have you even read the Quran?
I don't care about the Koran. I care about religious nutjobs that want to destroy the American way of life. That includes Bin Laden and anyone else like him.
Than please don't call me ignorant when you refuse to read the book that all our enemies read, cite and try and emulate. Everywere Muslims border non-muslims there is war. Just a few examples...Palestine, Kashmir, Sudan, Thiland, France, chechnya, nigeria, ivory coast, Afganistan, Phillipeans, Indonesia, Turkey/Greece, Kosovo, Papua New Guinea, Chad etc.
The difference is that this is a long war. We don't win this by producing the most amount of tanks. A strong economy BECAUSE of the tax cuts has brought in the money to cut the deficit even with Iraq. We also have a volunteer military now.
I'm sorry but The economy is doing very well and the military is more educated than ever. The average soldier is more educated than the average civilian his age.
When Bush took office in Jan 2001, the Dow was 10881. On Friday, the Dow closed at 12398. On average, that's a 2.0% annual increase, less than annual inflation. That Bush economy is dyn-o-mite!!!
Yes, dumb shit, but Bush inherited an economy that was on it's way down, then we had Clinton's 9-11, then a few corporate collapses due to crooked bookkeeping started during the Clinton administration. A more accurate view would be to judge the DOW between 2002 and now.
The con-tards don't understand basic economics. The dow doesn't mean the economy is dynomite. Its the economy as a whole.
Clinton grew the economy mor ant ANY other president in History.
Bush just ruined EVERYTHING and allowed 9/11 to happen when he was on vacation for 3 months before it.
Its also now been proven that 9/11 was planned ALL under bushs watch. Read the 9/11 report its eye opening to the failure of the "Father of 9/11" aka bush
You have already proven you know nothing about economics. In spite of 9/11, Afghanistan, Iraq, Katrina, Enron, anthrax mail, etc. its a strong economy. Read some Milton Friedman and less Karl Marx.
I posted this above, but it's worth repeating. Check out the article by James Fallows in the Sept. 2006 issue of the Atlantic, on why invading Iraq has actually hurt American interests and security. As for the deficit being cut-we had projected surplusses until Bush took office. Anyway, check out the Fallows piece, and see what you think.
Let me second the Fallows article. A very cognizant look at the War on Terror. Anyone who's interested in this issue should check out that article. Lays out why we should have our few Arabic translators working on terrorist communications instead of painting schools and building sewers in Iraq.
Projected surpluses that never would have happened because the economy took a turn down before Clinton left office. I am not arguing the benefits of Iraq here, we wont know that for 20 or more years.
Sticking with Rome just a sec., have you read anything by Marcus Borg? And I've already mentioned James Carroll. Carroll says it's impossible to understand Christianity unless you understand how brutal Rome was to the vast underclass. (He also says that antiSemitism is inherent in how Christianity evolved-thus responsible for the Holocaust). Parts of his book drag some, and I don't buy it all, but you might find it interesting.
Jesus was a Jew. The Quran call Jews "apes and pigs". Antisemitism is wrong, but it wasn't born out of Christianity. And I would fight and die for Israel, our best ally, if she was ever threatened.
SuperKooter - You crazy libtard. Is there anything more obscene than being lectured to on morals by a libera? Ha! Foley and Haggard didn't do anything that isn't done every single night in gay bars all over the country. And you libtards love it!
more white, heterosexual, conservative so-called christians showing their true racist and anti amierican colors. freedom of fucking religion you cock sucking mother fuckers.
Thats my Congressman! Thats my Boy From Minnesota...Got to Represent...Belive me people when I say this guy doesn't mean any harm, he is very politicaly gifted and just happens to be a different religion. Don't believe the media, he is truely the opposite of what they are trying to portray him as now.
I get so damned sick and tired of the left vilifying any conservative who doesn't toe the ridiculous PC line they set. It is nothing but pure politics with these people. Yet Democrats can say anything they want to without repercussions. A few years ago Robert Byrd even said the word "nigger". Can you imagine a Republican saying that? Hell, he'd be run out of town on a rail. The Left criticizes without even analyzing the gist of what people say.
Oh yeah the Muslims are coming!! paranoia, run to the panic room!! P-LEASEEE, you have been watching 'Planet of the aaaaarabs" since kids (look it up on here or gglevid)
I would love a mosque in my neighborhood! matter-of-factly this is what "red" america needs, to give up delusions of superiority and humble down equally to the rest of the world. give up double edgedness and give up all badly ingrained traits in this not so model society.
i meant to say, look up "planet of the arabs" a short video on how muslims have been portrayed for decades in the media here, based on the book by the same title....
sorry but that bitch singing heaven on other video go to x factor or pop idol bitch u suck lets alll raise money and buy every one in armed forces a fuckin new house
see the coooooooooooooooooolessssssssssssssst fuckin nnnn viseo ON YOU TUBE ON MY CHANNNNELLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLL ITZ CALLES CRAZY ILLUSIONNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN
Ellison have behaved admirably, however there are legitimate questions surrounding him. He has ties to CAIR and former ones to the Muslim Brotherhood, both organizations have connections to terrorists. Even liberal Sen. Boxer is on to CAIR.
It's not that hes a bad guy, the problem is what he stands for, because we just don't know(and everyone is too scared to ask him, god forbid we offend someone).
Americans have been fed such garbage with regards to Islam that even an American who gets elected to Congress is viewed as "suspicious" because he is a Muslim. This is not the mark of a "great nation". Looks more like a declining nation to me.
I'm a conservative and I'm sickened by Virgil Goode. I don't agree with Keith Ellison's political views, but that's okay in America. Also, if Keith Ellison wants to swear his oath with his hand on the Koran, more power to him!
Don't be sickened. -Ellsion has connections to the Muslim Brotherhood, Cair and possibly other groups with terrorists ties. Islamic law is not compatible with western style democracy. Raising tough unPC questions is good, conservative, and not sickening.
Charlesmartel (interesting handle!), please post some documentation for these allegations, that is, citations to specific articles and authors with credible and detailed proof of these charges about the Congressman. Generally, when making attacks like this it's best to include some reference, otherwise it just looks like ranting.
Thanks for speaking up. I have no problem with Christians, Jews, Muslims, Hindus, athiests, or anyone else in public life, as long as they're willing to abide by the Constitution. To me, that's the only "reigious" test that matters.
I agree with that. But that is why it is not bigoted or hateful to ask Ellison or Muslims if they are in favor of Sharia law. In the PC age, we are too afraid of offending anyone to do so.
Hitler was raised by a Christian family, however, he became nonreligious as he grew older. Even he grew nonreligious, many Christian values were already implanted in his brain.
Which christian values did Hitler exert? You are knowledgeable about what was planted in his brain? The only thing I'm certain of is the bullet that was implanted there when my country defeated him.
So you're from Russia? I thought Hitler committed suicide because the Russians were within a block of his bunker. Churchill wrote that D-Day would never have succeeded if the Russians hadn't first "torn the guts" out of the German military. Anyway, Hitler's main "Christian value" was antiSemitism. Read James Carroll's "Constantine's Sword" for the details.
I didn't mean to discredit Russia, merely to instill a little pride in our own civilization. It's also good to note that we funded Russia and they probably would have quit without it.
I don't know if the Russians would have quit-Hitler wanted to exterminate their culture branch and root so what choice did they have but to keep fighting? But they might have lost, and so yes, the US role was crucial in destroying the Axis, no doubt about it. FDR, for all his flaws, was a consumate leader. I just wish we had someone today of his caliber, (not to mention Abraham Lincoln). The USA has been so blessed with the right person at the right time. Hopefully, it'll happen again.
There Germans became open to a cease-fire on the eastern front. This was one of America's biggest fear because going against Hitler alone would have been beyond difficult, maybe impossible.
The first power to come to terms with the Nazi government was the Vatican. There was also a pro-Nazi Christian church ("the German Christians")-though to be fair there was also anti-Nazi activism among both Cathlics and Protestants. Anyway, I think it's a distortion to call Hitler a "Christian."
Progress is being made. Regardless of intolerance and bigotry, the world will progress. I hope America gets the true liberty it deserves - liberty from the thought controlling media.
I like Elllison. He's a very good communciator- I've seen him on Glenn Beck and Wolf Blitzer. The guy is intelligent and witty unlike many politicans. Goode is ignorant and the best way to deal with ignorance like Ellison showed was with a smile.
Hey octo, where have you been? Haven't seen you around since before the election. Jeez, I'm beginning to feel like such an oldtimer here. Anyway, let's keep an eye on ALL politicians. They're supposed to be working for us, after all.
Jihadists like Osama bin Laden have a lot in common with America's snake-handlers. Both believe that prayer should be in schools and evolution out, birth control is evil, the earth is 6000 years old, women should be subordinate to men, and that US culture should be purged of its sexual nature. They only difference is that the Islamic fundamentalists have to pray 5 times a day, whereas the evangelicals speak in tongues. They're cut from the same cloth, and both are a threat to American liberty.
Yeah, those snake handlers have really killed a lot of innocent people lately, huh? Snake handlers are the same as islamists? I guess so, in liberal bizarro world...
Osama has alot more in common with Christian fundamentalists and thats not even being inflammatory - thats a straight fact. Neither have anything in common with liberals (aka educated in western tradition).
anti-gay, anti-women, anti-secularism, anti-evolution, anti-American popular culture, anti-choice, pro-state sponsored prayer, pro-religious indoctrination, pro-sectarian government, pro-fundamentalism. Osama's agenda is indistinguishable from Pat Robertson's, Jerry Falwell's, or Eric Rudolph's.
No, but if I had a lesbian daughter, Eric Rudolph would blow her up to bits, and Rev Fred Phelps would protest at her funeral. All because teh gay is prohibited by the Bible. Don't pretend that there aren't Christian terrorists; there are crazy people everywhere. And they'll kill for their religion, just like bin Laden
Eric Rudolph killed homosexuals for simply being openly gay. But I'm sure it's just a coincidence that he happened to believe that the entire Bible is the Word of God, except for Lev 20:13. I'm sure he thought that that particular passage was just "poetic license".
You see that's the point. Christians don't believe that the bible is the literal word of god(gospel according to mark etc.) The new testament overrides the Old so that Christians can say that killing gays is wrong. Where as Islam has yet to reform so that its people don't follow chapter 9.
Anyone who believes that killing people for their religious beliefs, be it establishing the Caliphate or bringing on the second coming of Jesus, is by definition insane. Attacking Americans for embracing American values is insane. This includes the maniacs who perpetrated 9/11 and Eric Rudolph who blew people up because he hates gays, abortion, and multiculturalism.
The FBI even released a report a few months ago concluding that suicide bombers were rational followers of their religion. This is the problem. They are not insane, they are following chapter 9 of the quran, what they believe to be the last word of Allah.
I'm sorry, but taking every last word in any holy text, be it the Bible or the Koran, as the literal Word of God and that it commands you to kill innocents is insane. The FBI may think they're acting rationally, but my guess is that the the FBI is arguing that within their insane worldview, these people happen to acting rationally. Would you suggest such a person is sane?
Muslims believe the Quran to be the literal word of god in which Allah protected it throughout history from change and is a perfect copy of one in heaven.
I don't think Muslims are insane, but this is a central part of their religion.
You are misunderstanding me. I don't think muslims are insane for believing the Koran is the literal word of God anymore than Christians who believe the same about the Bible. Here's my point; I think any religious fundamentalist who believes that their religion justifies killing innocents is insane. This includes Muslim suicide bombers AND Christians who blow the heads off of doctors with high powered sniper rifles or put TNT wrapped with nails to kill women walking into abortion clinics.
Right, But the connection you, and most of the world, are unable to make is that when the quran is literally interpreted, it can inspire suicide bombing, as the FBI report found out. Listen to the words of the terrorists themselves, they liberally quote the quran and hadith. And they recruit by saying,"look,read here. This is what allah wants."
Revelation 22:18-20 says if anyone adds or subtracts or in any way changes "this book" God "will add to that person the plagues described in this book" which are pretty severe, as I recall. There is a range of Muslim thinking just as there is a range of Christian thinking, some are fundamentalists, many aren't. It sounds like you already know this, but I wanted to be sure.
This has been flagged as spam show
MiddleEast ALWAYS at war! Mohammad violent SINFUL Murderer! Jesus Healed/Blessed/ Peace/Salvation/GOD! All MUSLIMS who converted to Christianity ARE HAPPY/FREE OF ABUSE/MISERY! Your leaders are killing you! All Christians LOVE YOU! PLEASE accept JESUS CHRIST as your SAVIOR! John 3:16 He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life: and he that believeth not the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him! PLEASE REBEL/ACCEPT JESUS! Be free of this horror! Visit wlix radio.com
tigersforchrist 10 months ago
i ask people who comment here :
why are trying to turn every debates to religion , hate or other things ?
morchid 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
budavol
4/04/06 Videos Spammed: 25,492 !!!
budavo(i)1
3/14/07 Videos Spammed: 625
budavol1
3/14/07 Videos Spammed: 1,813
purplehorny
Videos Watched: 10,802
Known OVER 38,719 videos SPAMMED by this brain dead pro terrorist Soros paid MoveOn moron.
Help stop this stalking idiot and report this muslim mass spammer!!!
FreedomsPatriot 3 years ago
keith ellison is former member (and still supporter) of the very racist "nation of islam" group and puts the koran above the American Constitution and other founding documents as he has stated.
Huckit 5 years ago
Charles, I'd like to recommend again the James Fallows article on the war on terror, in the Sept. 06 issue of the Atlantic. "Declaring Victory: a New Strategy for the Fight Against Terror." I don't know if you can get it on-line, you may have to go to a library, but it's worth it. Check it out, and let me know what you think.
thucy2 5 years ago
SL 2: That quote from was taken from "The Life of Saint Louis" by Jean de Joinville, who was a friend of Louis and fought with him in the Crusades. I read it a while back, remembered being shocked by it, and went back to the book this afternoon to check the quote. So should we be suspicious of all Catholics because they continue to deify a man with such an obvious taste for violence? Wouldn't that be an absurd thing to argue?
thucy2 5 years ago
This is similar to the literalism debate. Quotes such as that were not out of the moral standard of the day. Muhamad was a ordinary 7th century warlord, but the idea of his example being the literal right from wrong for all times along with the quranic literalism has produced societies virtually unchanged since then.
Christianity does not have a perfect history but there is a fundemental difference between it and Islam. Something like 70% of the violence in the world today is caused by Muslims.
charlesmartel3 5 years ago
I'm not sure where you get your figures from. "90% of the world's press" "80% of American mosques" "70% of the world's violence." I'm not sure it's even possible to measure such things. Hundreds of thousands have died in the Congo these past years-the world hardly notices. Chinese campaigns against Tibet, the civil war in Nepal, drug wars in Columbia, insurgency in Peru, Tamil war in Sri Lanka, massive gang violence in Brazil etc. etc. etc. How can any accurately measure all that?
thucy2 5 years ago
Your right, it was something I heard and wasn't too sure of the exact number. But there are a billion something muslims and basically everywhere they live they are fighting somebody, Palestine, Kashmir, Sudan, Thailand, France, Chechnya, Nigeria, ivory coast, Afghanistan, Phillipeans, Indonesia, Turkey/Greece, Kosovo, Papua New Guinea, Chad etc.
charlesmartel3 5 years ago
Charles, we can go round and round like this forever, I'm not sure to what purpose. Tell you what. I'll read one of Robert Spencer's books say, if you read James Carroll's "Constantine's Sword" and the James Fallows article in the Atlantic I keep mentioning. We can meet on this thread in 2 months (I have lots of work I should be doing too!) March 11, and compare notes. Deal?
thucy2 5 years ago
Alright I'm gona try and get it. The fallows one requires 'subscription' but Ill see what I can do.
charlesmartel3 5 years ago
Charles-I imagine if I googled long enough I'd be able to find at least one crusader, or some other Christian of another era, quoting that phrase of the Bible to justify killing. Like I said, people will use anything to justify their actions. Certainly, Pope Urban's call for the First Crusade is filled with Scriptural quotes, and the Book of Joshua was used to justify crusaders slaughtering women and children after cities had been taken. A crusader slogan was "Deus vult1" ("God wills it!")
thucy2 5 years ago
The idea of liberating the Holy Land is distinct from killing any non-believer. The pope also condemned the atrocities against the jews by crusaders. You really won't find anyone quoting that line and mainstream christians have never interpreted it to be an invitation to kill. Mainstream Islam, however, does take chapter 9 and Allah's commands to kill.
charlesmartel3 5 years ago
I posted this before, I think, but I don't see it. The Crusaders cited Joshua, chapter six, 17-21, to justify slaughtering civilians, women and children included, even after cities had surrendered. Joshua 6:21 was used to kill "by the edge of the sword all in the city, both men and women, young and old." I know it's Old Testament, but it was used by Christians to justify slaughter.
thucy2 5 years ago
Joshua is about the caananites fighting the israelis I think. Not a open command to commit violence or kill non-believers. Maybe if you were a caananite, but even then, there is no command here.
charlesmartel3 5 years ago
Charles, do you know what "Convivencia" means? It refers to Spain before the Christian reconquest. This was the time when Maimonides, the great Jewish philosopher, lived. Ruled by Muslims, Spain at that time was a thriving community of Jews, Muslims, and Christians. It wasn't until the "reconquista" by Christian monarchs that all Jews-and Muslims-were expelled from Spain.
thucy2 5 years ago
Again, I believe this a a rewriting of History, mainly by protestants in their day to try and convert away catholics. Terrible things were done, but its recognized now that all the figures were overblown and that idea of peaceful muslim rule wasnt so much.
charlesmartel3 5 years ago
Sorry to butt in, BUT-- It is absolutely NOT a rewriting of history. The royal decree from Fernando and Isabel gave non-Christians a succinct choice: 1)Convert to Christianity, or 2) Leave Spain. Many converted (many falsely). Many left. Cont-
budavol 5 years ago
Where did they go? To Muslim countries, which is why you find TO THIS DAY large Jewish communities in Tangier, Cairo, and Istanbul. These are the so-called "Sephardic Jews." The Jews enjoyed FAR more religious freedom in Muslim Spain than in Christian Spain, at least in that supposedly more barbaric era.
budavol 5 years ago
Read how Islamic law treats Christians and Jews living under it. Read Bat Ye'or's books. More people are killed by Islamist every year than in the 350 years of Spanish Inquisition.
charlesmartel3 5 years ago
I am. Read Abu Yusuf's 8th-cen. KITAB AL-KHARADJ (BOOK OF TAXES). Money quote: "If you take the poll tax from them, you have no claim on them or rights over them...do not enslave them and do not let the Muslims oppose them or harm them or devour their property except as permitted." It was rarely permitted. The Jews had a "Golden Age" in Muslim Spain, abruptly ended by the Christian Reconquista.
budavol 5 years ago
If you are reading Abu Yusuf and think his message is one of tolleance and respect for all religions than you are nuts. Move to Saudi Arabia. Read about what he say about war too, even more good stuff.
charlesmartel3 5 years ago
If you think that what the Roman Catholic popes and bishops were saying in that era was tolerance for other religions, then YOU are nuts. It was every bit as bad and militaristic.
It is undeniable that the Jews were FAR, FAR better off under the Muslims in Spain than under the Christians, who forced them to convert or expelled them.
budavol 5 years ago
No, they weren't as bad. Your relativism is ridiculous. Besides what theological basis does being "militaristic" and hating jews have? With Christians it was a matter of power. The Quran equates Jews to apes and pigs on a few occasions and all major schools of Islamic jurisprudence teach war to bring the world under Islamic law.
charlesmartel3 5 years ago
Yes, they were just as bad or worse in many cases. The Jews had FAR, FAR more freedom under the Muslims than under the Christians then. They claim biblical basis for this. Your prejudice is ridiculous, charlesmartel3. Muslims, as a whole, do NOT believe in aggressive, preemptive war to spread their religion.
budavol 5 years ago
There is no theological basis for hating Jews or being militaristic in Christianity. In Islam there is a well established theology, doctrine and law mandating war against non-believers.
charlesmartel3 5 years ago
According to many denominations, there IS Biblical basis for militarism. There are many interpretations of the KORAN. It is undeniable that the Jews of Spain were FAR, FAR better off under the Muslims than under the Christians. The historical evidence does not single out Muslims as being the only religious conquistadores. Review the history of Christianity.
budavol 5 years ago 5
I never said Christians didn't fight. But there is no major sect of Christianity that teaches believers to fight unbelievers.
Did you live in Spain during the Inquisition or are you reading Britannica again?
charlesmartel3 5 years ago
But there are several denominations that approve of Christians' FIGHTING and KILLING. That is hardly morally superior.
I am currently reading THE JEWS IN SPAIN by Jane S. Gerber. You should stop by your local library and check it out, charlesmartel3.
budavol 5 years ago 3
HAHAHA sure you are. Pick up some of the mainstream scholars of Islam writings to learn about how they teach warfare to spread Islamic law over the world.
charlesmartel3 5 years ago
"Jane S. Gerber is (2003) Professor of Jewish History and Director of the Institute for Sephardic Studies at the Graduate Center of the City University of New York. She is the author of numerous books and articles on the history of Sephardic and Middle Eastern Jewry including The Jews of Spain, which won the National Jewish Book Award in Sephardic Studies in 1993. She is past President of the Association for Jewish Studies..." Mainstream enough for you, charlesmartel3? Ha-ha.
budavol 5 years ago 2
Yea I know that. If you were truly reading that you wouldn't be as illiterate as you present yourself now.
charlesmartel3 5 years ago
If you knew that, why did you speak so dismissively of that scholar, whose credentials far outnumber those of, say, Robert Spencer?
Judging by the body of your commentary, charlesmartel3, you stand on sinking sand criticizing anyone's literacy.
budavol 5 years ago 2
Spencer doesn't argue based upon his credentials, and neither do I. My commentary is based upon what the scholars of Islam say and teach. Yours are based on some encyclopedia written by western types who certainly suffer from the RoP delusion.
charlesmartel3 5 years ago
If you knew that, why did you speak so dismissively of that scholar, whose credentials far outnumber those of, say, Robert Spencer?
Judging by the body of your commentary, charlesmartel3, you stand on sinking sand criticizing anyone's literacy.
budavol 5 years ago 2
JFK pt. 1: "Fear of Catholics was based in bigotry" is exactly right. But the people who expressed this fear used pretty much the same arguments then that you use against Muslims now. For instance, you say you can't be a Muslim and share Am. values "unless you're willing to reform" Islam. JFK ran prior to the major reforms of Vatican II. He never said anything about "reforming" Catholicism.
thucy2 5 years ago
There was never anything political about catholism or catholic doctrine. So as an elected official, the worry was that he would not respect the constitutoin and take orders from the pope. Here, we have Ellison with his political religion insisting on the quran. Why wouldn't he take orders from that book?
charlesmartel3 5 years ago
I doubt Ellison "takes orders" from the Quran, just as I doubt Goode "takes orders" from the Bible. Anyway, as long as our elected leaders obey the laws of the nation and swear allegiance to the Constitution, I think where they go for religious or spiritual guidance is their own business. I still don't see why Muslims should be held to any standard-higher or lower-than any other politician.
thucy2 5 years ago
Its not a different standard I am arguing for. If a mormon ran for office we should ask him if he wanted to introduce polygamy. And even then, if goode obeys the bible bad things won't happen, if ellison does than he would be striving for sharia.
charlesmartel3 5 years ago
pt. 6: Put it this way:it was one thing, in the context of 1960, to ask JFK about his loyalty to Rome, as ignorant as that might sound today. But it would have been far worse to write a letter implying that Catholics can't be good citizens, or are inherently alien to American values, and then cry foul when called on it. Can't you see the difference there?
thucy2 5 years ago
Not quite because that fear of Catholics was based in bigotry, whereas there are legitimate questions to ask all Muslims who want to come to this country or serve in government.
charlesmartel3 5 years ago
JFK 2:a central tenet of Catholicism is the Pope's infallibility. Pope Gregory XVI declared the idea of "liberty of conscience" to be "false and absurd." He said "liberty of the press" was "the most dangerous liberty" which "can never inspire sufficient horror." Isn't that antiAmerican values? Then why not ask every Catholic coming into the country "legitimate questions" about his or her allegiance to the Pope?
thucy2 5 years ago
Fine ask about allegiance to the Pope, because this is not a political allegiance. Remember, the most famous advocate of "separation of church and state" is Christ himself. "Render therefore unto Caesar the things which are Caesar's; and unto God the things that are God's", "My kingdom is not of this world..." etc.
charlesmartel3 5 years ago
Didn't Christ also say, "Do not think I have come to bring peace to the earth:I have not come to bring peace, but a sword"? Anyway, of course allegiance to the Pope is spiritual, not political, at least it is for the vast majority of American Catholics. That's my point. The same is true for the vast majority of American Muslims, and to assume something different just because they're Muslim is bias. That's why Goode's letter was so offensive.
thucy2 5 years ago
Yes but if you read after that it looks like hed want us to kill our own family. That verse and completely symbolic, but more importantly, no crusader has ever quoted that or used it to justify killing, whereas everyday Muslims act out 9:5,9:29.
charlesmartel3 5 years ago
You say this part of the Gospel is meant to be taken symbolically, and I agree. But aren't there Muslims who say that difficult parts of the Koran are also meant as allegory? Why shouldn't they be allowed the same sort of "poetic license" as Christians?
thucy2 5 years ago
You see thats exactly what I am arguing for. Unfortunately quranic literalism is absolutely supreme. All the major schools of jurisprudence teach it strictly. Rejection of quranic literalism is one step we need to moderate Islam.
charlesmartel3 5 years ago
Okay, so it sounds like what you're saying is that the problem isn't Islam or the Koran as such, so much as Islamic fundamentalism with its strict, literal intepretations. I can accept that. I've heard of Islamic scholars make the same argument, trying to counteract the more conservative teachings. I've also heard that the American community is at the forefront of that effort(which is why bin Laden counts them as infidels).
thucy2 5 years ago
Well, Islam is the problem because the mainstream of it is "strict, literal interpretations". Someday, hopefully, Islam can be transformed so that the guys we call "radicals" really are radical. Untill then there really is no hope for peaceful coexistance.
charlesmartel3 5 years ago
SL 1: "So I tell you, that no one, unless he is an expert...should venture to argue with these people [Jews]. But a layman, whenever he hears the Christian religion abused, should not attempt to defend its tenets except with his sword, and that he should thrust into the scoundrel's belly as far as it will enter." Saint Louis.
thucy2 5 years ago
Spencer pt. 2: There are lots of reasons for my impression of Spencer-guilt by association being one. But my first and easiest objection to explain is that Spencer misrepresents both what Goode wrote, and why people are responding in the way they have. He (and you, in previous posts) want to turn this into an issue of "political correctness" when that isn't the case at all.
thucy2 5 years ago
Spencer part 1: these posts are in response to charlemartel's request that I read the R. Spencer article on Goode/Ellison, which I did. It'll take more than 500 cts. to respond. Sorry Charles, but after reading Spencer, and re-reading the Goode letter, I have to say I'm not impressed by either.
thucy2 5 years ago
Repug and cons are nazis and bigots. It is proven time and time again. They are against progress and hate anyone who isn't white and christian.
SuperKooter 5 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
In 1945, a young girl named Katu Lata Kulu came over to America in a grey boat from Africa. A mysterious man killed her by cutting the word "LATUALATUKA" into her back. Now that you have read this message, she will come to your house on a full moon and steal your soul unless you follow these directions:
1. Retype this message as a comment for 3 other videos
2. Read the message backwards out loud.
ecropp 5 years ago
It looks like Rep. Dennis Kucinich of Ohio's 10th is mending some fences, or poking the tiger, depending on your viewpoint. We need for these guys to cut the sh*t and go to work. There are far better things to discuss in Congress than disagreements about religion.
toterola451 5 years ago
The liberal media including some of Fox News shepard the liberal Smith is hammering the citizens each day with bad is good hate-talk disquised as news. The focus is always on humanism and celebrity. To me, that is hate talk because it takes the focus off of Jesus Christ.
I challenge anyone to a debate on the goodness of Jesus! Thank God at least Bush is still in the White House to counter the liberals. This signing in with a Koran was just another charade to get the focus off Islama Facism.
compassionrepublican 5 years ago
You have it...I fully beleive that Jesus was a Sinner, and that came from the moment he was born. In fact, Bush is a man who represents the highest expectations of christians and that is nothing less than the destruction of Planet Earth so we may finally have Judgement Day and enter Heaven.
rt. rev. Richard Rizer
MagickTv 5 years ago
Liberals only care about advancing their own power. They are corrupt, incompetent, and can only win elections because of the media. If you notice, Democrats never forwarded a positive plan this past election. It was always "Bush is dumb" or "Bush is evil".
fruticetum 5 years ago
Fact is,Bush is dumb! Also arrogant and a pompous ass.
chromad 5 years ago
Bush has two Ivy League degrees. What the hell do you have?
fruticetum 5 years ago
he could have 3 ivy league degrees for all anyone gives a fuck. don't mean shit. dumb turd.
tsubeta04 5 years ago
Tsubeta here sounds like an educated fella, doesn't he? LMAO.
fruticetum 5 years ago
I love being a liberal....if nothing else. to hear you conservatives whine about losing. Grow up-YOU LOST! Deal with it. Now maybe we can get out of this misguided war in Iraq, increase the minimum wage, reform health care, and re-establish our credibility in the eyes of the world. LIBERALS!!!!
thatkoolkatal 5 years ago
Increase the minimum wage? Great. You volunteering to pay for that? Health care? Great. You volunteering to pay for that? You mean please the backward socialist hell holes like France, Germany, and Russia with their 25% unemployment? No thanks.
fruticetum 5 years ago
When you have the CEO of Goldman Sachs(one of my company's clients) receiving a 55 million dollar bonus, I don't thing raising the minimum wage is going to hurt the system of capitalism in America. I also live in Mpls, proudly cast my vote for Keith Ellisonl, and am very proud to see him as the first Muslim in congress.
thatkoolkatal 5 years ago
Only 2% of workers make minimum wage and they are mostly teenagers. The truth is minimum wage hurts the poor people. Its a price control saying you can't employ below this level. Increases unemployment and increases inflation, both hurting mostly the poor. Its really a politician's issue, it just gets votes. And I am definetly no CEO.
charlesmartel3 5 years ago
Goldman Sachs had an incredible year. The CEO earned his bonus. But when you raise the minimum wage, you are asking business owners, both large and small to swallow the cost. They can't. They'll have to lay off workers. Damn, I wish liberals could all get a course in basic economics.
fruticetum 5 years ago
Theres nothing common about common sense.
charlesmartel3 5 years ago
I'll pay for national health care, no problem. Now, about this billion $ a week Iraq war: are you willing to see your taxes raised for that? During WWII taxes went up, gas was rationed, and we had a draft. FDR told us: "Taxes and bonds, bonds and taxes" and all 4 of his sons served. Bush tells us "Go shopping" while his kids party in Argentina. As for Germany being a "hell hole," right now I'd take Berlin over New Orleans. Last time I saw it the Potsdammerplatz was jumping!
thucy2 5 years ago
1. Damn straight. I'm glad to my tax money to defend our country from future 9-11s.
2. New Orleans is a liberal hell-hole, I'll give you that. The leftist leadership there is why the people are screwed.
fruticetum 5 years ago
No, FEMA and the bush admin are why people got screwed. We've seen it in iraq and we see it at home. Repugs ruin everything and never progress. Thats why they are known as regressives.
SuperKooter 5 years ago
Invading Iraq had nothing to do with retaliating for 9-11 or protecting the US from a future attack. It's as if the US invaded Spain after Pearl Harbor. Check out "Declaring Victory" by James Fallows in the Sept. 2006 issue of the Atlantic, on why attacking Iraq was exactly the wrong thing to do. But from your comments about "liberal hell holes" and such I guess your mind is pretty closed.
thucy2 5 years ago
Iraq made perfect sense to attack. Saddam was a patron of international terrorism; he paid the families of suicide bombers. He always had had plans to develop nuclear weaponry as soon as he could, and he was openly hostile to the U.S. calling for more attacks just like the one on 9-11. Plus Iraq was the preeminent Arab power in the middle east. Going after Iraq made perfect sense. And you know what? It's working. No attacks since 9-11.
fruticetum 5 years ago
No attacks since 9/11? Why does everyone forget the biological attack on DC politicians and US media happened after 9/11? Many people died from this terrorism. Convenient memory lapse...
There has been other acts of terrorism, but the perpetrators aren't Muslim, so no one cares. But this war isn't about terrorism; it's about bigots' fear of the brown hoard.
ckthomps 5 years ago
Five people died from the anthrax, dumbass, and the perpetrators were never identified. And you are trying to make this a terrorist attack?
fruticetum 5 years ago
That's right, biological weapons of mass destruction released into our postal system to attack American politicians and media figures couldn't possibly be an act of terrorism.
That's two stupid comments and one false comment from you. Consider yourself on my ignore list. Your comments are low-hanging fruit and a waste of my time. That is, unless you decide to join the rest of us in reality.
ckthomps 5 years ago
If you remember the notes those terrorists left they praised Allah. There also is Madrid bombing, London, assassinations in Europe etc.
charlesmartel3 5 years ago
Honestly, that comment about the brown hoard is a typical libral tactic designed to stifile free debate. How much have you read about Islamic terrorism? Have you even read the Quran?
charlesmartel3 5 years ago
I don't care about the Koran. I care about religious nutjobs that want to destroy the American way of life. That includes Bin Laden and anyone else like him.
ckthomps 5 years ago
Than please don't call me ignorant when you refuse to read the book that all our enemies read, cite and try and emulate. Everywere Muslims border non-muslims there is war. Just a few examples...Palestine, Kashmir, Sudan, Thiland, France, chechnya, nigeria, ivory coast, Afganistan, Phillipeans, Indonesia, Turkey/Greece, Kosovo, Papua New Guinea, Chad etc.
charlesmartel3 5 years ago
The difference is that this is a long war. We don't win this by producing the most amount of tanks. A strong economy BECAUSE of the tax cuts has brought in the money to cut the deficit even with Iraq. We also have a volunteer military now.
charlesmartel3 5 years ago
Don't forget the bush recession. Iraq IS a failure and the military is full of uneducated baby killers.
SuperKooter 5 years ago
I'm sorry but The economy is doing very well and the military is more educated than ever. The average soldier is more educated than the average civilian his age.
charlesmartel3 5 years ago
Bush recession? Are you aware the stock market is setting new records every other day? Oh, that's right. Liberals don't have any stock.
fruticetum 5 years ago
When Bush took office in Jan 2001, the Dow was 10881. On Friday, the Dow closed at 12398. On average, that's a 2.0% annual increase, less than annual inflation. That Bush economy is dyn-o-mite!!!
ckthomps 5 years ago
Yes, dumb shit, but Bush inherited an economy that was on it's way down, then we had Clinton's 9-11, then a few corporate collapses due to crooked bookkeeping started during the Clinton administration. A more accurate view would be to judge the DOW between 2002 and now.
fruticetum 5 years ago
The con-tards don't understand basic economics. The dow doesn't mean the economy is dynomite. Its the economy as a whole.
Clinton grew the economy mor ant ANY other president in History.
Bush just ruined EVERYTHING and allowed 9/11 to happen when he was on vacation for 3 months before it.
Its also now been proven that 9/11 was planned ALL under bushs watch. Read the 9/11 report its eye opening to the failure of the "Father of 9/11" aka bush
SuperKooter 5 years ago
You have already proven you know nothing about economics. In spite of 9/11, Afghanistan, Iraq, Katrina, Enron, anthrax mail, etc. its a strong economy. Read some Milton Friedman and less Karl Marx.
charlesmartel3 5 years ago
I posted this above, but it's worth repeating. Check out the article by James Fallows in the Sept. 2006 issue of the Atlantic, on why invading Iraq has actually hurt American interests and security. As for the deficit being cut-we had projected surplusses until Bush took office. Anyway, check out the Fallows piece, and see what you think.
thucy2 5 years ago
Let me second the Fallows article. A very cognizant look at the War on Terror. Anyone who's interested in this issue should check out that article. Lays out why we should have our few Arabic translators working on terrorist communications instead of painting schools and building sewers in Iraq.
ckthomps 5 years ago
Projected surpluses that never would have happened because the economy took a turn down before Clinton left office. I am not arguing the benefits of Iraq here, we wont know that for 20 or more years.
charlesmartel3 5 years ago
Sticking with Rome just a sec., have you read anything by Marcus Borg? And I've already mentioned James Carroll. Carroll says it's impossible to understand Christianity unless you understand how brutal Rome was to the vast underclass. (He also says that antiSemitism is inherent in how Christianity evolved-thus responsible for the Holocaust). Parts of his book drag some, and I don't buy it all, but you might find it interesting.
thucy2 5 years ago
Jesus was a Jew. The Quran call Jews "apes and pigs". Antisemitism is wrong, but it wasn't born out of Christianity. And I would fight and die for Israel, our best ally, if she was ever threatened.
charlesmartel3 5 years ago
you con-tards lost because you have failed the country like you did in iraq. Nothing but a bunch of racists gay childmolesters
SuperKooter 5 years ago
Sorry, friend. Most gays are Democrats. LMAO.
fruticetum 5 years ago
I'm talking about pedophiles.
Mark Foley, Ted Hagart ect. The repug party is full of dirty old pedophiles.
SuperKooter 5 years ago
SuperKooter - You crazy libtard. Is there anything more obscene than being lectured to on morals by a libera? Ha! Foley and Haggard didn't do anything that isn't done every single night in gay bars all over the country. And you libtards love it!
rockycreek 5 years ago
KEEP making excuses you morons. You're party is collapsing under its own hypocracy
SuperKooter 5 years ago
more white, heterosexual, conservative so-called christians showing their true racist and anti amierican colors. freedom of fucking religion you cock sucking mother fuckers.
summitoaks 5 years ago
And you're typical of the potty-mouthed liberal pukes. Move the hell to Cuba if you don't like true Americans.
fruticetum 5 years ago
Thats my Congressman! Thats my Boy From Minnesota...Got to Represent...Belive me people when I say this guy doesn't mean any harm, he is very politicaly gifted and just happens to be a different religion. Don't believe the media, he is truely the opposite of what they are trying to portray him as now.
chizniz16 5 years ago
Wooooo! That's my Congressman ya'll! I helped get him elected! Representin' MN! **various party-related noises** Yayus!
ectogamut 5 years ago
I get so damned sick and tired of the left vilifying any conservative who doesn't toe the ridiculous PC line they set. It is nothing but pure politics with these people. Yet Democrats can say anything they want to without repercussions. A few years ago Robert Byrd even said the word "nigger". Can you imagine a Republican saying that? Hell, he'd be run out of town on a rail. The Left criticizes without even analyzing the gist of what people say.
fruticetum 5 years ago
We have too many mosques in the US as it is! WE don't need jihadists in our own Senate!! Goddamn it People!
Wake up!!! This is insanity!
Necropolis069 5 years ago
woow typical Islamphobic lol
dahiya1 5 years ago
typical terrorist propaganda
Necropolis069 5 years ago
Oh yeah the Muslims are coming!! paranoia, run to the panic room!! P-LEASEEE, you have been watching 'Planet of the aaaaarabs" since kids (look it up on here or gglevid)
and step out of your trumman show ;)
asteroide 5 years ago
Would u like a mosque in your own neighborhood? FUCK NO right!
Necropolis069 5 years ago
I would love a mosque in my neighborhood! matter-of-factly this is what "red" america needs, to give up delusions of superiority and humble down equally to the rest of the world. give up double edgedness and give up all badly ingrained traits in this not so model society.
asteroide 5 years ago
i meant to say, look up "planet of the arabs" a short video on how muslims have been portrayed for decades in the media here, based on the book by the same title....
cheers
asteroide 5 years ago
No thanx. Down with the terrorists.
Necropolis069 5 years ago
The Muslims are coming. The jihad is getting closer.
People get ready! Be vigilant.
Necropolis069 5 years ago
see the coooooooooooooooooolessssssssssssssst fuckin nnnn viseo ON YOU TUBE ON 1MY channnnelll
{ CRAZY ILLUSION!!
100prsentHUSTLA 5 years ago
Wow! Keith Ellison is definitely the bigger MAN thand going up to Goode first... What class.
mrpunk 5 years ago
sorry but that bitch singing heaven on other video go to x factor or pop idol bitch u suck lets alll raise money and buy every one in armed forces a fuckin new house
mrEUtube 5 years ago
lol
jackmeoffpls 5 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
see the coooooooooooooooooolessssssssssssssst fuckin nnnn viseo ON YOU TUBE ON MY CHANNNNELLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLL ITZ CALLES CRAZY ILLUSIONNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN
100prsentHUSTLA 5 years ago
All religions must die.
bigboogertz 5 years ago
Kudos to Ellison...he turned the cheek!
Shapur1 5 years ago
Ellison have behaved admirably, however there are legitimate questions surrounding him. He has ties to CAIR and former ones to the Muslim Brotherhood, both organizations have connections to terrorists. Even liberal Sen. Boxer is on to CAIR.
It's not that hes a bad guy, the problem is what he stands for, because we just don't know(and everyone is too scared to ask him, god forbid we offend someone).
charlesmartel3 5 years ago
If you want to see a video that's actually funny, search for Typical Guy Converation. LUSH TV wil live on!!!!
michaelchrisjohnson 5 years ago
Go Ellison!
womfalcs7 5 years ago
Americans have been fed such garbage with regards to Islam that even an American who gets elected to Congress is viewed as "suspicious" because he is a Muslim. This is not the mark of a "great nation". Looks more like a declining nation to me.
dargay 5 years ago
I'm a conservative and I'm sickened by Virgil Goode. I don't agree with Keith Ellison's political views, but that's okay in America. Also, if Keith Ellison wants to swear his oath with his hand on the Koran, more power to him!
germrasputin 5 years ago
I don't agree with a lot of conservative ideas, but it's great that you're tolerant of other religions
ilovecomic 5 years ago
Don't be sickened. -Ellsion has connections to the Muslim Brotherhood, Cair and possibly other groups with terrorists ties. Islamic law is not compatible with western style democracy. Raising tough unPC questions is good, conservative, and not sickening.
charlesmartel3 5 years ago
Charlesmartel (interesting handle!), please post some documentation for these allegations, that is, citations to specific articles and authors with credible and detailed proof of these charges about the Congressman. Generally, when making attacks like this it's best to include some reference, otherwise it just looks like ranting.
thucy2 5 years ago
About Ellison frontpagemag*com/Articles/ReadArticle*asp?ID=26207
charlesmartel3 5 years ago
Thanks! I'll check it out.
thucy2 5 years ago
raising tough questions to our politicians? sorry buddy, no in this day and age.
rxbandit21 5 years ago
Thanks for speaking up. I have no problem with Christians, Jews, Muslims, Hindus, athiests, or anyone else in public life, as long as they're willing to abide by the Constitution. To me, that's the only "reigious" test that matters.
thucy2 5 years ago
I agree with that. But that is why it is not bigoted or hateful to ask Ellison or Muslims if they are in favor of Sharia law. In the PC age, we are too afraid of offending anyone to do so.
charlesmartel3 5 years ago
Except that Hitler wasn't Christian.
theboat22 5 years ago
Hitler was raised by a Christian family, however, he became nonreligious as he grew older. Even he grew nonreligious, many Christian values were already implanted in his brain.
womfalcs7 5 years ago
Which christian values did Hitler exert? You are knowledgeable about what was planted in his brain? The only thing I'm certain of is the bullet that was implanted there when my country defeated him.
charlesmartel3 5 years ago
So you're from Russia? I thought Hitler committed suicide because the Russians were within a block of his bunker. Churchill wrote that D-Day would never have succeeded if the Russians hadn't first "torn the guts" out of the German military. Anyway, Hitler's main "Christian value" was antiSemitism. Read James Carroll's "Constantine's Sword" for the details.
thucy2 5 years ago
I didn't mean to discredit Russia, merely to instill a little pride in our own civilization. It's also good to note that we funded Russia and they probably would have quit without it.
charlesmartel3 5 years ago
I don't know if the Russians would have quit-Hitler wanted to exterminate their culture branch and root so what choice did they have but to keep fighting? But they might have lost, and so yes, the US role was crucial in destroying the Axis, no doubt about it. FDR, for all his flaws, was a consumate leader. I just wish we had someone today of his caliber, (not to mention Abraham Lincoln). The USA has been so blessed with the right person at the right time. Hopefully, it'll happen again.
thucy2 5 years ago
There Germans became open to a cease-fire on the eastern front. This was one of America's biggest fear because going against Hitler alone would have been beyond difficult, maybe impossible.
charlesmartel3 5 years ago
Actually, he was always a Christian. His speeches and writings are full of Biblical references and justifications. Google it.
Hatalles 5 years ago
Google critical thinking, Christianity, demagogery and propaganda
a5dr3 5 years ago
Actually try and name something in the New Testament used to do evil. No German was fighting for Jesus, it was always about Hitler or the Fatherland.
charlesmartel3 5 years ago
The first power to come to terms with the Nazi government was the Vatican. There was also a pro-Nazi Christian church ("the German Christians")-though to be fair there was also anti-Nazi activism among both Cathlics and Protestants. Anyway, I think it's a distortion to call Hitler a "Christian."
thucy2 5 years ago
You wouldnt know a Christian value if it stood up in your soup.
a5dr3 5 years ago
Progress is being made. Regardless of intolerance and bigotry, the world will progress. I hope America gets the true liberty it deserves - liberty from the thought controlling media.
FatPlus1 5 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
I HAVE SEX TAPES!!SEX MY CHANNEL!!
pierdolys 5 years ago
I would rather watch Queer Massacre in America.
RedneckFromChicago23 5 years ago
Whoever wins we're all screwed
hafjapmatt 5 years ago
I figured that little twerp Kucinich would be right on Ellison's heels eager to ingratiate himself to the enemy.
ChristianGOP 5 years ago
I like Elllison. He's a very good communciator- I've seen him on Glenn Beck and Wolf Blitzer. The guy is intelligent and witty unlike many politicans. Goode is ignorant and the best way to deal with ignorance like Ellison showed was with a smile.
AlexBourbon 5 years ago
check my post on dumb americans
snow3585 5 years ago
We have plenty of dumb americans, but we have many more tolerant ones.
Sorry to disapoint you.
brownie289 5 years ago
Let's all keep an eye on this guy.
octopibingo 5 years ago
definitely...
ilovecomic 5 years ago
ok guys, you keep first watch...where's our spy equipment?
superso 5 years ago
Hey octo, where have you been? Haven't seen you around since before the election. Jeez, I'm beginning to feel like such an oldtimer here. Anyway, let's keep an eye on ALL politicians. They're supposed to be working for us, after all.
thucy2 5 years ago
Jihadists like Osama bin Laden have a lot in common with America's snake-handlers. Both believe that prayer should be in schools and evolution out, birth control is evil, the earth is 6000 years old, women should be subordinate to men, and that US culture should be purged of its sexual nature. They only difference is that the Islamic fundamentalists have to pray 5 times a day, whereas the evangelicals speak in tongues. They're cut from the same cloth, and both are a threat to American liberty.
ckthomps 5 years ago
Yeah, those snake handlers have really killed a lot of innocent people lately, huh? Snake handlers are the same as islamists? I guess so, in liberal bizarro world...
rockycreek 5 years ago
Osama has alot more in common with Christian fundamentalists and thats not even being inflammatory - thats a straight fact. Neither have anything in common with liberals (aka educated in western tradition).
superso 5 years ago
anti-gay, anti-women, anti-secularism, anti-evolution, anti-American popular culture, anti-choice, pro-state sponsored prayer, pro-religious indoctrination, pro-sectarian government, pro-fundamentalism. Osama's agenda is indistinguishable from Pat Robertson's, Jerry Falwell's, or Eric Rudolph's.
ckthomps 5 years ago
Will Pat Robertson cut your daughter's throat if you don't agree with him?
rockycreek 5 years ago
No, but if I had a lesbian daughter, Eric Rudolph would blow her up to bits, and Rev Fred Phelps would protest at her funeral. All because teh gay is prohibited by the Bible. Don't pretend that there aren't Christian terrorists; there are crazy people everywhere. And they'll kill for their religion, just like bin Laden
ckthomps 5 years ago
No where in the Bible does it say to kill gay people. Yes crazy people are everywhere, but Islamic terrorists aren't necessarily crazy.
charlesmartel3 5 years ago
Leviticus 20:13
"If a man lies with a male as with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination; they shall be put to death, their blood is upon them."
Next?
ckthomps 5 years ago
That's the old testament, I should have clarified. But most importantly you don't see Christians killing homosexuals and citing this.
charlesmartel3 5 years ago
Thanks for moving the goalposts...
Eric Rudolph killed homosexuals for simply being openly gay. But I'm sure it's just a coincidence that he happened to believe that the entire Bible is the Word of God, except for Lev 20:13. I'm sure he thought that that particular passage was just "poetic license".
ckthomps 5 years ago
You see that's the point. Christians don't believe that the bible is the literal word of god(gospel according to mark etc.) The new testament overrides the Old so that Christians can say that killing gays is wrong. Where as Islam has yet to reform so that its people don't follow chapter 9.
charlesmartel3 5 years ago
Anyone who believes that killing people for their religious beliefs, be it establishing the Caliphate or bringing on the second coming of Jesus, is by definition insane. Attacking Americans for embracing American values is insane. This includes the maniacs who perpetrated 9/11 and Eric Rudolph who blew people up because he hates gays, abortion, and multiculturalism.
ckthomps 5 years ago
The FBI even released a report a few months ago concluding that suicide bombers were rational followers of their religion. This is the problem. They are not insane, they are following chapter 9 of the quran, what they believe to be the last word of Allah.
charlesmartel3 5 years ago
I'm sorry, but taking every last word in any holy text, be it the Bible or the Koran, as the literal Word of God and that it commands you to kill innocents is insane. The FBI may think they're acting rationally, but my guess is that the the FBI is arguing that within their insane worldview, these people happen to acting rationally. Would you suggest such a person is sane?
ckthomps 5 years ago
Muslims believe the Quran to be the literal word of god in which Allah protected it throughout history from change and is a perfect copy of one in heaven.
I don't think Muslims are insane, but this is a central part of their religion.
charlesmartel3 5 years ago
You are misunderstanding me. I don't think muslims are insane for believing the Koran is the literal word of God anymore than Christians who believe the same about the Bible. Here's my point; I think any religious fundamentalist who believes that their religion justifies killing innocents is insane. This includes Muslim suicide bombers AND Christians who blow the heads off of doctors with high powered sniper rifles or put TNT wrapped with nails to kill women walking into abortion clinics.
ckthomps 5 years ago
Right, But the connection you, and most of the world, are unable to make is that when the quran is literally interpreted, it can inspire suicide bombing, as the FBI report found out. Listen to the words of the terrorists themselves, they liberally quote the quran and hadith. And they recruit by saying,"look,read here. This is what allah wants."
charlesmartel3 5 years ago
Revelation 22:18-20 says if anyone adds or subtracts or in any way changes "this book" God "will add to that person the plagues described in this book" which are pretty severe, as I recall. There is a range of Muslim thinking just as there is a range of Christian thinking, some are fundamentalists, many aren't. It sounds like you already know this, but I wanted to be sure.
thucy2 5 years ago
Fred Phelps is mentally insane and probably gay himself - how else could anyone fixate on one issue so completely? Rudolph is a single crazed lunatic.
Okay, that's two. McVeigh makes three. Now, how does that compare