this is why pentacostals scare the bejeesus out of me - Page 3

junkernaut · #21 (**permalink**) 09-10-2007, 07:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by wilthrill

Well even if you are right and the pentecostals are "showing signs of future killers" why are you so worried about that when we have PRESENT DAY killers (aka muslims) doing their dirty work in plain sight???

I'm not trying to pick on your junkernaut, but I hear so many of the same people who are so quick to castigate christians for ANYTHING and yet insist that we treat Islam as a "religion of peace".

They, for example will criticize christians as being "intolerant" when christians have the nerve to object to being forced through taxes to subsidize such "art" as the Mother Mary smeared in shit or a crucifix in urine.

When 10,000 muslims KILL people and blow up shit over a danish cartoon these SAME EXACT PEOPLE tell us that WE (those who disapprove of MURDER) are intolerant and must "understand" the muslim rage.

And BTW what did you think of the muslims destroying artifacts from Solomon's temple? I posted a link to it.

youve been listening to michael savage havent u will? as for the rest of the question, of course im worried about our current problem.....it shouldve been taken care of decades ago. intolerance is bad no matter who its against, or who is commiting it. but when u have an opportunity to stop something when its still just an acorn, u wont have to chop down a tree later.....then u wont have burn the stump that is left.

as for the muslims destroying the solomon artifacts, its horrible, we should always respect our history. and why arent the israeli officials doing anything about it....theyve actually blocked the archaeologists from doing anything with it....theyres something more going on there

wilthrill · #22 (**permalink**) 09-11-2007, 10:05 AM

Well I had COMMON SENSE before I even knew who Michael Savage was and I have NEVER HEARD him address the Mother Mary smeared in shit or the crucifix in urine (Jose Serrano I believe). Savage may have addressed it but I only get to listen to him for about an hour a week due to my schedule (he comes on at night here) so I didn't hear it from him.

http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/Read.aspx?GUID={DCDF6BDC-51CA-4A7E-8195-2B617B1D4659}

But my point still stands. When Jose Serrano debuted his TAX PAYER FUNDED "masterpiece" crucifix in urine, Christians were understandably upset that THEIR TAX DOLLARS were supporting this. They voiced their opposition. NOT ONE PERSON WAS KILLED. NOT ONE PIECE OF PROPERTY WAS HARMED. The NEW YORK TIMES castigated them unmercifully calling them the intolerant enemies of art.

Fast forward to a Danish cartoon (no muslim tax dollars being misused. just a free speech issue). 17 people KILLED, riots in the streets and massive property damage and the EXACT SAME NEW YORK TIMES instead of castigating the muslim terrorists says it is WE (the cartoonist and those who like free speech) who are wrong and must "understand" them. THIS IS A NEWSPAPER FOR GOD's SAKE DISAVOWING THE 1st AMENDMENT!!!!!

Don't try to tell me there is not a double standard. And that double standard is plain to see whether wilthrill, Mikael Savage or the fucking Easter Bunny are pointing it out!!!!

junkernaut · #23 (**permalink**) 09-11-2007, 01:06 PM

well u know me enough by now that i totally believe in free speech, no matter who its coming from. but of course with free speech comes responsibility. i remember the piss christ....a punk band got their name from it....and that was nearly 20 years ago, so im amazed with the um... currency(?) of the reference. but your right, there certainly is a double standard here...on that we agree. but my point is that if we had done something, anything, about this way back in the 40's and 50's when we had the chance, we wouldnt be in the situation were in now

wilthrill · #24 (**permalink**) 09-12-2007, 10:29 AM

I'm not sandbagging you, but what do you mean by doing something back in the 40's or 50's? What chance did we miss and what should we have done?

junkernaut · #25 (**permalink**) 09-12-2007, 01:14 PM

our problems with the arab world actually started back in 40s or 50s when we not only helped israel win the war against the palestinians, but i believe that was around the same time that we installed a new shah in iran. i may have the years off, ive never been good with dates. but there was trouble brewing even bzck then. it was only a trickle of descent then, but thats essentially when things started. then there was during the 80s when we finally started to see what extreme islam looked like. we did nothing to stop them at either time, now were in the current mess.

wilthrill · #26 (**permalink**) 09-12-2007, 06:19 PM

Well I agree that we screwed the pooch with respect to Iran. we were fighting the commies and since the shah supported us we overlooked his treatment of his own people.

I agree that our support for Israel pisses off the muslims.

But even if we nuked Israel ourselves and escorted the Palestinians into the wasteland that was left we'd still have problems with Islamofacism.

They hate us for being who we are.They hate what they view as the sinful and wicked Great Satan. Why we allow our women to go in public not covered from head to foot. We are infidels in their minds (even the good liberals who are apologizing for Islam).

History is what history is. We have made mistakes but make no mistake about the following. These 7th century THUGS are not justified in attempting to impose their savage "values" on the rest of the world.

Lerxstcat · #27 (**permalink**) 09-12-2007, 09:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by junkernaut

our problems with the arab world actually started back in 40s or 50s when we not only helped israel win the war against the palestinians, but i believe that was around the same time that we installed a new shah in iran. i may have the years off, ive never been good with dates. but there was trouble brewing even bzck then. it was only a trickle of descent then, but thats essentially when things started. then there was during the 80s when we finally started to see what extreme islam looked like. we did nothing to stop them at either time, now were in the current mess.

We actually helped REinstall the young Shah who had been deposed by the revolutionary government of Mossadegh, which was elected but was of the Tudeh (Iranian Communist) Party. Our POV was that the Shah was the legitimate head of state and we supported him against the Communists.

Thing is, the animosity towards the West
(and we may be a new country, but are viewed as part of the West) goes back well over a thousand years almost to the inception of Islam.

Islam fanned out from Arabia like a fire spreading and Europe dared to defy it by defending itself and refusing to submit to Islamic rule. So that was our unforgivable sin, and Muslim radicals today hate us as the leader of the West even though our country didn't even exist then.

The events of the 40s, 50s and on are just considered even more recent acts against Islam, but they would destroy us anyway simply because our ancestors didn't submit over a thousand years ago.

After all, the great Persian Empire caved to Islam. We embarrass them because our ancestors did not.

andrea · #28 (**permalink**) 09-13-2007, 03:47 PM

Whoa...I was hoping for a discussion about those crazy snake handlers.....*backs out slowly*

Mikael · #29 (**permalink**) 09-14-2007, 07:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lerxstcat

We actually helped REinstall the young Shah who had been deposed by the revolutionary government of Mossadegh, which was elected but was of the Tudeh (Iranian Communist) Party. Our POV was that the Shah was the legitimate head of state and we supported him against the Communists.

Thing is, the animosity towards the West
(and we may be a new country, but are viewed as part of the West) goes back well over a thousand years almost to the inception of Islam.

Islam fanned out from Arabia like a fire spreading and Europe dared to defy it by defending itself and refusing to submit to Islamic rule. So that was our unforgivable sin, and Muslim radicals today hate us as the leader of the West even though our country didn't even exist then.

The events of the 40s, 50s and on are just considered even more recent acts against Islam, but they would destroy us anyway simply because our ancestors didn't submit over a thousand years ago.

After all, the great Persian Empire caved to Islam. We embarrass them because our ancestors did not.

That is one of the reasons Vlad the Impaler (Count Dracula) is considered a hero in Romania to this day.
But, even Prophet Mohammed, after establishing a safe refuge for his fellow Muslims, put down his arms and stopped fighting.

Lerxstcat · #30 (**permalink**) 09-15-2007, 12:29 PM

Yes, Mohammed did retire from war. Problem was, the Arab tribes had always lived by fighting amongst themselves, and pillaging each other. So once they were united and forbidden to fight among themselves, they needed an external enemy to fight and pillage.

So as soon as Mohammed died, his successors took Islamic Jihad on the road, and ever since the motive has been to convert or kill the infidel.