Tolerence or Intolerence....

[layoutshooter]

What "RADICAL" Christians then?

I just don't agree with your argument. Our ROE and policies are not based on religion. They are being put forth by a secular congress and president who have no intention of even trying to win this war and would dearly love to, not only see us lose, but have as many of our troops as possible killed in the process.

Our military is subject to the whims of the Commander in Chief and controlled by him. Obama sets the tone now. Do you honestly think that Obama reflects mainstream Christian beliefs? (what ever those are)

 

[OntarioVanMan]

Religion has convinced people that there’s an invisible man…living in the sky, who watches everything you do every minute of every day.
And the invisible man has a list of ten specific things he doesn’t want you to do. And if you do any of these things, he will send you to a special place, of burning and fire and smoke and torture and anguish for you to live forever, and suffer and burn and scream until the end of time.

But he loves you. He loves you and he needs money. YOUR money

 

[Turtle]

What "RADICAL" Christians then?

Evangelicals would be the easy answer, but really anyone who believes that they are doing the right thing because they believe in God and justify their thoughts and actions as being righteous. But it goes way deeper than that, and way deeper into the military than many people can fathom.

There are military and government sanctioned Christian evangelical ministries on US military bases in the US, most famously at Ft Sam Houston and Lackland AFB in Texas, and the Air Force Academy in Colorado, where they evangelize recruits in basic training. The "Christian Embassy" is a fundamentalist group that evangelizes in the Pentagon, and has direct and sanctioned access within the Pentagon for decades. At any given point there are as many as twenty or so high level Pentagon military officers and civilians leading regular "Christian Embassy" Bible study lessons. Christian Embassy lesson plans use terms such as "spiritual warfare", call faith a "force multiplier", have titles such as "Warfare in Christ".

There are very few official military functions that do not begin with prayer. There are multiple chaplains on every post or base and chaplains deployed in the field with ground-pounding infantry units. Soldiers are often specifically encouraged to seek out chaplains when faced with tough personal circumstances or mounting stress.

Almost without exception, the job of every military soldier is either to kill, to help others do a better job of killing, or to protect those who are doing the killing.

The US military discovered long ago that a happy soldier is a better soldier. Just like any civilian, the more mentally and physically fit a soldier is, the better he will perform, no matter what his job. It is also known that for many, spiritual well-being can often be an indicator of wellness. As the soul goes, so goes the soldier. Cue the chaplains.

You think we don't have a Christian military? Really?
Read this: Jesus killed Mohammed: The crusade for a Christian military

 

[layoutshooter]

Turtle, I must have been around a LOT different military than you were in. I saw little of what you speak at any point in my 20 year career.

Yeah, we had priests, ministers, rabies, and many other forms of religious people in and serving soldiers. Yeah we said prayers, heaven forbid!! HOW horrible!! We sang songs in church too!! I even had a Jewish man in my guitar choir who sang with us at our Catholic mass. What a hoot!! A Jew singing a rousing verse of "They Know we are Christians by our Love"!! Yep, must be a Christian plot to take over the military.

We had agnostics, atheists, pagans, most likely a few witches and devil worshipers for all I know. IN FACT, I met all kinds of people, of all races and of many faiths. For the most part we even got along together. Far better than what you see in the civilian world.

I saw NO "Sanctioned" religious "groups" on any military or civilian base I was stationed on. Except on the HUGE bases that had mulitiple chapels, that allowed for specific religions to have their own church, most military chapels do mulitple christian and non-christian services. As to the chaplins.

How do evangelicals fly "BlackHawks" on the internet and kill civilians to satisfy their religious ferver?

 

[Turtle]

Your experiences in the military many years ago (you were in the military for 20 years?) do not reflect what is going on in the military today. Clearly, you didn't bother to read the story at that link. My uncle, the retired Army colonel, who still lives next to the base in Germany, said it's very different now than it was even 5 years ago. My cousin says it's totally different now than it was when he enlisted. So for it to be different now than when you were in the military doesn't surprise me in the least. This is a case where relying on your own experiences, and assuming they are still valid in today's military, is a mistake.

 

[RLENT]

Turtle, I must have been around a LOT different military than you were in. I saw little of what you speak at any point in my 20 year career.

That's one of the liabilities of having experience - one can think or believe that it necessarily means something relevant to a particular situation (when it actually doesn't):

Sometimes past experience is stale/dated .... and doesn't reflect the present reality/circumstances ....

Yeah, we had priests, ministers, rabies, and many other forms of religious people in and serving soldiers. Yeah we said prayers, heaven forbid!! HOW horrible!! We sang songs in church too!! I even had a Jewish man in my guitar choir who sang with us at our Catholic mass. What a hoot!! A Jew singing a rousing verse of "They Know we are Christians by our Love"!! Yep, must be a Christian plot to take over the military.

Again, you are confusing the past military which you experienced, with the present military (which you have not)

We had agnostics, atheists, pagans .... blah, blah, blah ..... I saw NO "Sanctioned" religious "groups" on any military or civilian base I was stationed on .... blah, blah, blah ...

See my preceding two replies immediately above .... and then maybe read it a couple more times for good measure .... just to let it sink in ....

If you still don't "get it" then just refer to the following, to shorthand the whole thing for you:

WHAT WAS THEN, IS NOT (NECESSARILY) IDENTICAL TO (IE. THE SAME AS) WHAT IS NOW.

It's actually a fairly simple concept or paradigm, applicable to many areas of Life .... and I'll bet even you can wrap your head around it ....

How do evangelicals fly "BlackHawks" on the internet and kill civilians to satisfy their religious ferver?

Well, since you apparently don't "get" the reference, they do it like this:

Collateral Murder, The Video

BTW, it's actually an Apache helicopter gunship .... not a Blackhawk ....

 

[RLENT]

I just don't agree with your argument.

Of course you don't - because it doesn't fit into your preconceived notion of "how things are" ..... and further, it doesn't fit with how you (oh-so-desperately) want them "to be" ....

Funny thing about preconceived notions - they really are only just a notion ..... something akin to an idea or opinion ..... they require no actual observation (just thinking a thought) ......and so may not necessarily be reflective of the facts regarding the way things actually are ....

Discerning facts regarding any state of condition requires actual observation .... at roughly the time you wish to know .....

Reliance on past data or experience may not reflect present reality ..... things change .... it's about the only constant there is ....

Our ROE and policies are not based on religion.

That's true .... however what you are overlooking is the following:

While our ROE and (official) policies are not based on religion, their actual implementation is dependent on the actions of individuals - some of whom do operate (unfortunately) off of their religious fervor .....

Some folks have hidden agendas, which they consider to come from a "higher power" .... and will seek to implement those agendas - even if they conflict with the oaths that they swore.

Our military is subject to the whims of the Commander in Chief and controlled by him. Obama sets the tone now.

Only a complete and utter fool could possibly delude themselves into thinking that a single individual absolutely controls everything and everyone in the military, completely and totally .....

Such proposition as you have expounded above doesn't even really merit a response because it is so silly - particularly considering the fact it is being put forward by someone with previous military experience.

Do you honestly think that Obama reflects mainstream Christian beliefs? (what ever those are)

Do you honestly think that anyone bought your proposition that the CIC completely controls the military, all of it members, and all of their actions, totally and absolutely ?

Surely you don't really think that everyone here is that stupid ..... do you ?

 

[RLENT]

I have a problem with it personally, but they have a right just as christians or any other legit religion ....

Good Lord .... I practically fell out of my chair when I read this Dennis ... first acknowledging their rights .... and then acknowledging Islam as a legitimate religion .....

.... there may yet be hope for the world (and even you too ....)

it is a slap at the American people and the families that lost love ones on 9-11 ....

Oh ..... you mean .... like the families of these folks ?:

Partial List of Muslim 9/11 Victims:

Samad Afridi
Ashraf Ahmad
Shabbir Ahmad (45 years old; Windows on the World; leaves wife and 3 children)
Umar Ahmad
Azam Ahsan
Ahmed Ali
Tariq Amanullah (40 years old; Fiduciary Trust Co.; ICNA website team member; leaves wife and 2 children)
Touri Bolourchi (69 years old; United Airlines #175; a retired nurse from Tehran)
Salauddin Ahmad Chaudhury
Abdul K. Chowdhury (30 years old; Cantor Fitzgerald)
Mohammad S. Chowdhury (39 years old; Windows on the World; leaves wife and child born 2 days after the attack)
Jamal Legesse Desantis
Ramzi Attallah Douani (35 years old; Marsh & McLennan)
SaleemUllah Farooqi
Syed Fatha (54 years old; Pitney Bowes)
Osman Gani
Mohammad Hamdani (50 years old)
Salman Hamdani (NYPD Cadet)
Aisha Harris (21 years old; General Telecom)
Shakila Hoque (Marsh & McLennan)
Nabid Hossain
Shahzad Hussain
Talat Hussain
Mohammad Shah Jahan (Marsh & McLennan)
Yasmeen Jamal
Mohammed Jawarta (MAS security)
Arslan Khan Khakwani
Asim Khan
Ataullah Khan
Ayub Khan
Qasim Ali Khan
Sarah Khan (32 years old; Cantor Fitzgerald)
Taimour Khan (29 years old; Karr Futures)
Yasmeen Khan
Zahida Khan
Badruddin Lakhani
Omar Malick
Nurul Hoque Miah (36 years old)
Mubarak Mohammad (23 years old)
Boyie Mohammed (Carr Futures)
Raza Mujtaba
Omar Namoos
Mujeb Qazi
Tarranum Rahim
Ehtesham U. Raja (28 years old)
Ameenia Rasool (33 years old)
Naveed Rehman
Yusuf Saad
Rahma Salie & unborn child (28 years old; American Airlines #11; wife of Michael Theodoridis; 7 months pregnant)
Shoman Samad
Asad Samir
Khalid Shahid (25 years old; Cantor Fitzgerald; engaged to be married in November)
Mohammed Shajahan (44 years old; Marsh & McLennan)
Naseema Simjee (Franklin Resources Inc.'s Fiduciary Trust)
Jamil Swaati
Sanober Syed
Robert Elias Talhami (40 years old; Cantor Fitzgerald)
Michael Theodoridis (32 years old; American Airlines #11; husband of Rahma Salie)
W. Wahid

In case anyone has forgotten, the above list is composed of actual, real people .... with individual personalities .... and probably at least one or more people who loved them dearly ..... and whose grief is undoubtedly no less than anyone else who lost a loved one on that tragic day ....

These individuals aren't just a "they" ..... or a "them" .... they were real ..... they happen to have been Muslims .... and may very well have been "Americans" as well .....

.... a slap indeed ....

 

[Pilgrim]

"OK, I'm being overly dramatic, but just barely"

A little more than just barely. More like a fair bit.

"A fair bit" is being kind; absurd is a more appropriate adjective. On the one hand we have people like Daniel Pearl being beheaded by Islamic radicals on the internet. On the other we have enemy combatants being "mowed down" by our soldiers in Blackhawk helicopters. Perhaps there are some civilians that are killed in these military exchanges - welcome to war. Civilians get killed in wars, especially when the muslim enemy without uniforms uses them as shields and camoflage when they attack our soldiers from rooftops and then attempts to blend into the general population for cover.

In an earlier time our military would not let these barbarians run for cover in mosques and cower behind women and children in the general population. However, in today's era of "kinder and gentler" combat these terrorists know that we hold the lives of civilians to a higher standard of value than they do. Perhaps we should once again consider the tactic of killing the enemy where he takes shelter - if the civilians get killed in the process, maybe they'll cease to provide safe haven for animals like Al Queda and the Taliban. Is this a brutal tactic? You betcha - welcome to war.

Regarding the article by Jeff Sharlet - since when is this guy an objective source of information? A contributing editor to Harper's and the Rolling Stone, he seems to show up on all the fashionable liberal venues. Granted, the US military is different than it was in the 70s and 80s but to claim that it's been taken over by Christian evangelicals is nonsense. The son of close friends and neighbors of mine just completed a six-year tour of duty in the special forces, including two tours in the middle east. He's a high calibre straight-laced kid with a sense of purpose that now is taking him to med school. Having spoken with him a couple of times since he got out, he never once has mentioned any unusual influence of religious factions in the Army. However, I'll make it a point to ask him about that very subject and send him the link to the the Sharlet article; maybe I'm wrong, but he'll probably get a good laugh from it. Amazing, the expert insights into the military we get from people who have never worn the uniform.

In he final analysis, the jihadists have demonstrated they intend to take over our civilization from within by dominating our culture since they know they can't win militarily. To their credit, they're a patient group and have a long term plan that involves gradually imposing their way of life upon our compliant society that appears at present to be more concerned with political correctness and misguided multiculturalism than the values that made our country great.

 

[RLENT]

I posted this as a "spinoff" off to OVM's founders and Religion post...

It is Just another opinion ...

KUHNER: Radical Islam's conquest of America

Welcome to the United States of Arabia

By Jeffrey T. Kuhner

Well, yes - it is just another opinion .....

But of WHO ?

And what are this individual's background and qualifications ?

What's his past history ? ..... his track record so to speak ?

Those are some questions a discerning individual who wants to think for themselves might just ask .....

Of course, if all one is looking to do is to slobberingly agree with those things which already fit your pre-conceived notions, then you really probably wouldn't be interested in asking any of the above questions .... in fact, it probably wouldn't even occur to you to ask them (even if only silently to yourself ...... )

Perhaps the following linked article might provide a little glimpse into what some of those answers might be ...... who "Jeffy" really is, what his sense of professional journalistic standards are, and how he likes to "operate":

Anatomy of an anonymous political smear

If you haven't listen to Jeffery yet, you might want to do so ... he is very good ....

Are you familiar with the following quote, often attributed to P.T. Barnum ?:

"There's a sucker born every minute ......"

BTW, Dennis ..... truly a great find on the Kuhner thing .....

..... you really are getting quite adept at mining the loon-ousphere .....

 

[layoutshooter]

Your experiences in the military many years ago (you were in the military for 20 years?) do not reflect what is going on in the military today. Clearly, you didn't bother to read the story at that link. My uncle, the retired Army colonel, who still lives next to the base in Germany, said it's very different now than it was even 5 years ago. My cousin says it's totally different now than it was when he enlisted. So for it to be different now than when you were in the military doesn't surprise me in the least. This is a case where relying on your own experiences, and assuming they are still valid in today's military, is a mistake.

No I was not in the military for 20 years but 17 of my 20 years were spent on military installations. I agree, if I was only depending on my out of date experiences it would be a mistake. When I talk with my son, who is career military, I hear similar stories like when I was in. When I speak with my nephew and his wife, who are both in now, I hear the same. The differences between what you hear from relatives and what I hear MIGHT just be due to personal bias.

 

[layoutshooter]

That's one of the liabilities of having experience - one can think or believe that it necessarily means something relevant to a particular situation (when it actually doesn't):

Sometimes past experience is stale/dated .... and doesn't reflect the present reality/circumstances ....


Again, you are confusing the past military which you experienced, with the present military (which you have not)


See my preceding two replies immediately above .... and then maybe read it a couple more times for good measure .... just to let it sink in ....

If you still don't "get it" then just refer to the following, to shorthand the whole thing for you:

WHAT WAS THEN, IS NOT (NECESSARILY) IDENTICAL TO (IE. THE SAME AS) WHAT IS NOW.

It's actually a fairly simple concept or paradigm, applicable to many areas of Life .... and I'll bet even you can wrap your head around it ....


Well, since you apparently don't "get" the reference, they do it like this:

Collateral Murder, The Video

BTW, it's actually an Apache helicopter gunship .... not a Blackhawk ....

One, part of the problem of having NO first hand experience, out of date or other wise, is that you have NO basis for comparison. If one has NO first hand experience one is only relying on the opinions of others.

I have 3 close relatives in the military, all tell me the same story. From what they say there is little change in this matter. That is second hand information and it is current. I trust little past second hand, MAYBE some third hand. The further you get from first hand the further you tend to get from reality.

As to your video, that traitor cannot be trusted. With any luck at all we will start executed traitors in this country again. I have no respect for malcontent traitors. NO one FORCED him to enlist. He KNEW what he was getting into and joined willingly. The context of a "whistle blower" such as this can NEVER be trusted as being totally complete or accurate.

 

[chefdennis]

Yeap islam is a legit religion, just as it is a polictical pary also....as a religion they have the right to bulid the mosque...but as has been pointed out, having the right doesn't make it the right thing to do....

As for muslums dying in the ywin towers, muslums kill their own daily.....do the fact that there were muslum deaths isn't surprising at all and I am sure those responcible didn't give a 2nd thought to the fact that they would be killing muslums.....it was exceptable....

Has for the Kuhner article, it wasn't hard to find at all, lol it was right there in the Washington times...and yes, it fits the agenda..... and yes , he is very good.....its just a matter of what you what to get across.....

As for the "hit" piece in the NY Times, yea they are a great journalistic master piece anymore, no bias on their part at all.....

 

[Turtle]

Pilgrim, like you, I can understand and accept collateral damage of civilians getting wounded or killed in war. I don't much like it, but that's just the way it is, and there's nothing that can be done about it. Mistakes and atrocities of all kinds happen in battle. It happens. But it the video, of which the link has been posted in this thread and in others, there was no mistake, other than with the people who were in that helicopter and those who allowed them to be there. They were mowing down anyone and everyone who moved including women and children, and were doing so with joy and glee. If these were Christians who were being mowed down, I wonder what your thoughts would be.

"Perhaps we should once again consider the tactic of killing the enemy where he takes shelter - if the civilians get killed in the process, maybe they'll cease to provide safe haven for animals like Al Queda and the Taliban. Is this a brutal tactic? You betcha - welcome to war."

Who's being absurd now? What should these civilians do, demolish their own mosques so as to not provide a safe haven to Al Qaeda and the Taliban?

"Regarding the article by Jeff Sharlet - since when is this guy an objective source of information? A contributing editor to Harper's and the Rolling Stone, he seems to show up on all the fashionable liberal venues."

You didn't agree with the article, so you set about trying to discredit the writer rather than what he wrote as a way to dismiss what he wrote. Awesome Dood. Are you trying to say that everything in the article is pure fiction, that none of it happened, simply because of who the author of the piece is? Oh, hey, turn around<flick>. You had a piece of hay, or straw or something on your back.

 

[RLENT]

Yeap islam is a legit religion, just as it is a polictical pary also ....

...... a political party ?

Guess I missed that one ..... what is the name of this "political party" here in the US ?

Is it registered in all fifty states ?

Is there only one single Islamic political party ..... is it some sort of monolithic thing ?

Obviously what you meant is that (at least some) people who are Muslims have a political agenda(s) .... I rather suspect that depending on which specific individual of the Muslim faith you are referring to, those agendas vary quite markedly .... from the benign to the malignant ....

Wow there Sport .... that's really insightful: people who are religious often have political agendas ...

You think any Christians might have political agendas ... or is it just confined to one single faith ?

and I am sure those responcible didn't give a 2nd thought to the fact that they would be killing muslums.....it was exceptable....

Certainly not to those who were killed or their families ....

There are certainly some whack-job Christians out there too, who apparently wouldn't bat an eye over killing other Christians ....

Has for the Kuhner article, it wasn't hard to find at all, lol it was right there in the Washington times...and yes, it fits the agenda..... and yes , he is very good.....

Well, I'll give him this: He at least seems to know how to correctly spell words in his own native language ....

As for the "hit" piece in the NY Times, yea they are a great journalistic master piece anymore, no bias on their part at all.....

As Turtle pointed out with Pilgrim:

You attempt to attack the messenger (NY Times) ..... while ignoring the veracity of the message .....

Other than the fact that it is a really great way to deprive oneself of factual data, it's a pretty lame response .....

 

[chefdennis]

Rlent wrote:

You attempt to attack the messenger

As you did with your article attacking jeffery maybe!?!?

As to the Politics of Islam, party was the wrong word, system is the word i should have sused. But then again thse not looking to nit pick probably understood...I really don't think that you believe that islam and muslums are not knee deep in the politics of turning the world to there way of thinkisn , but Here are a few links for you, but i don't think for a mment that you won't decry all of them also..

http://qurratulain.wordpress.com/2006/08/31/the-political-system-of-islam/

Politics & Islam's Brotherhood &mdash; Muhammadanism.org

The rise of political Islam. Workers' Liberty #2/2, March 2002.

American Thinker: Resolving the Cognitive Dissonance of Islam

Political Islam // Mission | Educating the World | Islamic Doctrine

Certainly there are christians that kill other christian, happens everyday, here and there, but not as a whole..and not as told to do by their "leaders" and certainly not in the numbers done by the "Current" muslums...(yes in know about the crusades. it history, and we can also dig up the killing don by muslums in history also)....so the arguement doesn't hold water...

As for the spelling issue, spellings fine , its the typing.....

 

[chefdennis]

This is from 2007. seems to make a pretty good point....

YouTube - ‪Hilarious Mulla, Hilarious Logic 2+2=Zakir Naik‬&lrm;

 

[greg334]

On the one hand we have people like Daniel Pearl being beheaded by Islamic radicals on the internet.

Why is this relative to the issue?

Pearl was no hero, nor was he a victim, he was someone who was relying on his profession to be safe and put himself in harms way to make a name for himself.

 

[Turtle]

Quote:
On the one hand we have people like Daniel Pearl being beheaded by Islamic radicals on the internet.

Why is this relative to the issue?

It's not, but apparently when you kill someone by beheading them, it's far, far worse than just blowing up them into a million pieces.

 

[layoutshooter]

It's not, but apparently when you kill someone by beheading them, it's far, far worse than just blowing up them into a million pieces.

Yeah, Turtle in some ways it is worse. In war people get killed. Civilians get killed as well. When a person is captured they should not be beheaded. Many "civilians" in this particular war are not what we would have called civilians in past wars. Many, by not means all, house, protect, store arms, feed and support our enemy. The lines are far more blurred. Our enemy also uses civilians as human shields. They use hospitals and mosques as bases of operations. They have been known to kill civilians and then provide "evidence" that U.S./NATO or other allied forces killed them. Many in our media love to jump on that, they are not famous for checking out what really happened.