Why do Muslims have such a hard-on against Jews?

[Klixxer]

Originally posted by: RabidMongoose

Originally posted by: Klixxer
[I am glad you enjoyed Germany, my home country for now, many still think it is where anti semitism is the strongest but i would say that France, Australia and California rank higher on that scale.

Just curious, but why do you say that California and Australia rank higher on that scale? And why are you comparing one state of one country to whole other countries?

I know that Australia does have many problems, but California is extremely diverse. What problems do these two have with regards to anti-semitism?

Well, because i have visited several states of the US and the only state i have seen neo nazism in was Calif, Austrailia, i dunno why, but they have a strong dislike against black and anyone of my color (you could tell that i am jewish).

Most of the US is tolerant, or at least tolerates you when you are Jewish.

Lets just say that the only place i have ever hear the words "deine kleine Jude shweine" was in calif.

 

[RabidMongoose]

Originally posted by: Klixxer

Originally posted by: RabidMongoose

Originally posted by: Klixxer
[I am glad you enjoyed Germany, my home country for now, many still think it is where anti semitism is the strongest but i would say that France, Australia and California rank higher on that scale.

Just curious, but why do you say that California and Australia rank higher on that scale? And why are you comparing one state of one country to whole other countries?

I know that Australia does have many problems, but California is extremely diverse. What problems do these two have with regards to anti-semitism?

Well, because i have visited several states of the US and the only state i have seen neo nazism in was Calif, Austrailia, i dunno why, but they have a strong dislike against black and anyone of my color (you could tell that i am jewish).

Most of the US is tolerant, or at least tolerates you when you are Jewish.

By that logic, Europe is the most racist place for me - by far. Even more racist than the most racist, poor, and backwards states in the US.

What part of California did you go to anyways and what did you see?

 

[Klixxer]

Originally posted by: RabidMongoose

Originally posted by: Klixxer

Originally posted by: RabidMongoose

Originally posted by: Klixxer
[I am glad you enjoyed Germany, my home country for now, many still think it is where anti semitism is the strongest but i would say that France, Australia and California rank higher on that scale.

Just curious, but why do you say that California and Australia rank higher on that scale? And why are you comparing one state of one country to whole other countries?

I know that Australia does have many problems, but California is extremely diverse. What problems do these two have with regards to anti-semitism?

Well, because i have visited several states of the US and the only state i have seen neo nazism in was Calif, Austrailia, i dunno why, but they have a strong dislike against black and anyone of my color (you could tell that i am jewish).

Most of the US is tolerant, or at least tolerates you when you are Jewish.

By that logic, Europe is the most racist place for me - by far. Even more racist than the most racist, poor, and backwards states in the US.

What part of California did you go to anyways and what did you see?

No, they tolerate you, that is not the same as being equal, the European countries i have lived in didn't even seem to care.

But i know what you are getting at, it is "Europe are all racists" well, we are not.

Sorry to break your illusions.

 

[RabidMongoose]

Originally posted by: Klixxer

Originally posted by: RabidMongoose

Originally posted by: Klixxer

Originally posted by: RabidMongoose

Originally posted by: Klixxer
[I am glad you enjoyed Germany, my home country for now, many still think it is where anti semitism is the strongest but i would say that France, Australia and California rank higher on that scale.

Just curious, but why do you say that California and Australia rank higher on that scale? And why are you comparing one state of one country to whole other countries?

I know that Australia does have many problems, but California is extremely diverse. What problems do these two have with regards to anti-semitism?

Well, because i have visited several states of the US and the only state i have seen neo nazism in was Calif, Austrailia, i dunno why, but they have a strong dislike against black and anyone of my color (you could tell that i am jewish).

Most of the US is tolerant, or at least tolerates you when you are Jewish.

By that logic, Europe is the most racist place for me - by far. Even more racist than the most racist, poor, and backwards states in the US.

What part of California did you go to anyways and what did you see?

No, they tolerate you, that is not the same as being equal, the European countries i have lived in didn't even seem to care.

But i know what you are getting at, it is "Europe are all racists" well, we are not.

Sorry to break your illusions.

I'm not saying that, unless we go by your logic. I am clearly a minority and have never in my entire life faced any type of discrimination or racism against me in the poorest and most racist states in the US. However, my time in certain areas of Europe were not the same. Using your logic, it is clear that Europe is severely racist. I think that this is a ridiculous argument that you are forming.

What part of California did you go to anyways and what did you see? The thing is that California is extremely diverse and more 'liberal', but it is also very large in population..so if you saw one incident, then that isn't saying that California is more anti-semitic or racist than Alabama or Kentucky.

If they tolerate you, it is not necessarily being treated as equal. I think you could have chosen a better word. You seem to have chosen one with a more negative connotation in that context.

 

[raildogg]

you cant lump all muslims into hating the jews

 

[Klixxer]

Originally posted by: RabidMongoose

Originally posted by: Klixxer

Originally posted by: RabidMongoose

Originally posted by: Klixxer

Originally posted by: RabidMongoose

Originally posted by: Klixxer
[I am glad you enjoyed Germany, my home country for now, many still think it is where anti semitism is the strongest but i would say that France, Australia and California rank higher on that scale.

Just curious, but why do you say that California and Australia rank higher on that scale? And why are you comparing one state of one country to whole other countries?

I know that Australia does have many problems, but California is extremely diverse. What problems do these two have with regards to anti-semitism?

Well, because i have visited several states of the US and the only state i have seen neo nazism in was Calif, Austrailia, i dunno why, but they have a strong dislike against black and anyone of my color (you could tell that i am jewish).

Most of the US is tolerant, or at least tolerates you when you are Jewish.

By that logic, Europe is the most racist place for me - by far. Even more racist than the most racist, poor, and backwards states in the US.

What part of California did you go to anyways and what did you see?

No, they tolerate you, that is not the same as being equal, the European countries i have lived in didn't even seem to care.

But i know what you are getting at, it is "Europe are all racists" well, we are not.

Sorry to break your illusions.

I'm not saying that, unless we go by your logic. I am clearly a minority and have never in my entire life faced any type of discrimination or racism against me in the poorest and most racist states in the US. However, my time in certain areas of Europe were not the same. Using your logic, it is clear that Europe is severely racist. I think that this is a ridiculous argument that you are forming.

What part of California did you go to anyways and what did you see? The thing is that California is extremely diverse and more 'liberal', but it is also very large in population..so if you saw one incident, then that isn't saying that California is more anti-semitic or racist than Alabama or Kentucky.

If they tolerate you, it is not necessarily being treated as equal. I think you could have chosen a better word. You seem to have chosen one with a more negative connotation in that context.

Let's just can it, i am not in the mood for it and i would just start flaming you, imo europe is far more tolerant as a whole than the US is.

That is in my opinion, yours might differ and that means nothing to me.

Just know that i am not for the intolerance anywhere.

 

[RabidMongoose]

Originally posted by: Klixxer

Originally posted by: RabidMongoose

Originally posted by: Klixxer

Originally posted by: RabidMongoose

Originally posted by: Klixxer

Originally posted by: RabidMongoose

Originally posted by: Klixxer
[I am glad you enjoyed Germany, my home country for now, many still think it is where anti semitism is the strongest but i would say that France, Australia and California rank higher on that scale.

Just curious, but why do you say that California and Australia rank higher on that scale? And why are you comparing one state of one country to whole other countries?

I know that Australia does have many problems, but California is extremely diverse. What problems do these two have with regards to anti-semitism?

Well, because i have visited several states of the US and the only state i have seen neo nazism in was Calif, Austrailia, i dunno why, but they have a strong dislike against black and anyone of my color (you could tell that i am jewish).

Most of the US is tolerant, or at least tolerates you when you are Jewish.

By that logic, Europe is the most racist place for me - by far. Even more racist than the most racist, poor, and backwards states in the US.

What part of California did you go to anyways and what did you see?

No, they tolerate you, that is not the same as being equal, the European countries i have lived in didn't even seem to care.

But i know what you are getting at, it is "Europe are all racists" well, we are not.

Sorry to break your illusions.

I'm not saying that, unless we go by your logic. I am clearly a minority and have never in my entire life faced any type of discrimination or racism against me in the poorest and most racist states in the US. However, my time in certain areas of Europe were not the same. Using your logic, it is clear that Europe is severely racist. I think that this is a ridiculous argument that you are forming.

What part of California did you go to anyways and what did you see? The thing is that California is extremely diverse and more 'liberal', but it is also very large in population..so if you saw one incident, then that isn't saying that California is more anti-semitic or racist than Alabama or Kentucky.

If they tolerate you, it is not necessarily being treated as equal. I think you could have chosen a better word. You seem to have chosen one with a more negative connotation in that context.

Let's just can it, i am not in the mood for it and i would just start flaming you, imo europe is far more tolerant as a whole than the US is.

That is in my opinion, yours might differ and that means nothing to me.

Just know that i am not for the intolerance anywhere.

Fine.

 

[Klixxer]

Originally posted by: RabidMongoose

Originally posted by: Klixxer

Originally posted by: RabidMongoose

Originally posted by: Klixxer

Originally posted by: RabidMongoose

Originally posted by: Klixxer

Originally posted by: RabidMongoose

Originally posted by: Klixxer
[I am glad you enjoyed Germany, my home country for now, many still think it is where anti semitism is the strongest but i would say that France, Australia and California rank higher on that scale.

Just curious, but why do you say that California and Australia rank higher on that scale? And why are you comparing one state of one country to whole other countries?

I know that Australia does have many problems, but California is extremely diverse. What problems do these two have with regards to anti-semitism?

Well, because i have visited several states of the US and the only state i have seen neo nazism in was Calif, Austrailia, i dunno why, but they have a strong dislike against black and anyone of my color (you could tell that i am jewish).

Most of the US is tolerant, or at least tolerates you when you are Jewish.

By that logic, Europe is the most racist place for me - by far. Even more racist than the most racist, poor, and backwards states in the US.

What part of California did you go to anyways and what did you see?

No, they tolerate you, that is not the same as being equal, the European countries i have lived in didn't even seem to care.

But i know what you are getting at, it is "Europe are all racists" well, we are not.

Sorry to break your illusions.

I'm not saying that, unless we go by your logic. I am clearly a minority and have never in my entire life faced any type of discrimination or racism against me in the poorest and most racist states in the US. However, my time in certain areas of Europe were not the same. Using your logic, it is clear that Europe is severely racist. I think that this is a ridiculous argument that you are forming.

What part of California did you go to anyways and what did you see? The thing is that California is extremely diverse and more 'liberal', but it is also very large in population..so if you saw one incident, then that isn't saying that California is more anti-semitic or racist than Alabama or Kentucky.

If they tolerate you, it is not necessarily being treated as equal. I think you could have chosen a better word. You seem to have chosen one with a more negative connotation in that context.

Let's just can it, i am not in the mood for it and i would just start flaming you, imo europe is far more tolerant as a whole than the US is.

That is in my opinion, yours might differ and that means nothing to me.

Just know that i am not for the intolerance anywhere.

Fine.

Thank you, be well.

 

[MegaWorks]

good discussion, GJ guys!

 

[Sultan]

no one answered the difference between being anti-Jew and being an anti-Semite?

 

[RabidMongoose]

I'll answer it.

Regarding the discussion you two are having, I'd like to ask... since all these European countries have such significant anti-Semite feelings, why do the Muslims get blamed for being anti-Semite and not these European nations?

Read the news. European nations are always being accused of being anti-semites.

Note: I am not saying they are anti-semite, but if you read the news and such, the accusations have existed for quite some time.

And why ARE these European nations anti-Semite anyways?

No idea, but they do have many problems regarding ethnic and race relations. Why are some people racist? I suppose it's for the same reason.

Why would they have a problem with Jews or Semites or whatever?

Scapegoat. Or they are different somehow.

I still dont understand why the term anti-Semite is used to define hatred for the Jews. Semites was a race. Jews are a people following a faith. Anyways, whats the answers to the above

It's true that semite is a race, but the word semite has also often been used to refer to Jews. Anti-Semite today has evolved partly to primarily mean anti-Jewish for many people today.

 

[Klixxer]

Originally posted by: Sultan
no one answered the difference between being anti-Jew and being an anti-Semite?

Well, i am not going into the discussion but maybe i can shed some light about this one matter, Anti-semite actually means anti Jewish Semite and comes from before the world war, the Russians classified different races and as we had very few arabs but very many Jews in the area anti-semite came to mean anti-jew, it is an expression that has been adopted ever since, even though it is wrong, the right expression would be a jew of heritage.

You see they were genetically determining who were semites, if you were an arab, tough luck, you are still a semite, they had labs to conclude your ethnicity. In those days an ethnic Jew and an ethinc Semite of any kind were all the same (and as the system left a lot to wish for, so were many others).

And today i hear that my ethnicity does not matter, well thank you, i wish it never had.

But others religion and ethnicity is still to despise according to some, we have to get rid of that.

In my future i envision a strong UN (it is only what we make it) that can prevent further wrongdoings.

I am willing to put my life on the line as a UN soldier again if that would happen.

A world wide, fully supported international community, all in favor say aye!

 

[RabidMongoose]

In my future i envision a strong UN (it is only what we make it) that can prevent further wrongdoings.

I am willing to put my life on the line as a UN soldier again if that would happen.

A world wide, fully supported international community, all in favor say aye!

Aye, but it will not happen any time in the near future.

 

[Klixxer]

Originally posted by: RabidMongoose

In my future i envision a strong UN (it is only what we make it) that can prevent further wrongdoings.

I am willing to put my life on the line as a UN soldier again if that would happen.

A world wide, fully supported international community, all in favor say aye!

Aye, but it will not happen any time in the near future.

Not hopeful that it will but i still like you saying aye. Not the least surprised by it, we all have hope.

 

[theblooms]

ehhh??? It wasnt the Jews who crucified him? Or was it? Jews believed Jesus was God and they tortured him and put him on a crucifix? That doesnt make any sense. Did Jesus, as God, tell Jews to do this to him? If he did, why arent all Jews Christians, or why is their a religion called Christianity anyways?

YES! It WAS the Jews that crucufied him! It dosen't make sense only because you haven't read the New Testament. He was REQUIRED to die! That is the SOLE PURPOSE that Jesus had on Earth! If he didn't die on the cross, NO ONE would get to Heaven! He died for YOU! He suffered so you didn't have to! The only cavet there, is that you must accept that fact! Other than that, you burn in Hell. Sorry, but that's how it works, dude!

SOME Jews are Christians? But not a lot? What do you mean? I thought Christians were Christians, and Jews were Jews. I dont understand what you are saying. Thanks for the info on Pharasiees.

Yes, being Jewish and practicing Judaeism are not automatically mutual. There are agnostic Jews, Wiccan Jews, etc. Being Jewish is a etnicity, not a religion. Judaeism is the religion.

Who wrote the Old Testament? Who wrote the New Testament? How is each related to the Jewish religion? I dont think Jews follow the Bible. They follow the Torah.

In the Old Testament, Moses wrote the first 5 books, David the Psalms and I believe Proverbs, and generally speaking, the rest of the books are named after those who wrote them. Daniel, Isaiah, Ruth, etc. Jews don't. Like I said before, The Bible's Old Testament is pretty close if not identical to what Judaeism uses as their Torah, but Christians added the New Testament, which is the story of Jesus Christ. The Gospels in the New Testament were written by Matthew, Mark, Luke and John, John also wrote Revelations, and pretty much the rest was wtitten by Paul.

I know the concept. Thats why I put "slept" in quote. From what I have learned, Jews believe Jesus was son of Satan, and not of God. I may be wrong. Correct me if I am. If not that, a simple search on Google regarding Jewish belief in Jesus contradicts your claim of Jews believing in Jesus as a God, a Prophet or a Messiah.

I can't speak to that.

I dont know of any person who REFUSES to allow any other point of view or religion in their country. Nor have I seen the Penalty of Death being imposed. An example you can quote is the existence of Blasphemy law in Pakistan, but it is hardly ever carried out, the majority of Muslims in the nation are against it and the there's no basis for it in Islam, as far as I know.

Just do a quick Google search for Christians persecution or whatever. I found this tidbit out: http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=26265

Theocracy HAS worked in many instances that I am aware of. They worked WITHOUT persecution and on the contrary, contributed to a lively economy, equality and over all justice for all living under the theocracy. When it has failed, it was due to the leaders not following the principles of the religion they were supposedly basing the government on.

Name ONE that has lasted more than say, 2 years without some persecution of a differing religion.

Since you are not aware of what is taught in Masjids across the world, you cannot be serious about your claim. I have studied in a Masjid and so have my brothers, my parents, their parents and so on and so forth. In fact, the vast majority of people in Pakistan go through religious teachings at the Masjids. Friday congregation prayers ALL over the world have sermons, even in the United States. Do you see me holding the belief that you state?

YES! Like I said above, the Mosques keep their people dumb, because they want power! The only way people have to be free and prosperous is through education! Like I said above, everything is blamed on Israel! There USED to be many Chriso-facists see the Crusades and the Inquisition, where people were tortured to death for having the wrong beliefs, and Judeo-Facists see the Pharasiees where people were routienly crucified for having the wrong beliefs

Again, a false charge. Masjids have religious leaders who teach religion, not preach hatred. Since you have not been to a Masjid, or rather, have not had years of experience going to a Masjid, you cannot speak of what goes on in there. Masjids have actually been the center of learning for a large number of years and much of science and math progress has taken place within those walls. Maybe not in the present times, but there's always a rise and fall to every empire.

OK, so NO WHERE in the Quran does it talk of convert the infedles or slay them, not does it talk of 72 virgins for dying while killing infidels nor anything like that! DUDE, COME ON! I am not saying that all sects of Islam preach hate! BELIEVE ME! I am NOT saying that, HOWEVER, I AM saying that in the middle east, particularly Saudi Arabia, Iraq, Afghanastan and the West Bank, THAT CRAP GOES ON BIG TIME!

Thats spoken like a "Michaelo-facist". The Muslims can say the same thing about Israel who have Zionist intentions, but no, that would not be right according to you. He WAS publishing just a newspaper in which the message was to get the USA out of Iraq. Being 'free people' and 'liberated', I believe the Iraqis had the right to voice their opinions. He was orchestrating strikes against a foreign military force. Thats how you'd view it if OBL barged into your house. WE have not tried to make peace with anyone. WE have made critical mistakes again, and again and again, including shutting down his newspaper. Will you agree to OBL's peace initiatives after he settles into your home? How do you justify the claim of Sadr being a terrorist? He is fighting against the Coalition Troops (an invansion force) and those who support the Invasion Forces. He on the other hand is fighting for his right as an Iraqi. Just labelling anyone a terrorist is not right. Thats what Bush does, call someone a terrorist and the buck stops here. Reminds me of that CIA dude who claimed so and so is a communist and threw them into jail without any justification.

There is a SIMPLE definition of a terrorist. A terrorist is someone who targets civilians for death and destruction for political gain. al Sadr was doing this. He was using his "newspaper" to instruct his followers to target the Iraqi police force as his main targets, because they are soft targets. The Iraqi police force is a CIVILIAN force. Iraqis were dying at his hands daily. He was invited to sit on the Iraqi governing council NUMEROUS time, which he REFUSED. He wants all the power for HIMSELF! He dosen't want to share: he is a facist.

And as far as your "CIA dude", it was actually a Senator named Joseph McCarthy back in the 50's. And yes, he was bold and brash in his claims, but you know what? After the fall of the Soviet Union, intercepted cables were made public called the Venoa Project. HE WAS 100% CORRECT IN HIS CLAIMS!

Thats a VERY biased and quite ridiculous mentality. They cannot develop because their development is seen as threatening towards others, and then you blame the "Islamo-facists".

Their attitudes ARE threatening towards others! It has been proven OVER and OVER! Mabye I came across the wrong way, but I have NO PROBLEM with them developing to 100% the capacity of the USA, in fact I SIUNCERELY HOPE THEY DO! But NO NUKES for them UNTIL THEY DO! Heck, I would even say that the USA should give them plans for Hydroelectric, Nat Gas and Coal fired plants to get them going!
Just NO NUKES RIGHT NOW! The region is TOO UNSTABLE!

There was PLENTY of justification! He would have NUKED ISRAEL! That is a FACT!

lol How do you claim that to be a fact? If you are to believe that, you must be one of those large majority of American who believe Saddam DID have WMD's, he and OBL were buddies, and he was instrumental in the 9/11 attacks See the post on a recent poll somewhere on P&N.

Read this and then look up the points for yourself:

http://www.anncoulter.org/columns/2004/051204e.htm

Not true, he WOULD have nuked Israel killing MILLIONS, and then Israel would have nuked him back, then Egypt, Arabia, and Syria invades Israel, backed by the Soviets, then NATO would have jumped in against the Soviets, then the end of the world. The Israels SAVED the earth by taking that plant out!

Again, all hypothetical arguments. A nuclear power plant in any case would only be able to provide the fuel for nuclear warheads at the most. Building a nuclear weapon does not need a nuclear power plant. All components, including the fuel for the warhead is easily available in the black market. Evidence is the recent blow-over of the nuclear scientist from Pakistan supplying technology in the black market. There was no justification whatsoever of a nation attacking another nation without provocation.

Even if he didn't develop a fissible bomb, dirty bombs will still take out huge metropolitan areas with radiation. The retaliation would have been swift and sure leading to nuclear exchanges.

Sorry, but AT THIS TIME, the world CAN'T take a chance. Like I said, I have NO problem in the future with the WHOLE WORLD developing Nuclear Power, the cleanest and cheapest electricity known to man, just not in the middle east. Soon, not now.

So you're limiting the Middle East of progress and blame it on the "Islamo-facists" :roll: and then they are ridden in poverty and turn to fanaticism, still you'll blame them for having low GDP and being extremists and all. The rest of the world can progress, just not the Middle Eastern nation. Even Israel can possess Nuclear capability, which has as much share of handing out persecution as receiving it! Is there any way the Middle Eastern Muslims can satisfy you?

NO, I think you misunderstand me, and that is my fault. I DESPERATLY WANT the middle east to become Constitutional Republics where everone has a fair shake and a chance at being the best they can be. But when people are held down, they turn to whoever says they can help them. Right now, that is the Mosques. And in MANY of those Mosques, hate IS being preached! Those people are EVIL! When they are gone, and their followers are gone, the whold world WILL be safer, and THEN they can have all the Nuclear power they want. Until then, NO NUKES. Coal, NG, HE, whatever will get them on the road to prosperity, just NO NUKES. Too dangerous.

I think that you have made it clear that you are Pakastani, and Pakistan happens to be probably the most economically and free country in the middle east. However, just to your north, Afghanistan was (is) the polar opposite. Women were (are) killed for not wearing their burkahs if they went outside and were forbidden from going to school.

That HAS to stop. A REAL education is the only thing that will save the Earth from terrorists.

Michael

 

[rextilleon]

I have no desire to see the Middle Eastern Jihad states become Republics because thats like saying I wish that Santa Claus was real. I have no desire to fantasize about the UN becoming apolitical and truely policing the world. The UN essentially exists to pander to certain dictatorships and to attack others.

 

[theblooms]

Originally posted by: rextilleon
I have no desire to see the Middle Eastern Jihad states become Republics because thats like saying I wish that Santa Claus was real. I have no desire to fantasize about the UN becoming apolitical and truely policing the world. The UN essentially exists to pander to certain dictatorships and to attack others.

Dude, your wrong there. Until the middle east is truely free, we WILL have to deal with the terrorists. Like I said above, the Jihadists MUST be killed off, because the are trying to kill us. Once they are gone, freedom WILL come!

And I do agree 100% with you about the UN. I couldn't have said it better than you. It was founded by communists and socialists, and remains that way today. If people could convince Congress and the President to get us the heck OUT of the UN, it would be a GREAT day for America!

Michael

 

[0roo0roo]

I still dont understand why the term anti-Semite is used to define hatred for the Jews. Semites was a race. Jews are a people following a faith. Anyways, whats the answers to the above

the word means what it means because of the person who came up with the word.


kinda like how "homophobe" means afraid of gays, not afraid of man u know? sometimes u hear anti gay bigots questioning the term homophobe ...its just what that kinda people do

 

[cquark]

The Gospels in the New Testament were written by Matthew, Mark, Luke and John, John also wrote Revelations, and pretty much the rest was wtitten by Paul.

The four gospels are attributed to those four apostles by tradition, but the books themselves don't make a claim as to their authorship and do not offer a first person point of view. We don't know who wrote them. Mark 16:9-20 does not appear in any of our earliest manuscripts and has a noticeably different style than the rest of the gospel, so we're fairly sure someone different added that than the person who wrote most of the gospel. We also have a different additional ending to Mark as well from around the time that Mark 16:9-20 started appearing.

We do know that the John who claims to have written Revelations was not the apostle John. Of course, he never claims to be that John in the book either. The book just states that the writers name is John, not that he's the apostle who died decades before the book was written.

As for the epistles of Paul, some Bibles have more letters than others. For example, the Ethiopian church, which was always separate from the Catholic/Orthodox churches, has the book of 3rd Corinthians, which the Catholic/Orthodox church declared non-canonical. Modern scholars agree that Paul didn't write 3rd Corithinians, but the same analysis also shows that he didn't write several of the other epistles, including Titus, the Timothies, and part of 2nd Corinthians.

 

[rextilleon]

Blooms, considering the fact that the Islamic states have not progressed, but in fact have regressed over the last 500 years, I think it will take another 500 years to liberate them from the prison of their religion.

 

[cquark]

Originally posted by: theblooms

Originally posted by: rextilleon
I have no desire to see the Middle Eastern Jihad states become Republics because thats like saying I wish that Santa Claus was real. I have no desire to fantasize about the UN becoming apolitical and truely policing the world. The UN essentially exists to pander to certain dictatorships and to attack others.

And I do agree 100% with you about the UN. I couldn't have said it better than you. It was founded by communists and socialists, and remains that way today. If people could convince Congress and the President to get us the heck OUT of the UN, it would be a GREAT day for America!
Michael

The UN was founded at the behest of the US in the US in 1945, largely by nations recruited by the US (if you ever wondered why so many peripheral Latin American nations declared war on Germany in 1945, it was at US behest so they could join the UN and give states that would support the US a majority in the GA.)

You're quite right that the UN isn't apolitical and, in fact, never has been, since it was designed by the three major victors of WW2 to morally justify their own foreign political agendas. The new UN immediately supported new US military bases on German and Japanese territory after the war, the US's Monroe doctrine, the UK's power over its Commonwealth, and the USSR's domination of eastern Europe.

Despite the minor irritant of protests from countries who dislike the US's domination of the UN as the sole remaining superpower, the UN is a useful political tool for giving support to US policies when the US so desires, yet remains weak enough to be ignored on the rare occassions it goes against the US.

 

[Klixxer]

Originally posted by: theblooms

Originally posted by: rextilleon
I have no desire to see the Middle Eastern Jihad states become Republics because thats like saying I wish that Santa Claus was real. I have no desire to fantasize about the UN becoming apolitical and truely policing the world. The UN essentially exists to pander to certain dictatorships and to attack others.

Dude, your wrong there. Until the middle east is truely free, we WILL have to deal with the terrorists. Like I said above, the Jihadists MUST be killed off, because the are trying to kill us. Once they are gone, freedom WILL come!

And I do agree 100% with you about the UN. I couldn't have said it better than you. It was founded by communists and socialists, and remains that way today. If people could convince Congress and the President to get us the heck OUT of the UN, it would be a GREAT day for America!

Michael

The US was founded by Europeans, if not for the French you would still be under Brittish rule, there are no true socialist states anymore, only mixed economies to varying degrees. Perhaps you should throw those who disagree with you out or put them in camps? There are still socialists and communists in the US, people just have no idea who they are because they think that Democrats are socialists, it is interesting to see how this has become some kind of a buzz word for the conservatives who believe everyone should bow before them.

Who founded it has nothing to do with it and i realize that most people have no idea what the UN even is or what it is doing.

If the US wanted to leave the UN, they could, to isolate yourself in such a way might be of your best interests as you somehow see yourself as so much better than other countries, it wasn't all that long ago when a European country had the same ideas, that is why the UN was founded.

The idea of the UN is a good one.

 

[YellowRose]

Its a family thing. IIRC both arab and jew can be traced back to one family.

 

[Doboji]

Originally posted by: rextilleon
I have no desire to see the Middle Eastern Jihad states become Republics because thats like saying I wish that Santa Claus was real. I have no desire to fantasize about the UN becoming apolitical and truely policing the world. The UN essentially exists to pander to certain dictatorships and to attack others.

I'm sorry to say I agree with this statement. In order for a government to succeed, the people it governs must agree to accept a particular political ideology. I don't see human global society as being capable of coming within a billion lightyears of accepting a single political ideology.

-Max

 

[Doboji]

Originally posted by: Klixxer

Originally posted by: theblooms

Originally posted by: rextilleon
I have no desire to see the Middle Eastern Jihad states become Republics because thats like saying I wish that Santa Claus was real. I have no desire to fantasize about the UN becoming apolitical and truely policing the world. The UN essentially exists to pander to certain dictatorships and to attack others.

Dude, your wrong there. Until the middle east is truely free, we WILL have to deal with the terrorists. Like I said above, the Jihadists MUST be killed off, because the are trying to kill us. Once they are gone, freedom WILL come!

And I do agree 100% with you about the UN. I couldn't have said it better than you. It was founded by communists and socialists, and remains that way today. If people could convince Congress and the President to get us the heck OUT of the UN, it would be a GREAT day for America!

Michael

The US was founded by Europeans, if not for the French you would still be under Brittish rule, there are no true socialist states anymore, only mixed economies to varying degrees. Perhaps you should throw those who disagree with you out or put them in camps? There are still socialists and communists in the US, people just have no idea who they are because they think that Democrats are socialists, it is interesting to see how this has become some kind of a buzz word for the conservatives who believe everyone should bow before them.

Who founded it has nothing to do with it and i realize that most people have no idea what the UN even is or what it is doing.

If the US wanted to leave the UN, they could, to isolate yourself in such a way might be of your best interests as you somehow see yourself as so much better than other countries, it wasn't all that long ago when a European country had the same ideas, that is why the UN was founded.

The idea of the UN is a good one.

I disagree with you Klixxer, the UN is a good concept, and a terribly designed reality. An internationally supported organization with limited jurisdiction, and strict political membership requirements is a good idea. The UN currently is not. I believe there should be established some form of bill of rights style requirement for a country to join the UN. I.E. Freedom of press, freedom of religion, freedom of speech. A nation that does not allow for these things has no place within the UN. A vote in the UN by a nation not meeting those requirements, is nothing more than the hand over of some slice of world power to a dictator.

The UN should be disbanded or at least heavily restructured.

-max