Ambassador: Bush didn't know there were two sects of Islam

I sure am glad to know that you are around to know what I intended to mean. What a relief. "In the grip" of is just a colloquial expression. I don't think it has mathematical roots which point to overwhelming (as you say entire) majority.

Your Lebanon illustration is good for the last little while and only in Lebanon. Oh, and Israelis are not Christians, too.

Tell that to the Muslims and Jews and Atheists and whatever other religious tradition is represented by the US mililtary. Bush asked Congress for permission. They granted. Does it hurt when you stretch that much?

A quip is a quip is a quip is a quip. My own little original statement (I"m not even sure we are talking about the same statement) had nothing to do with my worries. That came about when you forced the discussion into a historical persepctive.

My statement was ~ "If Christians were killing one another as much as Muslims are, you could tell their groups apart better."

I'm a Westerner. I guess I should apologize for having a Westerner's viewpoint. I have one. There I said it. I'm not sure where you see me backtracking. I thought I said that I stood by what I'd said?

I have and had no mathematical theories about what the results of a google search mean. The original search I did was to see how AQ search results compared with a similar Tamil Tiger search. AQ yielded 32,000,000 while the TT search came up with some 332,000.

I just wanted to see the scale of concern. I have made no significant claims about this or any other search result, so quit assigning importance to it that I never did.

At least you admit you are being disrespectful. It's not your job nor is it you prerogative to: 1) project my motives, 2) characterize my responses, and 3) describe my character.

You don't know me. You know very little about me. If you persist in the above described behaviors, I think a little self-reflection would be in order.

It's not that I don't believe in it; it's just not my primary concern. My primary concern is what is going on in the world today and, in particular, that group is Islamo-fascists who are wreaking as much havoc as they can on their way to their eternal reward.

I'm not sure exactly what you are referring to here, but I think it was a blame Bush while you characterize him as a Christian. My point was that Bush is not a dictator and there were lots of levels of people of all kinds of beliefs who started this war.

I don't think anybody except a psychopath supports unnecessary bloodshed. Are you calling Bush a psychopath?

Your bias is showing when you call deaths in Iraq "unnecessary" and Israeli military force as "terrorism." I think it is more complex than that. Does't Hezbollah have legitimacy in the Lebanese government? Doesn't the Lebanese government then have oversight and responsibility for missiles being lobbed into Israel?

Absurd, however I do think there is a distinction between what happend 5 months ago and what happened 5 centuries ago. Do you consider both equally weighted?

I never said that.

I said that it was much harder to draw a line between what is political and what is religioius when Islam's founder was Muhammed who was both Ruler and Prophet.

I didn't say that Christ was superior. I said he was vastly different because he was a homeless outcast who rose to spiritual leader.

For a guy who thinks himself to be so smart, you sure miss a lot of stuff. It must be a lot easier when you just make stuff up.

 

You need to learn better english then because I'm sure if you ask anyone, they'll tell you "being in the grip" of something means overwhelmingly being at its mercy. I don't think it's a matter of English though - it's a matter of you backpedaling off your original statement as you are accustomed to doing.

My Lebanon illustration was to show you that many parts of the world are victim to nonmuslim terror. Wake up.

Using this same logic, those soldiers believe in what they are fighting for which for the most part, isn't the case. They joined the military for either personal reasons or to protect the United States. I doubt anyone would voluntarily go fight in Iraq to "spread democracy" if they had the choice. The Army is simply the actor; the Christian Right's war mongering is the enabler.

Good. I'm glad to see you're once again qualifying your statements. At first it was just a snide remark about Muslim violence in comparison to Christian superiority, but now it's just innocent because it's from your Western perspective. Atleast you plead ignorance. How convenient.

Are you seriously still clinging to this?

Oh, I think it's fairly easy to project your motives. Conducting a simple search of your posts in the D&D, it's easy for any neutral observer to see you clearly have some sort of agenda against Islam and are out to prove Christianity's superiority. That's completely fine. Your problem is that not only are you dishonest but you can't accept your ignorance. I recall the time you posted an article from an anti-Islam propoganda site, admitted you knew nothing about the topic, and when it was discredited, you still clung to it. How does that work? Either that or you make snide, flippant remarks and when someone responds to them, you backpedal and claim you are being bullied. If you were genuine in your curiosity, you'd conduct yourself in the manner that those in the 'Islam' thread are or like MadMax. Grow up and grow a pair. And you're damn right I'm disrespectful because I don't hold an ounce of respect for you.

The more you talk, the more you expose your ignorance. I know you think it's a cute term, but they're not fascists.

I also like how in this same post by you up above you defended your "held in the grips" statement but are now returning to your original premise of Islamo-fascists wreaking havoc. Last I checked, these "Islamo-fascists" aren't occupying any Western countries with their militaries.

The only people that still support this war and support further excursions in the Middle East at this point is the Christian Right. The classical conservatives have withdrawn their support of Bush.

I thought the "Islamo-fascists" support unnecessary bloodshed giddy. So they're psychopaths? And no, the only people who support unnecessary bloodshed are not psychopaths. They are those who subscribe to the belief that they are of a superior morality and that Arab lives are simply collateral damage, irrelevant in the objective of hegemonizing the Middle East.

Pray tell how those deaths in Iraq are necessary, giddy. To spread democracy? We're doing pretty good with that.

You're damn right Israel is a terrorist state. They're in violation of UN Security Council 242 and the 4th Geneva Convention with their illegal occupation and systematic population shift into the West Bank. Their crimes against humanity in Jenin, Sabra and Shatila, and Lebanon speak for themself.

If you're making a blanket statement like the one you did, that Christian sects don't kill each other, then yes.

Are you that incapable of comprehending simple concepts? There was no religious disagreement or faith-based quarrel. They split over the issue of succession and an assasination.

How is the fact that Christ is vastly different even relevant? You're the one who keeps bringing him up. I know he's vastly different!

Tell me about it. You have great practice in that area.

Someone please remind me to never again attempt to reason with a 2 year old.

 

The giddyup outline for success:

1. Make a flippant, ignorant remark.
2. When confronted, qualify it and backpedal.
3. When confronted more, plead ignorance.
4. Label those calling you out on your bullsh*t as trying to "shove history down your throat."
5. Whine that everyone is bullying you and back off your original statement completely.
6. Repeat.

 

We are never going to resolve this difference about what "in the grip" means, so let this suffice: I didn't mean what you insist I meant.

The discussion was about Christian terror not non-Muslim terror.

And you've interviewed "most" of the US military?

It doesn't matter why they joined the military-- except to say that it probably wasn't to be a Christian warrior as you would like to think.

You have so little regard for the Christian Right... how is it that they are the head which manipulates the whole body of the USA? If that be so, what does that say about the USA?

It's really sad when identifying the obvious (I am a Westerner) is viewed as qualifying my statement. I just assumed you knew. I'm also glad to know that you consider the western perspective as ignorant. Heads up.. y'all.

I never clung to it. I never said it the way you extrapolate it. Please stop trying to associate any version of this with me.

Waaaaaah!

I've got it... you're working on a degree of some sort in clinical psychology. Why else this obsession with analyzing other people's motives and personalities.

I'm just not going to stoop to your level. Enjoy the muck...

It's more about the fancifulness than the literality of it.

Sorry but those are not mutually exclusive possibilities. I'm noticing your anti-Amerian rants which are slipping out.

So you are saying that the Christian Right represents some 33% of the voting block in this country? Isn't that kind of high?

Maybe they are. If they are willing even joyful to kill innocent people for their selfish motive of paradise... that is kind of psychopathic isn't it?

Let's compare the loss of civilian life in WWII to this war....

People die in war. It's been that way since the beginning.

Good to know you feel that way.

It was a quip not a blanket statement. Have you run your dipstick for you sense of humor lately?

Why can their faith not reconcile this?

The stark contrast with Muhammed was brought up by your comments about Muhammed being both Ruler and Prophet. I keep bringing it up because you do. I only mentioned it the first time and you keep coming back to it... and acting like I am pushing it on you.

I'm not putting words in your mouth or twisting your meaning. I'm sorry if not swallowing your anti-American, pro-Muslim POV is disappointing. Tough ****.

Put me on your ignore list and you won't even have to worry about it.

 

I've reported this to the mods. I hope you get disciplined. There is no need and no place for this kind of insult.

Oh, and it was a quip...

quip ( P ) Pronunciation Key (kwp)
n.
A clever, witty remark often prompted by the occasion.
A clever, often sarcastic remark; a gibe. See Synonyms at joke.
A petty distinction or objection; a quibble.
Something curious or odd

 

It's so amusing to me that you keep backtracking off your original statement and then return in the same post to say things like "they are willing even joyful to kill innocent people for their selfish motive of paradise", re-establishing your initial position.

No, the response was to your "in the grips of Muslim terror" hyperbole which caused me to point out nonMuslim terror.

Um, no. I just said myself the U.S. military isn't a Christian one. They're forced to act on what others enabled.

LOL. How do I have little regard for the Christian Right, you fool. I've been reiterating how powerful they are and how they, along with Jewish interests groups, have infiltrated Republican Party initiatives and are a formidable body.

What a joke. When I exposed your weak argument, you defended it by saying "it's from my Western perspective." So that makes it right and acceptable? I can make an ignorant statement about villages in Africa now and when rebuked, I can plead ignorance on merit of my "Western perspective"? You just want to stay ignorant and are so convinced that you are right that you defend that same ignorance.

Why would I stop trying to associate any version of it with you when it was your original argument. You are the poster named 'giddyup', aren't you?

Spades shoud be called for what they are - spades.

Yea, you would like that, wouldn't you? Your kind is attracted to bright, shiny objects and cute catch phrases like "Islamic fascists" and they "hate us for freedoms." We wouldn't want to go to the trouble for factual correctness now would we, giddyup? You like it fancy...and real dumb.

LOL! How convenient and oh-so predictable. Now I'm anti-American! I'm surprised you didn't go the McCarthyite route earlier.

That figure seems roughly correct, yes.

Oh, so when Muslims kill, it's because they're psychopaths, but when America and Israel kills, its completely reasonable. Go figure. I really feel sorry for people like yourself who simply embraces the commencement of a clash of civilizations due to some belief that they are superior. Forget about the fact that Muslims didn't attack Westerners for hundreds of years before the West began hegemonizing the Middle East.

We were attacked in WWII.

Go fight then. You seem to believe in the cause enough.

What, nothing of substance to respond with? Just like your other replies.

You're not really funny so I guess I have no sense of humor in that regard.

Because it's an inherently evil religion.

How was it relevant to begin with? It's common knowledge they did not have the same roles. It's only relevant in your agenda to prove Christianity's superiority.

LOL. More of your McCarthyite tactics. It's sad, really. Pray tell what I've said that was at all Anti-American, giddyup?

I can't allow you to run your bullsh*t with impunity.

 

Seriously, grow up.

There wasn't anything clever or witty about it so don't flatter yourself, lol. The only thing here that is curious or odd is yourself.

It's funny that at first, your defense of the statement was that it wasn't meant from a historical perspective, but rather just an observation of present day. Then you qualified it to being just from your Western perspective. You've now abandoned all of this altogether and are saying it was simply a "clever, sarcastic remark" with no meaning. It keeps changing. It just keeps getting better.

 

Coming from you, this is just too funny.

I really preferred the "gibe" synonym as being most accurate.

No, I didn't qualify it as being from my western persepctive. That was descriptive of all the "conversation" we had that followed. See I was born in Texas and now live on the East Coast. I'm "in the grips" of Westernism.

 

How many different "original statements" are you going to refer to. I made only one "original statement" and it's not the one to which you are here referring.

Here's your quote: "Originally Posted by thacabbage: It's (the US Military's) actions <b>are certainly representing Christianity</b> when you have a President saying he talks to God whose support is primarily derived from Christians."

I was referring more to their influence than their power. They are still the minority-- even at 33%.

I'm not sure what weak argument you are referring to here. Please be more explicit. I'm not sure why you equate western perspective with ignorance. I don't think the war in Iraq is a continuation of the Crusades. Some Muslims do. That is their perspective. Which side is ignorant, western or Muslim? Or neither?

That's the third "original argument/statement" which you have ascribed to me." It's a dizzying pace you set. My original argument was actually only a quip.

Not worth commenting upon.

No point in responding substantially to insults.

I slyly waited for your anti-Americanism to explode.

It's a bit high....http://www.publiceye.org/magazine/v17n2/evangelical-demographics.html

The American military is targeting those who are dedicated and avowed to kill US and coalition soldiers, any other Westerner, and any Muslim who just happens to get in their way OR just be in the wrong place at the wrong time.

I don't embrace any clash, but I sure am in the grip of it.

You say "Muslims" like its unanimous.

I was really thinking about the French and how many lost their lives in their liberation.

Do they have a Cripple Brigade?

I don't feel the need to respond to insults.

How about the one above when I came back with "in the grip" after you used "embrace?" At least a chuckle, right?

Islam is an inherently evil religion? Okay, we have a new game going on here...

No, it was relevent in pointing up the complexity of political power and spiritual power in Muslim culture. What about Sharia? Couldn't they use a little Separation of Church and State?

How about this one: "Last I checked, these "Islamo-fascists" aren't occupying any Western countries with their militaries." Doesn't that imply that American policy is, in fact, fascist in your opinion? I'd call that anti-American.

Fine.

 

my take on the conflict between thecabbage and giddyup

BBQ Corned Beef and Cabbage

For the Brisket:
1 gallon water
2 tablespoons pickling spices
1 (5 to 6 pound) brisket
3 cups BBQ sauce

For the Cabbage:
1 head red cabbage
1 head green cabbage
2 tablespoons duck fat
1/2 cup balsamic vinegar, reduced to 1/4 cup
Kosher salt and pepper

For the potatoes:
10 large white rose potatoes
4 ounces butter
1 cup cream
1/4 cup chopped fresh parsley
Kosher salt and pepper

For the Brisket: In a large stockpot bring water to a boil. Add pickling spices and brisket. Cook brisket for 45 minutes at a simmer. While brisket is cooking, start the grill using charcoal and mesquite. Add the mesquite after charcoal turns reddish gray. Remove the brisket from the water and let sit for about 10 minutes. *** NOTE: Do not discard the water.

Place cooked corned beef on the grill. Close lid on the grill and cook the corned beef very slowly turning the corned beef to allow for all sides to be cooked evenly. (Depending on how dense the beef is, this will take about 1 1/2 to 2 hours). Keeping the temperature of the grill around 240 degrees. Add BBQ sauce at the end of cooking process. The BBQ sauce is optional, any will do.

For the cabbage: Trim and wash cabbage. Cut out the hearts. Slice the cabbage very thin. Remember to slice the head of cabbage into quarters. (It is much easier to hold and cut). Bring the water that the brisket was cooked in to a boil. Blanch the cabbage for about 5 minutes. Strain and cool. Saute the cabbage in the duck fat and balsamic vinegar. Season with salt and pepper.

For the potatoes: Bring water to a boil in a large stockpot. Peel the potatoes and cut them in half. Place the potato halves into a strainer. Place the strainer into the pot. Cover and cook until they are fork tender, about 20 minutes.

In a small saucepan melt the butter. After the butter melts add the cream and reduce by one third. Add the parsley, salt, and pepper, to taste. Serve over potatoes.

Remove corned beef from the BBQ and let stand for a few minutes. Slice cross grain. Try to slice thin.

Serve with any dark beer.

 

The two "original statements" were your "grips" one and the one about Muslim sects killing each other.

Uhhh yeah, what's your point? You somehow from that statement, went off on some tangent about nonChristians serving in the military. You're just proving my point. When a large majority of support for these wars is from the Christian Right, then United States military is acting in the name of Christianity.

Yes, and that "powerless minority" of 33% was powerful enough to get George W. Bush back into office to further the neoconservative agenda. Wake up.

I never equated a western perspective with ignorance. In fact, you did, when you apologetically used that as your defense. You said "it's just from my Western perspective."

You really are sad. Is this what you're reduced to now? Calling me anti-American because your other weak arguments have evaporated? Why am I anti-American? Because I criticize the actions of our administration? I'm sorry that I can think for myself and don't buy everything I'm fed.

Did you read your own article? "In the broadest sense, according to Gallup polls, the number of persons in the United States who described themselves as either Evangelical or Born-Again between 1976 and 2001 fluctuated between 33 percent and 47 percent with a reasonable estimate being 35 percent of the population or just over 102 million people in 2003." While not identifying themselves as the "Christian Right", the Evangelical demographic is usually in support of the war.

Yes, all those Muslims in Iraq just happened to "be in the wrong place at the wrong time", giddyup. How f*cking convenient. No wonder your kind has its head stuck in the sand wondering why terrorism is occurs when you show such blatant disregard toward Arab lives. I'm sure if you happened to "be in the wrong place at the wrong time" yourself, you wouldn't talk so big and then you would REALLY be in the "grip of it."

You're just proving my point. WWII was a necessary war. Iraq was not.

Would you send your own son to Iraq?

That's what you've convinced yourself of, isn't it?

LOL! Talk about a reach! I was mocking your use of the term, not drawing a parallel! Keep grasping at straws, giddyup.

 

You're as effective as an UNSC Resolution.

 

i'm HDTV resolution, everyone else... analog

 

Is that why you have bad reception....

 

That's a start.

The US military does the bidding of the Executive Branch and the US Congress and their own officers not the general population of the US.

I never called them powerless. That is approximatelly the most recent approval number on Bush which has been floating around.

It was no defense; it was a fact that you seemed to need reminding of. Remember I said ~"I thought you knew that..."

Nothing has evaporated. Why are you unAmerican? You tarnish the religioius tradition of the nation. You label the Administration as fascist. You characterize the US military as war criminals. That's a start...

You cherry picked. Read a little more. You'll find other stats about the largest voting bloc of the Religious Right is the non-voting bloc. You'll find other interesting tidbits about the Black Religious Right and the Jewish Religiious Right which don't support your thesis.

Do you really think I would cite an article that I hadn't even read? Let me introduce you to the color gray. It runs the continuum between the black-white world you imagine is out there.

This sentence I wrote makes no sense: "The American military is targeting those who are dedicated and avowed to kill US and coalition soldiers, any other Westerner, and any Muslim who just happens to get in their way OR just be in the wrong place at the wrong time."

<b>It should have read</b>: "The American military is targeting those who are dedicated and avowed to kill US and coalition soldiers. On the other hand, the insurgents seek to kill any Coalition soldier, any Westerner, and any Muslim who just happens to get in their way OR just be in the wrong place at the wrong time."

I don't know how it got so screwed up except it was late and I was tired. I know you'll just say I'm "backpedaling" but honestly does it make any sense that I would say that the US military is killing "any Westerner?"

You dodged the question by inserting your opinion. Was it criminal for the US military effort to kill so many French civilians in the liberation of France?

It's not my decision. We don't have a draft. Military service is voluntary. My nephew signed on after 9/11 went to Iraq once and is going back in the near future. My other nephew graduated from West Point but was ridden out of the military because of injuries.

No, that's what you wrote. Rather than lambaste you over it, I tried to light-heartedly point out that you had probably mis-typed something.

Sorry, I misread what you wrote. I thought your comment was about Arab occupations not Western.

 

i'm the jerry rice, they are just condelezza rice

 

You're washed up and dancing with the stars?

 

Turbodog is killer. Right now, I'd go with that.



Keep D&D Civil. Drink Turbodog!

 

The executive branch and Congress do the bidding of powerful interest groups and individuals/corporations. It just so happens that in this case, neoconservative foreign policy agenda to create strongholds in the Middle East is easily projected to the hysterical masses in the guise of fighting Muslim terror and protecting Israel. The Christian Right has run with it.

Yea, and that's still pretty strong for one bloc and apparently enough for him to think he has a mandate.

The point here is that using that is an easy cop out anytime someone is offering a different perspective. You, holding a Western perspective, wouldn't be privy to the causese of shi'ite/sunni discord. When someone such as myself who has studied the topic rebukes you, if you don't have a factual rebuttal, you can't just say "well...it's from my Western perspective." That's basically admitting you're content with ignorance on something. I don't know anything about China. If I made a comment about China which wnes corrected me on, if I had no factual rebuttal, I can't just say "well...it's from my perspective, so bite me." It doesn't work that way.

lol. Pray tell where I labeled the administration as fascist. Pray tell where I characterized the US military as war criminals. lol, you really like making things up and applying your own meanings, don't you? I said the Muslim extremists aren't fascists and you somehow arrived at the conclusion that I said the administration was fascist. I said our military occupies other nations and you somehow conclude that I think they're war criminals.

Sorry that I hold our nation to some standards and don't eat up everything I'm fed in some sense of jingoism. As far as "tarnishing the religious tradition of the nation" - I'm not quite sure how that makes me anti-American at all. Didn't you yourself just lambast Islamic shariah for not having seperation of church and state? So now when I criticize the infiltration of religious infiltrations into the political agenda, I'm anti-American? LOL.

The raw numbers of the Christian Right isn't of any significance. What is signifcant is the influence that Christianity has on the voting population's conscience, especially when "family values" are unanimously pointed towards as the key issue in the election. This demographic is very easily manipulated when you consider that such an obscure issue in the grand scheme of things, gay right's, was able to dominate and hijack one of the most important elections of our times. The economy was floundering, our nation was in a quagmire in Iraq, the President had possibly fabricated claims of WMD in Iraq to justify his war, and you're telling me this many people were more concerned over the right of two men to marry each other? That seriously worries me that Republican leadership is that easily able to attach something of such little consequence to their platform, and the masses buy into it. It also tells me that these same people are the ones gullible enough to buy the current lies being served up to justify more incursions in the Middle East.

I'll give you the benefit of the doubt, but it doesn't change anything. Those "insurgents" didn't come to America. They're in Iraq. How can you seriously criticize people for defending their country when it was invaded? This is so ridiculous.

It's not an analagous situation. We were talking about Iraq. We had no need to enter Iraq. We were attacked in WWII, thus we had a need to enter. What we did after that is irrelevant to the discussion.

Again, would you send your son? If you yourself weren't injured and were younger, would you go yourself? You need to ask yourself these questions honestly every time you advocate a war. We take the value of human life for granted far too many times when we ourselves are not directly affected. That's why it's so easy to advocate idealistic causes like "democratizing the Middle East." We're not effected. But millions of people are. Young boys your nephews age come back without limbs and for naught. The lives of hundreds of thousands in Iraq are now ruined. You don't think this fuels more hatred?

No, I didn't mistype anything. I was being sarcastic when I said that, because obviously anything I say about Islam won't register with you so there is no point even trying anymore.

 

i'm dancing in the streets..
they are doing the safety dance