AssemblyBoard

Friends I just saw the movie Fahrenheit 9/11.  It is my hope you will also and let me know what you think?  

Michael Moore uses a simlar technique as George in that he takes things that are facts and arranges them into an alternative context in order to make a statement that is different than one would normally interprete.

For example, in Bowling for Columbine, Moore made it appear as if right after the Columbine incident, the NRA came in to Columbine and had a huge rally where Charleston Heston raised his rifle and made his famous "they will pull my rifle from my cold, dead hands" speech.

Wow!  Charleston Heston is pretty insensitive isn't he?

The truth is, the NRA did have meetings in the area (it may have even been Denver) that were arrange ahead of time.  The NRA cut back their meetings to their business meetings that were required by their bylaws.  There were no speaches and Heston did not make the "from my cold, dead hands" speech at that convention.

This is just one of several examples that were documented of how Michael Moore uses the camera and frames the facts to his liking.  This is why several reviewers refer to his films as "Mocumentaries" instead of "Documentaries".

I know this doesn't answer your question direction.  I don't plan to see F9-11 soon because I don't want to add to its success.  Maybe down the line I may see it, but I have about as much interest in seeing it as I have in going to a Geftakys seminar as I consider them both in the same genre.

P.S.:  Just for the record, I am not an NRA supporter and I do not have any interest in owning a gun.

Dave, did you see "Bowling for Colimbine"?  I was a little offended by some of Moores' deceptivness,(The interviews with Mr. Nichols and Heston) yet I learned a lot about  violence in America.  The jist of the documentary was asking the question Why are we such a violent nation?  Moore doesn't pretend to leave us with any answer to this problem but he does a great job in exposing it and causes us to examine ouselves.  Please don't write off F-9/11.  Just see it and let's talk.

Dave,

I was not aware that you have a violence problem.  Have you had this problem all your life?  Or, did it emerge recently?

Have you sought counselling?  That might help.  

Now that I think about it, the title of this thread, "Let's take the gloves off!", is an invitation to violence.  I hadn't thought of that before reading your post.

I don't remember you as being an angry, hostile person, Dave.  You seemed like a gentle man.  Now, you want to "take the gloves off."

Be careful, Dave.  Violence has consequences.

Thomas Maddux

(Deleted)  Especially those who have decided that God and Christianity is a sham, and that people like George Geftakys stole the best years of their lives from them.

It is understandable, and is only one example of how George and his people have really devastated those that were true believers.

Dear anonymous poster,

It looks to me as if you are accusing Dave Mauldin of being a homosexual.  You have offered absolutely no evidence of: 1. Who you really are; 2. That he indeed has this problem.

Therefore I have edited your accusation out of your post.  Please do not call people ugly names.  Especially as you choose to remain hidden yourself.

Thomas Maddux
Global Moderator

Hi David! :)

  I am also very angry at what GG did to me while in the Assembly, but I do not automatically reject God and Christianity because of that.

 In the Assembly we were involved in a gross distortion of the teaching of the Christian faith, and those distortions should be rejected.

  I'm not saying that there have not been moments that I  questioned my faith, or even my own sanity, but I always believed that the problems was not that "God was a sham" but that my perception was the problem.

  I would imagine that most Homosexuals angrily reject Bible believing Christian beliefs because they feel guilty about their sexual inclinations.  It must be a very difficult, and unhappy life, to have desires that one finds impossible to change, and yet they are condemned for having them-- kind of a catch-22 type situation.

  There are all kinds of sins that an individual may be trapped in (example=heterosexual porn.) but angrily rejecting God's moral standards is not the answer.  This still leaves us with a nagging guilt and a feeling that God is rejecting us.  The truth is that God is not asking us to change ourselves, but to agree that we have a serious moral problem over which we have no control, and ask for His help.

  I imagine this is something that you tried to change in your life when you first joined up with the Assembly, and found that all the hope for a "cure" via "Christian teaching" brought only great discouragement.

  That GG lived a sham, and taught a false holiness message that promised that all sinful desires would depart our souls and we could live perfect lives, is clear to most now.  Exactly what to do with persistent desires that are contrary to clear Biblical teaching is probably less clear to most us.

  What if we've confessed and prayed our hearts out for years, and feel like the desires are just as strong as ever?    

 And if so, does that mean there is no God? And if God is real, and his supply of grace through the Spirit available to us: how come I can't seem to find help?

  It certainly does not mean that God helps those who can manage to wrestle down sin in their own souls, though we are told as Christians to struggle against sin in our lives.

  No, I think the answer lies in finding others who have struggled with similar sinful inclinations and getting their help.  God has gifted His body with those he sends to minister to every need.

  God is not the author of our "catch-22", nor does he reject us for our sin, but is the way out of the trap. The answer to that need is not the instant kind of "touch from God" that will make it all go away. This does not mean that God has not provided some other less "spiritual" means to help us.

  God has provided this BB where ex-assembly members can find help with their specific needs regarding their deceptions.  This BB can be helpful because it is made up of ex-members who understand what it means to have fallen into that trap.

  There are ministries that God is using to help homosexuals find deliverance from their abberant desires and discovery of true joy in Christ.  Focus On The Family sponsors one such group and by going to their site one could get in contact with them.

  I am not trying to mock you David,and truly have only your best interests in mind in sharing these things.

                                          God Bless,  Mark C.

Tom:
If you don't see the USA as a violent nation, you need counselling

delila

1.  The USA has plenty of violence.

2.  Nobody on this thread (so far) has denied that or even hinted that it isn't so.

3.  I don't know of anyone who is beyond the need of sound counselling.

4.  Violence has many forms beyond the physical;  mental, emotional, verbal...  Take great care to not become the thing you claim to deplore.

al

Delila,

Actually, I don't really understand what the term "a violent nation" means.

Does it mean that many violent people live in the USA?  If that is what it means, then all nations are violent nations, since all have violent people.

Does it mean that all Americans are violent?  That simply wouldn't be true.

Is it a description of current or past governmental policies?  In that case it seems an election would transform us into a peaceful nation, and then a later election could transform is back again.

How much violence does a nation have to have to qualify as a "violent" nation.  One act?  One million acts?  Two? Three?

So, I guess someone will have to explain to me just what the term means.

If anyone knows.

Thomas Maddux

JUNE 26: 11:43 PM

Violence is just not a USA problem. It is in major Canadian cities.

Canadian get the news from USA, I dont know how Canadian news travel the other way.

Even in Ottawa, there are violence, that other major North American Cities  endure.

Just turn on our television, most of the programming we Canadian watch is American television.

I was thinking about this most of the evening.
Violences touches us each and every day. Just watch the News , read the News, or even listen to the news.
It is not just North American, there are violence through out the world.

Violence is reality, but do we have to become obsessed with it . No.
Can violence become personal, yes, we can become victims of violence in many forms.
Do we have to be the on who  is a part of violence . NO.

I agree with Al. There are many forms of violence, even the speech has become violence in tones and words.

Is our culture so different from Biblical times, in the subject of violence.  

Every generation has had it share of violence.
Unfortunately , when you get several million people living in one city, with different cultures, different ideas, different needs.  Everyone wants their own way, their own rights, trying to survive, trying to feed their family, poverty, hopelessness.

Remember, this world is ready to explode. The master of violence is ready and posed, it is going to get worse.
For us Christians, MASTER OF LIFE, LOVE , AND LIBERTY
is also ready, posed and will act.

Violence is a real whether we are Americans, Canadians, city dwellers, rural dwellers, children, adults, seniors, whether we are of European decent, African decent, Asian decent, or First Nations decent.
Whether we are North American by birth or adopted in to the countries by immigrating.

I think most of North Americans, have really no idea, what violence really is, when so many refugees, have horror stories, that would make our Hollywood Movie look like a lullaby.

Violence like every thing else, needs to be talked about, dealt with, maybe we need to be more active in solving the matter.  

Am I making any sense???

There has been violence in the world for ages, but I think that what David Mauldin is trying to bring attention to is a special kind of violence.  This form of violence is well portrayed in the Twilight Zone episode, "Printer's devil."  Mr. Smith (the devil) has made special modifications to the linotype machine so that whatever is typed into it happens.  By this means he is able to bring success to a newspaper business.

Since so much of the violence that the news makes a big deal out of is carried out by a very small number of people, it is not unreasonable to imagine that those few people are in some sense sponsored by some organization connected with the news media.  Such an organization would be very much like the devil's linotype machine in the Twilight Zone episode.

Hi Lenore,

I think that violence is a characteristic of the USA. We may not have as many violent incidents as other countries, but I think it's just a matter of time.

The violent crime of abortion happens more than 1 million times each year in America.

Moonflower

David,

I did see the movie.  Mr. Moore called it Bowling for Columbine based on the idea that the Columbine killers was enrolled in a bowling class the morning before the killing.  Though they actually skipped the class that morning, it could have been presumed that bowling was one of the last things they did before the 11:00 AM shooting.  Blaiming hard rock music such as Marilyn Manson for the killing (as religious types rushed to do) is about  as logical as blaming bowling.  This was Mr. Moore's point and he could be right on this.

He then attempted to show that we were a nation of gun nuts.  He gave the example of how silly it seemed to him that a bank was giving away rifles to those who opened a CD account (actually, rather safe since he did not show the fact that he had to sit in the lobby for an hour while a background check was done and give the bank a couple thousand dollars to open an account - not a great set up to turn around and rob the bank).

He then went to to a survivalist group and made links to Timothy McVeigh.

He offered the following explanations of our preoccupation with guns.

1.  He pointed out that in Columbine there was a large defence plant.  Could the fact that we were making missles to destroy lives overseas be the model the Columbine killers to kill at home.  (He didn't point out that one of the Columbine killer's parents were gun control advocates).

2.  He showed the plight of a woman who had to take a bus from Flint Michigan to work two minimum wage jobs and couldn't make enough to pay her rent.  She was forced to move to her brother's house.  Her son, who was unsupervised, found a gun and shot someone at school.  Moore then blames business that don't pay enough and specifically Dick Clark since she worked at his chain of restaurants.  

What Mr. Moore didn't point out (and investigation afterwards showed) was that the amount she was making was plenty to pay her low rent.  Further there were job and rent subsidies right there in Flint that she was not taking advantage of (could have been an errant social worker who didn't tell her or other reasons).  Finally, her brother where the son found the gun was running a crack house.  I would be more inclinded to put some blame here rather than on Dick Clark.

3.  He then moved to racism.  He made some dubious ties between the KKK and the NRA via a cartoon.  He then pointed out that we were a culture of fear because the nightly news focuses in on crime - especially racial crime.  Actually, according to Mr. Moore, inner city Los Angeles is actually rather safe.  The real problem is air polution, not crime.  We only think that the inner cities are unsafe because of the constant news reporting.  If you compare this to Canada, where the news is not so obsessed with racial crime, you find a different attitude in people, less racism and less tendency to be gun nuts.  He relied heavily on the author of "Culture of Fear".

While I am not sure I believe the inner city of Los Angeles is perfectly safe, I do think Mr. Moore has a point here in terms of the type of junk that is churned out in network news.  If this is what you were getting at, David, when you made your comment about a violent society, I would agree with you.

4.  He does have a segment where he blames K-mart for selling the the bullets that were used in Columbine.  He walked into their corporate headquarters and, on film, demanded they stop selling bullets which they agreed to.

This was my understanding of the film.  Because Mr. Moore has such a slanted adjenda, again, I will probably not see his new film now, but down the line.  I don't want to add my vote to his ratings.  I do feel offended at Hollywood for breaking it's unwritten rule and distributing a blatantly political work attacking a sitting President.  This has never been done before.  I know we have free speech and Mr. Moore has every right to declare his opinion.  But with Mr. Moore, the purchasing of Mr. Frankin's air time and George Soro's spending billions, I feel it is a flaunting of any campaign reform attempts.  You know that if this wins Kerry the election, conservatives will strike back in kind on the next election and it will escelate the battle of high stakes, multi-million dollar "spin wars".  I would rather discuss issues.

A book that I would read, I suppose would be Woodward's book "Plan of Attack".  He seems to argue that Bush did have an intensity about going to war, but it also points out that the information he was receving at the time (and the conventional wisdom of many of both parties) was that the fact of WMD's were a "slam dunk".  In other words, he seems to be attempting to show facts - both sides of the debate may benefit depending on what they choose to emphasise, but Woodward doesn't openly pitch his tent on any one side.

Lord bless,

Dave

P.S.:  I am on vacation and I may not have internet the next week.  I may not be able to reply until July 5th.

Hello? How in the world did my "violence problem" become an issue? (Tom, as ussual I don't understand you.  Are you being sarcastict?) How did my "homosexual" problem become an issue?  Oh, by the way please inform my fiance' about this, we are getting marride July 10th at the Anahiem Unitarian Church 11:00 All Welcome! (Stephen Mather-Cottons' great, great, great, great grandson will be performing the ceremony.) My point in starting this thread was to invite people to watch Fahrenheit 9/11.  Dave I appreciate what you wrote about "Bowling for Columbine"  I would agree with you and state again that Mr.M doesn't offer any answers to the problems. A couple of months ago a husband and wife spoke at my church.  They have been succsesful at getting legislation passed that prohibits the sale of rapid fire weapons to citizens. Why are they involved in this stuff?  Yes, their son was killed by such a weapon.
Now is this the answer to the fact that more U.S. citizens were killed in L.A. last year than in Iraq? I don't know.  I do think it is important to them and perhaps this was Mr. Ms point.  


  Fahrenheit 9/11 is an altogether different movie.  Yes it is "Propaganda" and Mr. M states this himself.  Yes he takes facts and weaves them together to present a conspiracy theory.  But any intelligent person can evaluate the facts by themselves and draw their own conclusions.  Please don't let your image of me keep you from watching this film!

Hello Moonflower:

Abortion is readily available in Canada too.

Doesnt violence whether it is abortion, drive by shootings, violences against women and children, wars, gangs, doesnt it stem from one thing.
SELFISHNESS, SELF CENTERNESS, WANTING ONES RIGHTS in otherwords 'SIN'.

Yes I agree, violence is only going to get worse.
Because the Master of Sin is at work.

But the Good News is we have a Stronger Master at Work, but because of the times we live in whether we are North Americans, or Middle Eastern, or Africans, or Asians. Even South & Central American.
God has warned us within his Word of what the end times are going to be like.

Even with school violence like Columbine, even the one in Alberta. Even in the midst of all that horror, there was praise and honour to God, about the girl who stood up for God before being shot. The Father of the student in Alberta, showing his forgiveness. Even in Ottawa, when a girl was brutually murder while riding on the bicycle path, her parents exercise their faith in God, to extend forgiveness.

With these examples this show how much more God is at work over the deeds of hands of man.

USA is a violent country in many areas.
Should we look to the examples like these people did, rose above the violents, relied on their Saviour, and bore witness to the world community.
I think these examples are much better to give hope, love and faith.  I believe much better to follow and think upon.  

Hello David,

1. If you will read this thread, I told some "troll" to knock if off when he implied that you were a homosexual.  As I told him, I have never seen or heard any information that you have that problem.
I don't know exactly what Mark C. is thinking.

2. My post about "your violence problem" was to point out that you are not being clear.  If we are a "violent nation" then everyone, including you, must be violent.

What makes a nation a "violent" one.  Is it a history of wars?  Street crime?  Fights in bars?  Wife beating?

If it is any of the above, is there an average rate of incidents that qualifies a nation for the title?  Does the term extend to the past?  If so, how far in the past.

Is Mongolia a "violent" nation?  After all, they produced Atilla the Hun and Genghis Kahn, not to mention Timur the Lame.  
But admittedly, no real action there for several centuries.  Is their title retired?


Or, is your term merely an emotion- based vague dislike of America?

Thomas Maddux

David,

When I was a kid the streets of LA were safe.  Two major and related problems have arisen which have developed from the 60's on.

The first is drug use.  Los Angeles is awash with drugs.  The liberals and the ACLU, (Anti Christian Liberals Union, or so it seems), have made it nearly impossible to deal with the problem.  Year after year we hear political rhetoric, but nothing is done.

Some modern societies, who have large numbers of people far poorer than our poorest, have very little trouble with drugs.  The reason is that they have a death penalty law for drug dealers.  Odd, even poverty people seem to be able to control themselves if there are consequences they respect!

Poor people, however, don't make the laws.  The reason we have such weak drug laws and such poor enforcement of existing laws is that we have so many affluent Baby Boom Liberals who are drug users.  They, however, are more sophisticated than the poor Crack and PCP users.  So, although they get their drugs from the same cartels they are rarely caught or prosecuted.

In other words, they are quite willing to let the drug trade go on so that they can have a regular supply, no matter what the consequences are in the poor communities they claim to champion.

The second is gangs.  Again, LA has always had gangs.  But prior to the 50's they were much less violent, and more concerned with getting drunk and hanging out than controlling drug sales in the areas they dominate.  

That is what is behind the high murder rates in LA and in other major urban areas as well.  They kill each other in territorial wars and revenge killings that arise from conflicts over control of the drug trade.

In addition, drug addiction is what drives most prostitution, burglary, street muggings, and most of the holdups in stores.  It is a blight on modern America.

Yet, we don't deal with it, and we are not going to deal with it real soon.  The potheads start screaming "injustice" every time an attempt is made.  And, there is some truth in what they say.  Arresting more crackheads in the ghetto does nothing to solve the problem...there is always some other kid to trap into drug use.

The root of the evil is the large number of wealthy educated "Liberals" who are regular drug users and are not about to give it up.  "Groovy man"   "If it feels good, do it"

Thomas Maddux

f you know anyone who is disturbed, upset, confused
or otherwise conflicted about Michael Moore's
"documentary," feel free to send them this article
(URL below will take you to slate.com.). It's rather
long (6 pages, single-spaced when printed), but
readable and insightful, especially when you consider
that the author is "left-leaning" (according to
William F. Buckley, Jr., anyway).

Interesting (to me) that some people are actually
falling for this propaganda as if it were true, with
some so-called conservative fence-sitters emerging
teary-eyed from the film, convinced of its veracity!
What nonsense! Feel free to pass along!

Thanks

Article URL: http://slate.msn.com/id/2102723/

Tom for many years I have wondered why our community seems to tolerate the crime it does.  Every few years we hear the the police cheif is cracking down on crime.  Warrents were issued, arrest made etc... then things settle down again.  It is just a cycle
that doesn't really address the problems.  I work in the poorest community of Buena Park. Yes my kids are faced with crime everyday.  Murders, drugs, you name it. their school looks like crap.  It was built in 1952 for 400 students. Yet is runs at 1000. The campus is dirty, grafitti marks everywhere. If a teacher wants to visit the campus during the weekend she better take her husband because it is a hangout for scum. Yes the kids are in danger of joining this kind of lifestyle. Yet I live in Aliso Viejo. Across the street is a public school. It is the finest public school I have ever seen. New buildings, beautiful lawns, the children have the best equipment, gymnasium, outside garden where they grow their own plants, vegetables etc.. No doubt the children in this area have somewhat stable lives at home.  Their parents are involved in their education, extracurricular activities. They probably play musical instruments, vacation out of Sate etc.. It doesn't take long to figure out which kids are more suseptable to taking the wrong paths in life.  "It's the parents responsibility!" Yes I agree.  But what do you do when they won't or are not able to take responsibility?  For the past 6 years I have volunteered my time and money to helping these kids.  I have had a "Harry Potter Book Club" one hour a week with about 50-100 students.  I have also had an "Astronomy Night" Last January, 300 people from the community showed up. (remember how hard it was to get people to attend "Bible Study") Yet any thing you do in this neighborhood is packed.  This is because the people their have no money and nothing else to do. Yet I am only one teacher who is burnt out exhausted. I have often wondered what our community would look like if the leaders would just invest some time and money themselves. I have often wondered what my school community would look like if it had an afterschool science program, sports program etc...(Did you know our Jr. high has no athletic program???)  (It did when I went to school in 76!) Why did George need 187 billion of our taxes to "...ensure good education for the Iraqi people..." Yet we constantly hear about cutbacks.  The staff at my school spends time worrying if they will be moved or pressured into quitting. If you compare the money we put into education with that of France or Germany or Norway, If you compare the prestige of the teaching proffession with that of England or Canada, for some reason we are way below their standards. Yet we have more people in prisons in proportion with our poulation than they do!  why???  No, I don't think tougher law enforcment is the only answer.

David,

As you know, I taught for 33 years in the LA district.  I am, (sadly), very familiar with the school conditions and social problems you describe.

When I started my teaching career in 1970 the "old order" was still in place.  By today's standards, our schools were clean, orderly, and successful.  They were not perfect, and they never were.  Just quite good.

When I retired, I was teaching in a building built in 1917.  It was run down, filthy, and very little learning was going on.

When I started, the moral breakdown of the 60's was taking hold as the indulgent druggies finished their educations and moved into society.  Teaching was one of their favorite career goals.  Now, they dominate the educational establishment of America.

These are amoral, indulgent people.  Religiously, they are either, agnostics, atheists, or new age occultists.  Morally, they are relativists.  They do not believe in fixed moral values.

So, they have solved the behavior problems of the schools by attacking the rules instead of the bad behaviors.  The results are obvious.  For example, in my district they still had PE programs.  About half of the kids simply refuse to participate...so they get an F in PE.  Year after year.  The teachers and administrators just whine about social changes and bad parents.   But they do nothing.

They believe in the fantasy that educational problems can be solved by just throwing more money at the problem.  But if you don't stop kids from destroying schoolbooks, for example, and buy more and more books for them to destroy, where's the gain?

Oh that the solution were that simple.  It is popular to compare american education, (unfavorably),  with Japan's or Europe's.  But they never mention the Paedea Project.  In the 1970's a large number of "intellectuals", (Liberals), got together and decided that it was "unfair" to channel kids that weren't succeeding academically into vocational courses.   Everyone, they said, should receive a "liberal arts education".

All over america, vocational education has been shut down!  Kids that used to leave school with marketeable skills now drop out after they turn 16.  It is a social disaster.  

Are these "liberals" willing to take the blame for what they have done?  Are they willing to change anything?  Nope.  They just whine about needing more money and go right on with their counter productive policies.

If they actually get more money, they use it to hire more folks like themselves to do the same kind of things.  During the Great Depression of the 1920's and 1930's, educational funding was so tight that virtually ALL administrative services were curtailed.  All you had was books, teachers and the local school principles.

But because of the MORALS in place in our society, the schools were orderly and produced a superior product!  Now we have an educational system that denies any basis for morals beyond personal preference...the results are there for all to see.

Thomas Maddux

David Mauldin! :)

  1,000 apologies for not understanding your post!  :-[

  I thought you were talking about yourself when you mentioned homosexuality.  The reason that I did think this was because it seemed that you went out of your way to use homosexuality in your argument where it didn't seem to fit the context.

  Also, congratulations on your upcoming marriage and I pray God's richest blessing on it!!
                                                        Mark C.

I would like to say that I appreciate Faith and her desire to encourage people to read material about Fahrenheit 9/11 but also I would encourage you to see the movie and decide for yourself.

My opinion too.

Akin to choose a doctrine and then find some random, or even relevant, verses to back up the doctrine.

The truth is to guide us.

Marcia

from the internet:
--------------------

Spider-Man 2 Conspires to Silence Michael Moore
by Scott Ott

(2004-06-30) -- Spider-Man 2 is part of "a web of deception, a conspiracy to silence" Oscar-winning documentarist Michael Moore, according to the filmmaker whose Fahrenheit 9/11 is America's current number one box office smash.

"It's not just the cynical timing of the release of Spider-Man 2," said Mr. Moore, "but the movie endorses the unilateral and so-called righteous use of power to overcome so-called evil. This is a thinly-veiled rebuttal of Fahrenheit 9/11 and the entire security plank of the Democrat National Committee platform."

Mr. Moore added that buying a ticket to Spider-Man 2 is "tantamount to voting for George Bush."
 
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
(the above is a work of humor  ;D taken from:

        http://www.scrappleface.com/MT/archives/001747.html  (http://www.scrappleface.com/MT/archives/001747.html) )
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

P.S.--  David, I add to Mark's congratulations upon your upcoming wedding those of Cathy and myself, with wishes for God's will in your life together...

Sincerely,
al

Sceptic:  "The Bible is full of contradictions!" ;D

Believer:  "Oh, could you please show me where?" :-\

Sceptic:   "Well, I a, "I just know because a friend told me so.." >:(

Believer:  "Have you ever read the Bible?

Sceptic  : "Well, a NO!"

Believer:  "Then how can you be sure that it is full of lies?"

Sceptic:  "Yes I guess your right, perhaps I should read the Bible and the decide for myself!" :)

Believer:  "Great let me know what you think!" ;D ;D ;D

Hi David,

Good point.

I neglected to mention that I have seen a good chunk of Bowling for Columbine and have not seen Fahrenheit 9/11.

I would have considered watching F9/11 if Moore had been more objective in B for C.  Sorry I cannot comment on his latest documentary.

Lord bless,
Marcia

Hi folks,

David seems to be saying that unless you see Moore's movie, your opinions about it are unfounded, just as the "skeptic" had unfounded opinions about the Bible.

The difference is that anyone who has been awake for the past few months already knows what Moore's movie is about and what it is intended to produce.   It is widely acknowledged, by commentators on both the Left and the Right, to be nothing more than anti-Bush propaganda.  

Both print and electronic media have been chattering about it for a few months.  Disney refused to distribute it, even though they owned it.  So Moore bought the rights and distributed it himself.

Personally, I agree with former President Clinton, President G. W. Bush and Senator John Keary...Sadaam Hussein was a supporter of terrorism and a threat to America...and we are all better off without him.

As to the movie, I'll save my nickle.

Thomas Maddux

The movie points out that:

A conservative majority on the Supreme Court decided that Bush was our next President.

Before 9/11 Bush was on vacation 46% of the time.

The Saudi governemnt owns 7% of the U.S. Much of this money is tied into Texas oil owned by Bush and friends.

135 Saudi citizens (Many relatives of Osamin Bin Laden) were given flights out of the U.S. two days after 9/11. (U.S. citizens were grounded and many U.S. citzens were taken in for questioning about their ties to terrorist.)

Against the advise of the U.N. and many people in his cabnet own Clark ect...Bush invades Iraq on the premise that ..."The U.S. is in danger od being attacked by Saddam Hussain and his weapons of mass destruction.


Daily life in Iraq is driven into chaos.  Innocent people are killed, injured, disabled for the rest of their lives.

As of today no WMD'S are found.

As of today over 15000 Iraqi citizens are dead

11000 Iraqi soldiers dead

over 800 American soldiers dead

Only one Soldier stationed in Iraq is the son of a U.S. senator
while the vast majority of U.S. soldiers were recruited on the premise that they could elevate themselves out of a life of poverty. Many of the U.S. soldiers joined believing it would lead to acollege education.  Many U.S. soldiers believed that they would be coming home after 3 months.

All this information was already known to the American public.  All the Mr. Moore has done is make it acsessable and entertaining to the  to the general public.

Yup.  That's the way the whacky Left sees it.  Every allegation in the movie is true, no doubt about it.  

One thing Mr. Moore may be right about.  When he got up in Germany the other day and said, "Americans are the stupidest people in the world, that's why they are always smiling", he was probably thinking of his Liberal friends.

Dave,

Once you were the blind follower of George Geftakys.  You have merely changed the crowd you follow.   You are still just following the leader.

I'm not so sure your new leaders are any better than the old ones.

Thomas Maddux

Methinks much of it is how you order the facts.  In our postmodern world, we tend to order facts according to our own personal story.

If Mr. Moore want's to let us think that Bush was asleep at the wheel, he is free (as he did) to use weekends and holidays along with retreats to camp David (as all Presidents took) to come up with the 46% vacation statistic.

If he want to ignore the fact that at the time that both parties voted for the war under the commonly believed perception that WMD were a "slam dunk" (see Woodward's book) and that Saddam's behavior with the weapon's inspectors indicated ill intent, he is free to do that.

My only regret is that Mr. Leiberman didn't win the Democratic primary.  He is the only Democrat running who voted for the war (as they pretty much all did) and didn't back peddle and act as if President Bush acted alone on this.  I don't agree with Mr. Leiberman's conclusions about abortion and other issues.  But, at least I feel he is a man trying to be honest to his convictions and stand behind his actions.

If we were to produce a popular documentary about Mr. Kerry posing him as a rich billionare out of touch with people and constantly changing his position on issues for political gain, would you watch it?  Probably not.  So why should I rush out to see a liberal propaganda piece?

BTW, I agree with what is said before - it's not that I don't want to be open minded and overcome my prejuduces (as you implied by the Bible anology).  I know Mr. Moore's track record.  Even the Simpson's and Mad TV make fun of his inaccuracies and loose cannon ways.  There is no indication that Mr. Moore has gotten more honest.  So, why don't we look for a book/film to discuss that has greater credibitity as opposed to mere popular appeal?

Michael Moore has a lot in common with the Scottish character in the "Austin Powers" movies----They're both fat bastards.

--Joe

Tom,  "Allegation"  All I did was list undisputed events/facts.
If you want to acuse me of following blindly it would be according to the  conspiracy theory Mr. Moore suggest in the movie.  (He Bush- let the Saudis go because....etc) These I do question and believe that he may have taken liberties. Yet the movie does come intouch with people who are directly involved with the war, relatives of the dead, the wounded, deserters.  what these people have to say we cannot judge.  They are there and they have paid dearly for Mr. bush's desicions.  See the film!  It may change your life.


Tom as far as Geftakys goes I feel redeamed!  Why? I got in his face and threatened to clean his clock.  Try it. It feels good!

 :): Say it is great to see a discussion about American Politics is just a fevered , or even more so that we Canadians complain about our Canadian Politicians.

Thanks for "making me glad I am Canadian"


Gidday from the Ottawa Valley.
Happy Canada Day/Happy Independence Day.

I saw Canadian politicans debating economic policies on CSPAN.  My overall impression was - What a bunch of weenies.  

Indisputable facts?  Then you won't mind if I dispute them.



This so-called conservative majority on the Supreme Court has voted to legalize sodomy and on-line pornography in public schools.  To make the claim that they have a conservative majority is ludicrous.  To go on to claim Bush had some influence over them in the election is insane.  If you want to raise up the issue of the election, how about the thousands of votes for Gore in New Mexico that came from dead people.



So?  Sounds like a typical government employee.  The fact that he's working more now after the terrorist attacks is a good thing, right Dave?


Where did you (or Moore) get this figure?  Even if it's true, so?


So?  Did the Moore film mention that these relatives of Bin Laden have publicly renounced Osama?


Bush was the only one willing to act upon the U.N. ultimatums.  The U.N., not the U.S., made these ultimatums in the first place.


So?  Why did the U.N. make the ultimatums in the first place?  Because there was no doubt that Hussein had these weapons.  They were probably moved before or during the U.S. invasion.



So?  Are you saying that all of the soldiers fighting in Iraq today are too stupid to not understand that joining the army means combat?


If you call propaganda entertainment.  Are you the type of person who said a hearty "Amen" when Hitler sent media throughout Germany stating how it was imperative to annex Czechoslovakia to the fatherland.




This one takes the cake.  Do you think things are so much worse in Iraq today than when the Butcher of Baghdad was in power?  Why don't we have all the people who were tortured by Saddam shake your hand and thank you for understanding that their plight today is worse than it was then...oh but they can't because their tongues and hands are cut off.  Where do you get your information?  Tom?  Peter?  CNN?  The Times? The Post?  Oh, that fat slob, communist America-hater Moore?

Every day they display their horror show hoping the American public will pick it up like the tabloids.  But if you listen to the people who are actually there and working in Iraq, you'll learn that most Iraqi's are very glad the American's are there.  They want their freedom and are working towards it. A commander there said that Iraqis no longer consider Americans foreigners. To them, Americans are the ones who are training their police, building new sewers, helping get the IT infrastructure up. When they refer to terrorist attacks that occur in their country, they refer to them as attacks from foreigners--the foreigners being the terrorists from other countries such Iran and Syria who've crossed the border to stir up trouble.

Is America or Bush bent on conquest?  For a long time during the war people like you were complaining that he wanted oil.  In fact, we could pull up a post of yours where you said that very thing.  But did you know that America is footing the bill so that Iraqis can get cheap gas?  5 billion dollars a month it's costing us.  And on top of that gas prices rose 30-40% here in the U.S.  It should be clear to everyone what America's role is in Iraq--and it isn't oil or conquest--it's to help these people.  If you aren't willing to help them, then you can just shut up.  

All of this lowlife's Moore's points are vague connections and nebulous points.  There's nothing substantial to it at all.  It's just a lure, he dangles some morsels of trash on a wire, to get easy-to-be-misled people like you to shell out 8 bucks to see it.

Arthur

THANKS ARTHUR:
You probably are right.
QUESTION: What language they debate from?

I lost respect for my goverment when all the memorials were going on after Sept 11. The Television protrayed your president  with tears and prayers.
And each of the major religions got to pray during the services.

Our goverment at the time, had a service, with representatives from the major religions, but there was no prayers off up for the victims, or the families of 911
even though there were Canadians killed in that terrorist attack too.

Our own Prime Minister didnt even say the word prayer.
Even though hard core reporters who one time would scoff at such  a possibility, would even saying prayer, or was praying or advicing people to pray. Not our Prime Minister at the time.
During this time many people were ashamed of the Prime Minister of Canada, because like the States, our country was based on Christian values.
But I believe Canada has sold, its soul for the sake of multiculturalism tolerance.  Which unfortunately includes lifestyle. I am all for accepting people for who they are, but  in stamping out discrimination Christians have set themselves up for discrimination by not including the right to be accepted too.

I believe if prayers were allowed back into the schools, and christian moral values, I believe you wouldnt have the trouble with the youth you would today.????

I know there were a lot of talk of Americans blaming Canada, for our multicultural policies,  that allowed terrorist from crossing across the border.  
Canada has a lot to be ashamed of in the distant past, in the last century past, and even in recent history past.
Canada was also a save haven during the slavery era of the States history.

I know alot of people in the States blame Canada for not going to IRAQ with the Americans.
I bet if you look there are Canadian over there, because Canadian men have joined the American Armed Forces. Just like there were Canadian Men who went to War in Vietnam. These men do not get the benefits of veterans from neither country. Because they are Canadian, and because Canada was not involved in the Vietnam War.

Canada also need to be worried, with so many seat that the BLOC has won in our recent election, the possibility of Separation  is once again on the hearts of Quebecers.  Many fears who live alone the Ottawa River and other Quebec /Provinical Borders.
Well I wont say it. But even when I was growing up, and during the FLQ crisis. Many talked about the possibility of a civil war between the two major language groups in Canada. A country that tolerate multiculturalism, many people fear the consequences between the English and the French.

I am just voicing and talking and remembering the words of 30+ years ago.

THANKS ARTHUR . maybe Canadian politicians are weinies when it comes to some things. The politician that was campaigning for the NDP was too nice of a guy, and you know what they say, Nice guys finishes last.

Canada is still a nice place to live .

Lenore

Lenore, maybe Canada is in a more advanced state of decline politically and/or morally (if so the US isn't far behind), but it's still good and right to be patriotic.  There's always trouble-makers and wicked people who want to trash a good thing.  They just don't think the same way we do.  They think good is evil and evil is good.  Forget them, I've given up, there's not much we can do but talk--no changing them.  But we don't have to think like them and we don't have to be like them.  If I visited you I'm sure I'm come back with the impression that Canada is a great place.  If I read a Canadian newspaper, I'd be as depressed as if I read ours.  So, thank you for the O Canada postcard and I say that America is still a great place too :)

Arthur

Hey Dave, here's you're WOMD.  

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,124576,00.html (http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,124576,00.html)
Polish troops found 17 Sarin Warheads in Iraq.

OK Dave,

I ran Mr. Moore's facts by a couple of US Marines. They are stanking behind me as I type. It's a group thing. We live very close to Camp Pentalton. One of these young men didn't die when he was in Iraq, but he did have a close hand to hand fight with a ex-Republican Guard that the US was trying to rehabilitate. Even though this man was trying to kill him the Marine is still convinced what the US is doing there is important to humanity. Your fact of 15.000 Iraqi dead caused him to point out that 1,000,000 had already died and was wondering how many Mr. Moore was willing to sacrifice for the world to continue doing nothing. In fact, he was wondering how many have to starve to death in Korea or are murdered in Sudan before the UN blue helmuts do anything. There are some bumper stickers floating around that say "War is not the answer." That is true, but "Peace at any cost" is not either. Mr. Moore lives an easy  black and white world (hence his "Americans are the dumbest people in the world" line). We are so stupid we are the richest nation in the world and Mr. Moore is making millions off of us. Mr. Moore has millions, Mr. Bush has millions, but only one of them is really rocking the world.

My Dave,

So now you feel "redeamed".  Let's see, while enveighing mightily against "violence" you threaten to beat up an 80 year old man!

And this makes you feel good!   "Redeamed" even.

And you have come here to lead us out of the darkness of Christianity and into the light of atheism.

Then maybe WE can enjoy beating up old men.  It must be fun to be a member of the enlightened elite.  You get to enjoy condemning the imagined wrongs of most other folks, and then indulge in evil yourself.

Way to go, Dave.

Thomas Maddux

Hey Jem, have those Marine friends of yours been to Iraq or have friends who have? I'd be interested to hear their perspective on how things are going over there.  All we have over here to go by are the liberal media or an occasional guest on conservative talk radio.

David,

     I'm glad you keep returning to this board to express your feelings and views.  It clearly demonstrates that God is working in your heart and mind, despite whatever you may suspect.

     Your concern for others-- for your students, your community, the world, and even us here on the BB-- is evidence that God has begun a good work in you.  Whether you post here in hope of leading the rest of us from our benightedness, or to flaunt your superior comprehension, or merely to vent your spleen is immaterial to the larger picture.  You obviously know who, and where, your true friends are, and you are not finding fulfillment elsewhere.

     That you are sometimes roughly addressed here, and yet return, further shows that you understand:  that is what friends do.  We do not deny or alter the truth for the sake of social propriety ("political correctness").  We speak the truth in love, and we pray.  We do not hope nor expect to convince you by clever argument or persuasive logic.  One plants, another tends, and God contents us with the sure knowledge that the harvest belongs to Him.

      Continue to do as you think you should.  God has not forsaken you and will not leave you.  I speak as one who spent over twenty post-assembly years denying Christ's authority in my life and believing myself to embrace a far superior kind of secular humanism.  Unsensed, unexperienced, and unknown by me, He was at work in my life all that time, converting my unbelief and preparing me to receive and comprehend His grace so I could begin with Him anew.

     I now know that my Redeemer lives, who He is, and that He (not I) is the Author and Finisher of my faith and my salvation.  My prayer is that your recovery may not take as long as mine...

Sincerely,
al

Thanks Al,

         Yes Tom I should be ashamed of myself for threatening an 80 year old man.  Yet for 15 years George had no qualms about getting physical with me. Literaly at times he would throw out his chest and walk through me. He had no qualms about publicly humiliating me or demeaning me in private. He had no qualms about letting me know who's  boss whenever he felt like it. He had no mercy on me when my wife left me. Only words of condemnation and ridicule. (Kinda like what you do to me on this B.B.!) Yes I am sorry but at the time I needed to stand up to him and let him know he didn't have me whipped any longer. Perhaps I was the Lords instrument? Perhaps if others did the same they wouldn't have taken their own lives?  Or ended up in a mental hospital? George himself often boasted about how he "cleaned peoples clocks" And I think if given the chance many people would like to clean his. Forgive me Tom I was wrong.


     O.K. guys you have all had your say about Fahrenheit 9/11.  It looks like I have wasted my time by trying to  get you to see it.  But I  will let you know that for the past week I have been working with the Democratic Party. I have been registering people to vote outside a theater here in Aliso Viejo.  In this predominantly Republican community I have been very surprised at the reception I have been getting.  Many people have been giving me the thumbs up.  The movie itself continues to sell out!   It has been a great experience and I have met many new friends.  You  may just want to see the movie because of the fact that you might just be the only person who has not!!!!

Dave and Tom:

Actually, GG is 76 years old going on 77.  

Matt

David,

Your reply, though I don't doubt that it is sincere, shows the moral confusion that athiesm forces a person into.

As I have said many times, if atheism is true there are no rules beyond personal preferences.  So, beating up old men is neither good nor evil, just what one feels like doing at the time.

All that matters, in this system, is avoiding unpleasant consequences for acts one commits.

Your explanation reveals something else, Dave.  First, that deep in your heart the laws of God are written, just as the Bible says.  You know that such an act would be wrong.

Second, at the same time, the fallen mind seeks justification for evil desires and acts.  "in that they show the work of the Law written in their hearts, their concience bearing witness and their thoughts alternately accusing or else defending them." (Romans 2:15)

Your explanation falls into a line of thought that was described in the early chapters of Genesis, thousands of years ago.

"Lamech said to his wives, Adah and Zillah, 'listen to my voice, you wives of Lamech, give heed to my speech, for I have killed a man for wounding me; and a boy for striking me; if Cain is avenged sevenfold, then Lamech seventy-sevenfold." (Gen. 4:23-24)

In other words, "I was offended so I can do whatever I wish in order to obtain revenge."  Notice also the self centeredness and self importance of Lamech.  He is ten times more important than Cain.

This is the mind set on the flesh that is hostile to the law of God and does not subject itself to the law of God.  (Romans 8:7)

As long as you pursue this path you will have to live in this kind of irrationality and moral confusion.  What hyporcisy atheism necessitates.  I have never actually met an atheist who is willing to "live and let live" in logical consistancy with his professed beliefs.

They, like you Dave, always end up preaching moral judgements upon those they dislike, and excusing all kinds of evil that they wish to do, or at least be free to do.

As a Christian, I do not live perfectly.  But at least I can have a worldview that is logically consistent with physical reality and human moral necessity.

God bless,

Thomas Maddux

Hi folks,

Here is a newspaper column about our good friend Michael Moore.



The following are quotes from the San Jose Mercury newspaper of Sunday, June 27, 2004. This paper is a very liberal newspaper and I was surprised that they ran this column by a David Brooks.

 

“Like Hemingway, Moore does his boldest thinking while abroad. For example, it was during an interview with British paper The Mirror that Moore unfurled what is perhaps the central insight of his oeuvre, that Americans are kind of crappy. “They are possibly the dumbest people on the planet … in the thrall to conniving, thieving smug [pieces of the human anatomy]”, Moore intoned. “We Americans suffer from an enforced ignorance. We don’t know about anything that’s happening outside our country. Our stupidity is embarrassing”.

 

“It transpires the Europeans are quite excited to hear this supple description of the American mind. And Moore has been kind enough to crisscross the continent, speaking to packed lecture halls, explicating the general vapidity and crassness of his countrymen. “That’s why we’re always smiling all the time;,” he told rapturous throng in Munich. “You can see us coming down the street. ‘You know, Hey! Hi! How’s it going’? We’ve got that big [expletive] grin on our face all the time because our brains aren’t loaded down.”

 

“Before a delighted Cambridge crowd, Moore reflected on the tragedy of human existence: “You’re stuck with being connected to this country of mine, which is known for bringing sadness and misery to places around the globe.” In Liverpool, he paused to contemplate the epicenters of evil in the modern world: “It’s all part of the same ball of wax, right? The oil companies, Israel, Haliburton.”

 

“We, the United States of America, are culpable in committing so many acts of terror and bloodshed that we had better get a clue about culture of violence in which we have been active participants.”

 

“Don’t be like us”, he told a crowd in Berlin. “You’ve got to stand up, right? You’ve got to be brave.”

 

“In an open letter to the German people in Die Zelt, Moore asked “Should such an ignorant people lead the world?”

 

“But venality doesn’t come up when he writes about those who are killing Americans inn Iraq: “The Iraqis who have risen up against the occupation are not “

‘insurgents’ or ‘terrorists’ or ‘The Enemy.’ They are the REVOLUTION, the Minutemen, and their numbers will grow –and they will win.”


When I look at this man on TV, I do not see a joyful, positive individual.  What I see is an angry, negative, miserable man whose obesity and slovenly appearance are expressive of the realities of his inner life.

Such a man is to be pitied and prayed for, not followed as an intellectual or moral guide.

God bless,

Thomas Maddux
 

 

Hi Everyone,

  I am reluctant to make this BB into a political debate forum, but since it is July 4th, and in honor of this great remembrance, I will make an offering.  in so doing I would like to mention several important endorsements of the movie, "Fahrenheit 911":

   Hezbollah has come out with a very positive review of this movie

    Yes, the Arab press has reported that Hezbollah (the same group that sends bombers to blow up innocent Jewish children and who killed our Marines in Lebanon) gives"two thumbs up" to the Michael Moores movie.

   Saddam Hussein, though he has been unable to see the movie, agrees with Michael Moore that "Bush is a criminal"

  As to voting for Kerry for President:  10 out of 10 terrorists polled agree that Kerry is their man and that Bush is a criminal that should be defeated!

  With these kind of endorsements for the leftist view of things how can we not join David in signing up the great unwashed masses to support the Democrats?! ;)  
      The proliteriat shall arise!!!  And up with The Berkley Barb!!!    ;D

                      God Bless America,  Mark C. ( a former hippie) ;)

   

Hi Mark,

We are re-evaluating where we stand on spiritual matters and political matters and everything, so it would be great if you did enter into the political 'debates' more often.

I heard that there is another documentary of 9/11.  Has anyone seen DC 9/11?  David Frum comments on that movie:

http://www.nationalreview.com/frum/diary091003.asp (http://www.nationalreview.com/frum/diary091003.asp)
David Frum's Diary on National Review Online

SEP. 10, 2003: AFTERSHOCKS
Chetwynd’s Bush

In preparation for the 9/11 commemorations tomorrow, I watched last night Lionel Chetwynd’s excellent “Showtime” docudrama, “DC 9/11.” I don’t know how others will respond, but for me it very authentically revived memories of one of the most terrible days in my life – and not only because a character based on me makes a cameo appearance in the film.

Chetwynd gets details impressively right, down to the exact lamps in the Oval Office. He has found actors who look spookily like the characters they play, including President Bush himself. And the crux of his story is the essential thing that was visible to all of us who were there at the time: Bush’s absolute, unquestioned personal command.

DC 9/11 is a movie with a thesis – and in today’s context the thesis is a provocative one: that the war on terror was intended and understood from the very start to begin with Afghanistan, but not to end there. For the TV-viewing public, the movie stresses and restresses the connection between Middle Eastern radicalism and Middle Eastern terrorism – and that we won’t defeat the latter until we have discredited the former. That’s how President Bush saw it from the start, and he was right. The movie has Bush and others saying aloud how radically they intend to depart from the policies of the past – and that is right too. The sense of the wrongness of America’s old Middle East ways pervaded the White House after 9/11 and spared a series of confrontations with those officials (especially Colin Powell) who regarded themselves as conservators of the nation’s policy traditions.

Powell is shown in 9/11 as a rather good-natured but essentially unthreatening personality. That rather sharply contrasts with the way in which many of us perceived him at the time: as a highly skilled bureaucratic warrior, determined to fight as many rear-guard actions as needed to defend the Saudi connection and everything that followed from the Saudi connection, including the survival of Saddam Hussein after Desert Storm.

My one question about Chetwynd’s movie is that it is so carefully redacted, follows actual events so closely, that I wonder whether TV audiences will find it dramatic enough. It opens after all with Donald Rumsfeld scourging a congressional delegation for a too-stingy defense appropriation! When has such a scene as that ever opened a Showtime movie? But audiences do sometimes rise to a brave film-maker’s expectations, and that deserves to happen with this painstakingly wrought presentation of the decisive moments of recent American history.

Marcia

My two cents worth:

I have a friend in the Marines who has been deployed to Iraq.  When he got back I asked him how the Iraqi people feel about us being there.  Most are glad we are there and glad to be rid of Sadam.  This is not widely reported in the media because ("suprise!") they hate Bush, don't want to say anything nice abouyt him (even if it's true), and don't want him to win the next election.

Michael Moore is primarily interested in pushing his political agenda so being truthful is of no importance to him.  I would like to publish a rebuttal to many of his purported "facts.".

Spititual warfare often boils down to truth:  Satan uses lies to keep people under his control, God uses truth to set people free.

 :): Can I ask what may be a loaded question?

It related to 911 disaster:

The war in Afghanastan:

What do you hear, on the streets of American, when the Canadian Soldiers were killed by friendly American fire?

I havent seen the movie that is being discussed around here.
I have heard news reports.
But sometime getting the people prespective is better than getting it from a reporters need for sensationalism.

Maybe it is too loaded of a question?

Lenore

Michael Moore for President

Michael Moore is an idealist and like the activists of the 60s only has half baked understanding of all the facts. Like the hippie who became the Wall Street fortune 500  man in later life Moore may wake up one day and see rather than inspiring people to greatness he is disillusioning many who could aspire to greatness. Let him preach to the starving people in Russia he has nothing to offer them and the war torn people of Afghanistan he can't bring peace there. He would probably embrace Sadaam as a great hero of the people if he were President not knowing what a butcher the man was. Do the Iraqi people thank the American and allies who went in. Most do but of course some won't. The atrocities are deplorable and should not happen but every army in every conflict has done the same. That does not make it right but just puts things in perspective. Some of the men and women over there are not suited for the job. It is very difficult to stay focussed when friends of yours are blown up by car bombs. Michael Moore is not living in reality. He dishonestly edits the films for his message and is not truly telling the truth and can not be called a documentary journalist based on the two films we have seen. Does America have problems, yes and big ones but it also has great deeds of valour and triumph as well. To paint only one way is dishonest to the truth and to not acknowledge your own bankruptcy to add to the solution is just as dishonest. Like in the Assembly all we learned to do was tear down and no one was putting back in. Don't tear down what you can't fix. If you know Jesus you know he is against all tyranny in the World and the regime of Sadaam was a tyranny. If you know Jesus he told the people of  the religion of His day he would tear down their institution but unlike Michael Moore He said I will rebuild it in three days. America warts and all is far better than the America Michael Moore sees because he only tears down and has no real workable alternative. He is basking in the sunlight of discontent and is trampling on the graves of your former heroes, your fathers and mothers and grandfathers and grandmothers and generations of great people. Listen to the Michael Moores of today but ask them for a solution. They are silent. They have only one agenda that is themselves. See things in a balanced perspective listen to both Kerry and Bush and anyone else out there who speaks on any side and pray and read and figure things out. Don't go for a sappy story pieced together to elicit an emotional response. Michael Moore is not elected and is not responsible to anybody. Reminds me of GG and you know what he did.

Lord Bless
Hugh

Michael Moore and the problem of American (and Jewish) self-hatred
By Dennis Prager

July 6, 2004

http://www.townhall.com/columnists/dennisprager/printdp20040706.shtml (http://www.townhall.com/columnists/dennisprager/printdp20040706.shtml)

Did you ever notice that there are no Germans going around the world saying, or making movies about, how awful Germany is or has been? Given that Germany unleashed two world wars and invented industrialized genocide, why has there been no German Michael Moore?

Are there any Japanese making films about the absence of Japanese soul-searching or expressions of sorrow over their country's enslavement, torture and murder of Asians in World War II? Has anyone ever encountered any Japanese self-hate?

Any Belgians telling the world how bad their country is? Argentinians? French? France surely has reason to produce people ashamed of their country.

The answer, of course, is no. In fact, among all the world's peoples, only two produce large numbers of individuals who have greater sympathy for those who hate their country or national/ethnic group than for those who love it -- Americans and Jews.

Many on the American Left loathe America (they love the Constitution and their vision of what America could be) and have contempt for the average American. That is why most of the Left has such admiration for Michael Moore, who has said, among so much more, the following:

Americans "are possibly the dumbest people on the planet . . . in thrall to conniving, thieving, smug p----s" (London Daily Mirror).
"Should such an ignorant people lead the world?" (open letter to the German People in Die Zeit).

Elsewhere, he speaks of America as bringing immeasurable misery and sadness to the world and as essentially deserving attacks on it.

There are no comparable self-haters in any other country except Israel, whose leftists have the same contempt for their country, nor among any other group except the Jews, whose Left also generally loathe the Jewish state (and America).
Israeli professors in the West are often the leaders in anti-Israel demonstrations and movements. Jews such as Professors Norman Finkelstein and Noam Chomsky devote much of their lives to trying to harm the one Jewish country in the world (and America) and express deep hatred of Jewish institutions.

Here is Finkelstein:

Jewish organizations "steal, and I do use the word with intent, 95 percent of the monies earmarked for victims of Nazi persecution" (Counterpunch, Dec. 13, 2001).

Jews "are not Zionist by conviction, they are Zionist because it is useful for their political and more recently financial self-interest" (same).

In a lecture delivered in Beirut, Finkelstein likened Israeli actions to "Nazi practices" during World War II, albeit with some added "novelties to the Nazi experiments" (Commentary, June 2002).

And Noam Chomsky wrote the foreword to a book denying the Holocaust. This is the same as a black professor writing the foreword to a book by a Ku Klux Klansman.

This self-loathing on the part of Americans and Jews is all the more remarkable when you consider that leftists of every other group strongly affirm their national, cultural and ethnic identities. For example, while American and Jewish leftists ceaselessly attack America and Israel, black and Hispanic leftists ceaselessly defend blacks and Hispanics.

How, then, to explain this anomaly of American and Jewish self-loathing?

I offer four explanations in no order of importance.

First, those Jews and Americans who loathe Israel and America are virtually always on the Left, and the Left around the world hates America and Israel. You can't be a leftist and strongly defend America or Israel. The Left will shun you. And since most of these individuals' primary identity comes from being a leftist, being ostracized from fellow leftists is hell on earth.

Second, many leftists are psychologically adolescents. And one feature of adolescent psychology is anger at a parent who claims very high ideals and turns out to be flawed. Many on the Left are angry at America and Israel for being imperfect and therefore disappointing them.

Third, the words "American" and "Jewish" both represent distinctive value systems, not only national and ethnic identities. And these value systems clash with leftist values. Both American and Jewish identities are rooted in religion and divine chosenness. And the further left one goes, the greater the hostility to religion -- especially to Judaism and Christianity (not to Islam, which the Left often defends, because many Muslims hate Judaism and Christianity as much as the Left does) -- not to mention to any notion of national or religious exceptionalism. When you add to this that America also represents capitalism and holds liberty higher than equality, you can further understand why America elicits so much hatred from its own leftists.

Fourth, since America and Israel are the two most hated countries in the world, and the Jews are the most hated ethnic/religious group, many Americans and Jews would rather identify with the haters than with the hated. That is why, for example, so many American leftists base a large part of their case against George W. Bush on his having increased anti-American sentiments around the world. This makes leftists livid -- again, like adolescents, they yearn to be part of the in-crowd (meaning America- and Israel-haters) and fear being disliked.

There may be other explanations. But what is certain is that American self-hatred and Jewish self-hatred are unique phenomena that play a particularly destructive role in our world.

Prager is a bit off here on the self-loathing thing. When he asks why we never hear of German or Japanese Michael Moores it is obvious that MM has his own style, but has he never read Gunter Grass or Shusaku Endo? He's got me on the Belgians though. Every nation pretty much has its Left and Right. The extremes of both sides are equally destructive and demonize each other (Moore is to Limbaugh as Clinton is to Gingrich). But the moderates on both sides aspire to higher things with different visions. The saddness is the polarization.

Jem,

I think the polarization has been caused by strong special interest ties.  Imagine if abortion and homosexual marriage was not so tied to party.  Then, I believe, we would see Christians and secularists more evenly distributed.  You are correct that it is indeed unfortunate.

-Dave

Jem,

     An excellent post, with vestiges of hope in your closing thoughts.  Thank you.

     What makes Prager's concept so poignant is that the self-loathing of Americans and Jews is championed by figures that are so popular and important in the public eye.  The Follywood people alone hold the world's attention in their palms.  Moore has probably enjoyed more attention globally in the past week than Grass and Shusaku combined have had since they were first published.


Dave,

     Thanks for sharing the article.  The liberal press is definitely more in the public eye than the conservative viewpoint, and we suffer for the imbalance.

al

Agree with this statement: Special interest groups have  the government in their hip pockets.

Yet if we Christian want something important to us, do you think the government would readily be willing to join with us.  I dont think so!!!!!!!!!!

Why do you think that special interests groups such as the topics of abortion, homosexual, have the governments ear, while at the same time we Christians are losing our freedoms to pray, read the bible, worship in public places etc.?

I think the answer is the values that the people who are elected to government tend to follow themselves.
Discrimination, human rights, political correctness, etc.
seem to be favoured to the above named special interested groups over Christians.

I thought for awhile after the 911 attack, in both countries that the pendulum was shifting back to basic christian values again. But that was so short lived.
Canada is consider a dark country where Christianity is consider. A place where other countries are sending missionaries, missionaries from Africa and Asia are coming to witness the truth of God's Gospel.
That how much Canada has become darkened.
Yet who is making great strides in the government law makers, is the abortionist, the homosexuals, etc.
Canada is becoming cold.
I remember what the Bible says the hearts of many will go cold. I say that too myself , each time I want to wallow in self pity and bitterness.  It becomes a whisper in the dark place.
Canada is a heart that is growing cold. Not just the weather.
It is funny though. It is seems that non Christian people have a very warm heart in generousity and giving.
The difference between Christians and Non Christians the line has gotten so blurred that sometimes there is no difference in that  lifestyle.
Which is ashame.

Hi friends,  

        find me at ex-christrians.net

                  http.www.vanallens.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=4740

Dave,

I couldn't get your website reference to work.  Remind me again why you are rejecting Jesus Christ and his teachings?

-Dave

He typed it wrong, here's the correct address, though I think the website is having technical problems (which are the least of their problems).

http://www.vanallens.com/forum/index.php

It's a support group for "ex-Christians".  

You know David, if you have a problem with organized religion and it's hypocrisy, fine.  But if you want to trash the name of our Lord Jesus Christ than you either have never understood him or you have understood him and are so perverse as to hate him anyways.  Either way do not pretend to be our friend.  

Arthur

With all due respect, Arthur, I hope you don't mean for David to stop posting. I enjoy the debates. I almost never post, I didn't even look at the bb for a few months, and perhaps I should get my religious/political education elsewhere, but I get a lot out of reading posts by David, Tom, etc. This sort of discussion did not happen in my home, wasn't allowed in the assembly (unless you wanted to be singled out as a troublemaker), and is never heard in evangelical circles now. For me, it's a safe place to see more than one type of opinion and helps me form my own opinions - or strengthen the ones I already have. Years ago debates and debate teams were central players in schools and politics. Now it seems ideoligacal (sp!) mudslinging is the best anyone can muster, whether its politics, religion, or anything else. (IMHO)

thanks,
Karey

No, Karey,  I did not tell Mauldin he couldn't post or debate here.  He can post all he wants, I don't care.  I was refuting his claim that he is our friend--a claim he made just before giving us a link to a new "ex-Christian" website he was excited to find. He is no friend of mine or any other Christian if he's an "ex-Christian" forgetting what Christ did for us in favor of lies about how naturally good people are etc.

I enjoy a good debate--with someone who knows what they're talking about--someone who can understand points made by the person with which he is debating.

Why do I even bother explaining this to you?  If, after reading my last post in this thread, you came to the conclusion that I was telling David to stop posting then you probably won't be able to understand this explanation either.

BTW, I'm curious, what good things do you get out of reading David's posts, Karey?

Ex-Christian websites like the one listed below always intrigue me, because it is so hard for me to fathom someone saying "I USED to be a Christian". I, myself, have gotten very angry at God, and have "tried" not to believe in him in a "hissy fit" similar to a child who throws a tantrum and says "I don't love you anymore Mommy!!"

But inevitably I came back to the conclusion that I was being a total fool.  I believe with all of my heart that anyone who is TRULY a Christian will not come to a settled position that Christ doesn't exist or God doesn't exist. And the reason they won't is because they belong to God, and he will chasten them and lead them back to him. Just as the little child who said "I hate you Mommy!!" slowly comes to the recognition of how much they really love their "Mommy", so a true Christian, when chastened by God, comes to the recognition of how much they love God and are sorry for anything they did to hurt his generous heart.

I don't believe a true christian can become an ex-christian. Of course, just my opinion.

--Joe

Arthur, thanks for your inquiry and BTW you crack me up. Of course you didn't say that. I tend to make jumps of logic and was making one there. Perhaps I could clarify what I meant by "getting a lot out of the posts".  When I read David's posts it's like listening to arguments from people I know or work with or read in the Seattle Times editorials. I get frustrated by my own lack of knowledge re:well, almost anything (!). Many times the arguments seem shallow and  full of emotional hype and edited facts. However, due to my ignorance I don't have anything sensible to say in response. If I consider anything at all it sounds so trite, like a hallmark card or sermonette of the day, even to my own ears. Mostly I keep quiet. I'd like real knowledge but it seems wherever you turn information has been sanitized to fit the writer's world view. Ok, I haven't scoured the planet so I suppose I shouldn't whine. I am reasonably intelligent - more or less, have managed so far at least, but my lifelong education revolved mostly around being a caregiver (except that old accounting degree that currently gathers dust).

So, Arthur, do you have any recommendations ie: world politics, middle-east history,  american politics?? I'm game.  :)

Dear David, I have been on an ex-christian website. Don't know if it's the one you reference or not. It made me very sad and seemed so dark (boy, that's an assembly word, huh?). Most of the complaints dealt w/bad experiences or the ugly history of organized religion. I wish org. religion could give a better report. I  wish I didn't feel like God abandoned me in an evil system like the assembly. How could a loving God do that? Those are the sorts of issues that have given me pause. How could He allow my sister to be molested from the age of 3-5? There is so much in our lives we don't have control over - what timeline we live in, the family we come from, our temperment, etc. and that vulerability has made me want to rage at times. One thing that has helped me is when God (after a temper tantrum of mine) said He is the remedy of sin, not the author of it. THese things are the result of sin throughout the centuries. I know God loves me and that keeps me, even if it's by a thread sometimes!

Karey

Joe, right on the money, they never were in the family, just strangers.  These people have probably never studied the Bible in depth and are just ex-practioners of some particular denomination.  They probably don't even know what a real Christian is, since they've never been one themselves--so how can they be "ex-Christians"?

Karey, there was a time when I thought I should try to understand everyone. Those were the days in college when I was being fed that liberal crap about multi-culturalism, tolerance and exploring the so-called "humanities".  Today I see that, as the Bible always has stated, I need to cling to what is good and hate what is evil.

Don't get me wrong, I believe that being educated is a good thing, but not the way the sick perverts in the ACLU see it. I don't need to embrace garbage and pretend to understand it, love it or practice it.

As a Christian, the primary source of wisdom for us is of course the Bible.  Everything else that we may learn must be scrutinized under its light and guidance.  
I don't have to be able to identify with a Muslim or think like a Buddhist or empathize with pedophiles, as the far left would have me and every college student do.
We have a solid rock, Karey.  You can know something with absolute clarity and assurance.  And it isn't about your IQ or talents, it's about faith.

About politics, etc. yeah I have my opinions, I hope you have your own views. It's fun for awhile but wearisome and nothing to be compared to the joy in believing in God--being able to look to a being of perfect virtue, one who loves us, is merciful, all-powerful, and holds us and the destiny of the entire universe in the palm of his hand.

Atheists don't have this.  They have nothing but death.

Arthur

 :)OKAY, EVERY BODY TAKES THE GLOVES OFF, THEY THEY HAVE TO DO THE HOKEY POKEY AROUND THE RING BEFORE THE BOXING MATCH RESUMES.

David,

     The guys are right-- there are no ex-christians.  To be a Christian, one must have been accepted into God's immediate personal family.  To be an ex-christian, one would have to be booted out of God's family.  God just simply doesn't do that.  You can be a former-professing-christian (an ex-pretender, as it were), but that's as close as you can get.

     Where the confusion comes in, I believe, is that people think that what they do makes them Christians, i.e. "accepting" Christ.  Nothing could be less true nor more foolish.  The element of sin has established a chasm between man and God that we are utterly unable to bridge.  It could only be, and has been, spanned from His side to ours.  By sending His Son into the world to bear the judgment and penalty of our sin, God has extended to us a grace which enables us to acknowledge His love for us-- an act of which we were otherwise incapable.

     The point is that it is not our acceptance of, or actions toward, God that makes us Christians, but His acceptance of, and actions toward, us.  No mere mortal can undo what God has done.  If you are not a Christian today, David, then you simply never were, whatever you may have thought.  On the other hand, if Christ has received you into His fold-- if God in heaven has made you His son-- you can balk and struggle to your own exhaustion and it will not matter: you are His forever.  Flee to the mountains; hide yourself in the depths of the sea: He is there and you will not escape Him nor the goodness He will bestow upon you.

     You found yourself a wonderful new haven of like-minded "ex-christians," so why did you come back here to tell us about it?

     David, please listen to me:  It is less than four days until your wedding if I recall the date correctly, and here you are playing red-rover between two opposing forces.  I don't mean the websites-- there is a warfare being waged over the the destiny of your soul; over the way you'll spend the rest of your life if you are born again, or where you'll spend eternity if you aren't (yet).

     You don't have time for this!  You need to discuss in detail your complaints, first with God (whether or not you believe He's there to hear you), and then with your fiance.  IN DETAIL!  As a friend, I wouldn't willingly rain on your parade for anything, but there is far more at stake than either of us is capable of realizing, and your opinion of me is nothing in contrast to that.

     David, I have and shall continue to pray for you both...

...............................................................................................................

Karey,

     You have been a source of personal encouragement to me for a long time, but not as often as I'd like.  Hearing from you has always been solid, edifying and uplifting.  You may attribute that to its infrequency, but I believe it is because you belong to Christ and He speaks through you, as your most recent posts attest.  You have much more to offer than you seem to recognize or allow for.
     God is breathing His life into you.  I urge you to remove the mute and let the music be heard...

...................................................................................................................

Arthur,

     Please trust me, brother:  I'm smiling and in an absolutely un-assembly state of heart and mind when I ask this:  How long has it been since you truly rejoiced?

     I may be misreading you.  You could be dancing before the Lord and singing His praises even as I type this.  I just haven't seen any joy or genuine humor in your posts for a long time, and too much of the other stuff.

     Scolding you?  Not for a moment!  If you're hurting I care, and I want you to know that there is nothing that you can't say to God.  The things that most of us could (should?) say to God but don't are usually the things that we don't want to admit to ourselves, because those admissions make us feel like failures.  Most of us don't like feeling like failures.

     It's almost humorous, because if we hadn't admitted to being failures in our lost state of condemnation for sin, we wouldn't be where we are today.  But it's a long, slow process for most of us to learn that our failure is absolute, and that even after our salvation any goodness to be found in us must be owned as a gift of the grace of God and not the product of some vestige of virtue of our own.

     Were it not for the all-providing grace of God, Arthur, none of us could rejoice in anything, ever!  Go to a secret place and open up-- pour your heart out.  Christ gave up all for us-- give up all to Him.  If you feel weight upon you, it isn't because of His easy yoke & light burden!  Step into His harness and find rest to your soul.

..................................................................................................................

Lenore,

     If you aren't careful, someone will start up a line of "Lovable, Huggable Lenore" products!!! :) ;D


God bless us all,
al

Dear Arthur,

Excellent point. You know, for the first time in a long time I don't have a generalized unease about what I don't know and maybe I'm just wrong and how am I suppose to know what's right - maybe I should just rollover for whoever thinks they're right. There really is a source of Truth. Despite everything I do still believe the Bible, that's why I avoid it like the plague sometimes. Thank you.

Al, I was glad to read when you mentioned you wandered for 20 years. Made me think there's hope for all of us. Thank you for your kind words. That explanation to David was very cool, how refreshing to hear - again - that it isn't how well we meet expectations but what has already been accomplished on our behalf.

David, since I probably won't post for awhile again (going back under my rock! ;)) congratulations and God Bless you.

C U all,
Karey

Al---

Great post!!!   Thanks for the very encouraging words!! We all need to hear them over and over again.

--Joe

 :DJuly 8th: 2:09 pm:
========================================
"""
Lenore,

    If you aren't careful, someone will start up a line of "Lovable, Huggable Lenore" products!!!  


God bless us all,
al""""

=========================================


DEAR AL:

THAT WOULDNT BE SO BAD WOULD IT.

I am more rested to day , after the thunderstorm quit, so Missy could stop trying to hid in my skin, panting and shaking.  

Thanks:

Lenore

Hi Everyone!

  I was reading, trying to catch up on missed posts, and discovered that I had not answered Marcia's post re. having political discussion on an Assembly BB.

  Recovery from my Assembly past was hastened by trying to learn to think for myself, vs. trying to join myself to a party line.  Conservative vs. liberal political arguments tend to be like what Karey described as a "debate" format, where skilfull arguments win the day.  Each side tends to demonize the other side via caricatures (like political cartoons) that are not truthful.

  One such example would be:  all liberals are as wacky as Michael Moore and all conservatives are Nazis.  Of course, this just is not true, and as Jem stated it destroys any meaningful dialogue.

  Debate seeks mastery via argument of an opponent and I do not consider poor wounded souls from the Assembly as my opponents; even one's with seriously damaged (destroyed?) faith like David Mauldin.  I do not consider David to be a dangerous wolf, though terribly misguided, because it is obvious to everyone that the positions that he defends are clearly wrong, and just as clearly a result of what GG and company did to his soul.

  We can go to many places and debate conservatism vs. liberalism, but there is only one BB that I know of where exassembly folks can come together and find a place to heal.  The truth is essential, but not for mastery in argument over the weak and damaged; rather love, the desire to build up, must be the constant companion of our discussion.  

  For the true wolf in sheeps clothing it is loving to clearly expose them, as we don't want any of God's little one's to be injured by them, but I see no such malice in David Mauldin's posts; only the angry reactions of a seriously damaged soul.  GG will have a lot to answer for before the Throne of God for this and so much more!! :'(

                                              God Bless,   Mark C.  

 

     Mark's post points to one of my favorite aspects of this BB:  spiritual recovery.  Little wonder, seeing that I can trace my own recovery to these pages.

     He  is 100% correct in identifying the factors that motivate political debate, and those that we work to let dominate the spirit of this BB.  I will extend the discussion of both categories a little further:


1. The Will To Defeat.     Those who have read the BB thread "Let's Keep Arguing" will understand that the will to defeat, rather than to help, our peers is destructive.  The point of proper discussion is not to win, but to get at the truth, regardless of the personal cost to self.  Such character is absolutely noble, but it is not natural.  It only exists in its true state in the character of the person of Jesus Christ, and is manifest in the lives of those whom He indwells.

     The quest to win the argument at all costs is fundamental to worldly politics, but it has its roots in sinful human nature.  It is the instinct of self-preservation in fallen and godless humankind, and is foundational to all the pain and grief that abounds in the world we know.  It is expressed at every level of human existence, and is the reason we have to teach our children how to be gracious winners, respectful losers, and to not cheat.


2. The Will To Love.     God works in you, both to will and to do His good pleasure.  It is as much an act of will to love as it is to "win."  The immeasurable difference between the two is in their resources to succeed.

     The will to conquer is carried out by every device of which the clever human mind is capable, and sometimes given a boost by spiritual forces violently opposed to both Christ and humanity.  Often our "helpers" would be our destroyers.

     The will to love has access to all the power and authority of the Godhead.  Christ's own great love with which He loved us is the greatest resource in the universe for overcoming the destructive tendencies of ungodliness.  The natural man can, at best, attempt or pretend to love "for," or "on behalf of" Christ, and will always fail at it.  But those who live by the faith of the Son of God can submit themselves to Christ's love, allowing Him to love others through us.


3. Knowing the Difference.     On the face of it, one might think that the contrast between good and evil, right and wrong, would be stark black and white.  But for that very reason, one of the most basic tactics of the enemy of our souls is to blur the lines.  Nowhere is this more prevalent than in defining love.

     Innumerable volumes have been written on the subject of love, by people at many strata of society, intellect, and spirituality.  The result is a muddle of overlapping concepts which an army of Einsteins could not formulate.  As always, mankind seeks to conquer;  in this case love, by understanding it.  But the love of God, which passes understanding (exceeds knowledge) will not be conquered by the folly of humanity.

     Anyone who spent any time at all in an assembly must have known that we all "loved" one another.  Worship was performed in love.  Meetings were conducted in love.  Our labors and offerings were received in love.  Stewardships were assigned, morning and evening times enforced, exhortations pronounced, discipline meted out, all in "love."  And since being delivered from that awful bondage, we are coming to recognize how very unloving so much of it was.  Some devastatingly carnal and sinful things were done under the cover of large labels that said LOVE.

     For many of us, as Christians wanting to love God and our fellow saints, a present dilemma exists.  As ex-assemblyites, we once had to read those blasphemous labels repeatedly in every phase of our spiritual pusuits.  The world calls it "brainwashing" or, more contemporarily, "mental conditioning."  Told often enough (far too often) that black is white and white is black, we became confused, seeing only variegated greys.

     Our paltry English word "love" doesn't begin to describe the various biblical forms it purports to identify, nor is that my purpose in this post.  Love affects us emotionally, intellectually and, most importantly, spiritually.  With the help of the Holy Spirit, the references incorporating "love" can, by their context, communicate God's meanings to us, and we can and will see the love of God shed abroad in (our) hearts and minds.  This pursuit belongs on the "A" list in our prayers and meditations.  Ask... Seek...

God bless us all,
al Hartman