Your Stand on the Present Crisis

[4Him]

Doggonit Brent,
You're not giving the rest of us anything more to say!
Quit hogging the show!  

Your friend,
Tim

[editor]

Sorry Tim!  

My wife will warn you not to get me going on certain things, and this is one of them.  I'll calm down soon, perhaps in a month or two....

In the mean time, I do hope that some other's chime in.  

Oh, and by the way, I'll rip anyone to shreds if they advocate "No war," or "Jesus' teaches not to kill the human family,"  etc.  

My wife, Suzie, read this and said, "How can people think that God is anti-war?  In the Old Testament, He advocated swords and killing, etc.  Men, women, children, livestock...wipe them out.

In the NT, there is spiritual warfare.  How can anyone come to the conclusion that God is a pacifist?  

Brent and Suzie

[4Him]

You are 100% correct. Evil requires us to take radical action. That is why we must repent when we sin.  In the personal life there is no more radical action.  In the affairs of the nation and dealing with right and wrong, tho' as you correctly stated, we do not have the moral conviction or courage as a people to take such action, the LORD Jesus Christ will come and do it Himself!

Rev 12: 12  And I beheld when he had opened the sixth seal, and, lo, there was a great earthquake; and the sun became black as sackcloth of hair, and the moon became as blood; 13  And the stars of heaven fell unto the earth, even as a fig tree casteth her untimely figs, when she is shaken of a mighty wind. 14  And the heaven departed as a scroll when it is rolled together; and every mountain and island were moved out of their places. 15  And the kings of the earth, and the great men, and the rich men, and the chief captains, and the mighty men, and every bondman, and every free man, hid themselves in the dens and in the rocks of the mountains; 16  And said to the mountains and rocks, Fall on us, and hide us from the face of him that sitteth on the throne, and from the wrath of the Lamb: 17  For the great day of his wrath is come; and who shall be able to stand?

Your solution would solve the problem (at least for the forseeable future) with Islam (Ishmael) but it would still leave us with the enemy within.  We also lack the guts to truly deal with that enemy.

Jesus, however, has what we lack and he is not afraid to execute it.

Brent, keep it up.  Continue to hold the banner high!

PS - My hand couldn't help itself. It moved the pointer over to [good] and left clicked another one for you.

[BenJapheth]

You are 100% correct. Evil requires us to take radical action. That is why we must repent when we sin.  In the personal life there is no more radical action.  In the affairs of the nation and dealing with right and wrong, tho' as you correctly stated, we do not have the moral conviction or courage as a people to take such action, the LORD Jesus Christ will come and do it Himself!

Rev 12: 12  And I beheld when he had opened the sixth seal, and, lo, there was a great earthquake; and the sun became black as sackcloth of hair, and the moon became as blood; 13  And the stars of heaven fell unto the earth, even as a fig tree casteth her untimely figs, when she is shaken of a mighty wind. 14  And the heaven departed as a scroll when it is rolled together; and every mountain and island were moved out of their places. 15  And the kings of the earth, and the great men, and the rich men, and the chief captains, and the mighty men, and every bondman, and every free man, hid themselves in the dens and in the rocks of the mountains; 16  And said to the mountains and rocks, Fall on us, and hide us from the face of him that sitteth on the throne, and from the wrath of the Lamb: 17  For the great day of his wrath is come; and who shall be able to stand?

Your solution would solve the problem (at least for the forseeable future) with Islam (Ishmael) but it would still leave us with the enemy within.  We also lack the guts to truly deal with that enemy.

Jesus, however, has what we lack and he is not afraid to execute it.

Brent, keep it up.  Continue to hold the banner high!

PS - My hand couldn't help itself. It moved the pointer over to [good] and left clicked another one for you.

Yep, yep, preach it, brother...

[BenJapheth]

By Israeli writer and thinker:  Moshe Feiglin

Not only the regular collaborators of murderous Islam - France, Belgium, Germany, and others like them aren't enthusiastic about cooperating in the great performance that President Bush is preparing for us. The feeling of dissatisfaction can also be seen amongst moral people who understand very well that people like Saddam Hussein must be eliminated. This feeling does not arise from the nature of the action against Iraq but from the tremendous hypocrisy associated with it.

At the time of the attack on the Twin Towers I was visiting the US and I expressed my feelings at that time in an article called "Why America has Already Lost the War". Click here, or use your web browser to go to: http://zionet.co.il/manhigut/en/view_article.php3?article_id=77 (check this out it is super insightful, Chuck)

The article predicted precisely what would happen in the year following the attack, and the lack of purpose in the expected actions of the US. On one point I was completely wrong. I was convinced that the US, with its tremendous technological capabilities and great resources, would rapidly get hold of Osama Bin-Laden. It is amazing to see how this man still continues to make a fool of the super-power. Bin-Laden, using a single audio cassette, succeeds in endangering the US more than all Iraq's soldiers.

Why?

Because Bin-Laden is attacking the US at a place in which it isn't ready to fight. In the cassette broadcast by the El-Jezira network Bin-Laden tells all his admirers in the Moslem world (and all of them, without exception, admire him): "The Crusaders (the US) are attacking the ancient capital of Islam, Baghdad, in order to establish there Greater Israel".

In Western terms Bin-Laden is telling every Moslem wherever he is that we have here a religious war against the Christians and the Jews.

America isn't prepared to accept this. Freedom of religious is one of the American fundamental principles. According to the Western concept, the world order and its borders are determined by nationality. Religion, in contrast, is a matter of choice and it crosses national, community, and even family boundaries. You can be a good American, regardless of whether you are Christian, Jewish, or Moslem, or even a pagan. The US was established on this principle.

At one time it was quite easy - the Japanese Zero aircraft that attacked the American fleet in Pearl Harbor did so in the name of Japanese nationalism and not religion. The Axis powers (Germany and Italy), against whom the US waged a bloody war in Europe, held the same religion in which the majority of Americans believe, and the Vietnam War and the Cold War were waged against a (Communist) enemy who denied the existence of G-d.

Suddenly Bin-Laden appears and murders 4000 Americans in the heart of Manhattan - neither in the name of a nationalist struggle, nor for territorial demands. He does so in the name of religion.

America (and also Israel, which lies in the same position of cultural inferiority) refuses to look the new reality in the eye. It is incapable of taking up Bin-Laden's challenge. It is incapable of recognizing that this war is one between a civilization based on the culture of Islam, and one based on Christian culture. The significance of such recognition is that in order to fight, the US must itself undergo cultural metamorphosis and become something totally different from the external picture it has over the years tried to paint. [In practice Western countries have a Christian culture, despite the formal separation between Church and State. The culture of these countries is based entirely on the Christian religion and its values. However, the US has preferred to conceal it built-in Christianity and present an external supra-religious facade. The most Christian country of all, the only one that implements Christian values in such a perfect way is, ironically enough is Israel. For further examination of this issue see the articles "World War", and "Moslems, Christians, and the Temple Mount"] In order to combat Bin-Laden, it is necessary to enter his arena, the religious arena, and pay him back in the same coin. America (and Israel) will continue to flee from this truth that contradicts one of the foundation stones of its existence. It will continue to respond in the wrong arena, and will continue to be hit and crushed.

The American (and the Israeli) administration must create a response to this new enemy. The role of the leadership is to defend the lives and honor of the led. A leadership that fails to do so hasten its end. How can the American administration (and in fact, the entire Western world) defend a nation involved in a religious war while avoiding this fact?

They invent a new enemy - terrorism.

Islam isn't the enemy, but terrorism. The enemy is the terrible method used to fight against us - not the combatants, but the ideology motivating them.

It is amazing to see how the entire Western world has been deceived by this ruse. If Churchill had defined the enemy, during the Battle of Britain, as the Luftwaffe (the German Air Force) and not Germany itself, Britain would not have won the war. And when this definition exhausts itself (after millions of tons of TNT in Afghanistan), and victory is of course not in sight, the US wishes to depict the enemy in a form which it is capable of fighting - an enemy who is a national state.

Saddam is no more dangerous than any other Moslem ruler. Weapons of mass destruction are being produced in Egypt, Iran, and Libya. Every Moslem ruler is trying to get hold of such weapons. Virtually all the September 11 murderers came from Saudi Arabia. Saddam is perhaps less dangerous that the other Islamic tyrants. Any prosecuting counsel in a criminal case who offered evidence of the kind produced by Secretary of State Powell against Iraq in his speech to the Security Council, would have been thrown out of court.

So why is Bush driving his people and the entire world crazy in a stupid military campaign against Saddam?

Simply because it is easy against Saddam. Saddam isn't playing the Egyptian or Saudi game. It's easy to present him to public opinion as an enemy and to create the feeling that the administration is looking after the security of its citizens.

Obviously we shouldn't regret the blow that Saddam is going to sustain. However, America (and subsequently, Israel of course) will itself sustain far more. The lack of purpose in this war will be revealed rapidly. The Arab world will unite behind the "Iraqi heroism" and Europe will of course support them. The Americans will quickly understand that victory over Iraq is a pyrrhic one...just like all the wars in which the aim is not clear. The Americans will then wish to pay the price of their folly and appease both the Moslem and Christian worlds.

As usual, they will pay in Israeli currency.

[Fighter]

Listen to this song!!!  IT WILL SOON BE NUMBER 1

www.townhall.com/media_services/haveyouforgotten.html

HERE ARE THE WORDS TO HAVE YOU FORGOTTEN?
by Darryl Worley


I hear people saying we don't need this war
I say there's some things worth fighting for
What about our freedom and this piece of ground
We didn't get to keep 'em by backing down
Now they say we don't realize the mess we're getting in
Before you start your preaching let me ask you this my friend

Have you forgotten how it felt that day?
To see your homeland under fire
And her people blown away
Have you forgotten when those towers fell?
We had neighbors still inside going thru a living hell
And you say we shouldn't worry 'bout bin Laden
Have you forgotten?

They took all the footage off my T.V.
Said it's too disturbing for you and me
It'll just breed anger that's what the experts say
If it was up to me I'd show it everyday
Some say this country's just out looking for a fight
Well after 9/11 man I'd have to say that's right

Have you forgotten how it felt that day?
To see your homeland under fire
And her people blown away
Have you forgotten when those towers fell?
We had neighbors still inside going thru a living hell
And you say we shouldn't worry 'bout bin Laden
Have you forgotten?

Now I've been there with the soldiers
Who've gone away to war
And you can bet that they remember
Just what they're fightin' for

Have you forgotten all the people killed?
Some went down like heros in that Pennsylvania field
Have you forgotten about our Pentagon?
And all the loved ones that we lost and those left to carry on
Don't you tell me not to worry about bin Laden
Have you forgotten?

Have you forgotten how it felt that day?
To see your homeland under fire
And her people blown away
Have you forgotten when those towers fell?
We had neighbors still inside going thru a living hell
And you say we shouldn't worry 'bout bin Laden
Have you forgotten? Have you forgotten? Have you forgotten?

[wolverine]

NO WAR!!!  NO WAR!!!  NO WAR!!!

Just kidding, Brent...please don't hurt me...















<-----------

[retread]

…
I advocate massive nuclear destruction in the Mid-East, beginning with Iran and Saudi Arabia.  I am not kidding, this is what I really believe.
…

What about North Korea?  They say that if the US can make a preemptive strike, then they can too.  I consider this a threat to us.  Should we add them to your list, so we can nuke them before they nuke us?  They could cause us some SERIOUS harm.

…
 This is the cleanest, safest and fastest solution for US.  I am on our side.
…

Yes, this may be safe for you personally, since you are part of the US and we would then be rid of some of our enemies, albeit ones who seek our total annihilation.  But why stop at the Middle East, what about Canada? I heard that there was a guy in Canada who wanted to destroy the US,  let's nuke Canada, and maybe New Jersey, I heard that there might be terrorists there as well.  This would still protect Californians wouldn't it? And what about African Americans, I heard that one of them didn't like white males, why don't you kill off them to help protect yourself as well? Perhaps Calle Serena should be added to the list. Okay, I already know the answers to these questions. I realize that Canada is not as much of a threat as the countries that have radical Muslim leadership who seek the destruction of America.  My point in asking these questions is to make sure that we aren't relying entirely on our own wisdom, in matters of such great consequence. So I guess we can remove Canada from the list, but please can we replace it with France? Yes, there is a point when war is necessary (that point may be somewhere between Canada and Iraq, I don't know).  May the Lord lead us and give our leaders wisdom in determining this.

On this matter, I still can't say yes, and I still can't say no.  Perhaps you have spent more time considering this matter than I have.  But for now, my position on this still remains "Pray Fervently!"

[retread]

NO WAR!!!  NO WAR!!!  NO WAR!!!

Just kidding, Brent...please don't hurt me...

Hey, I wanted to be the first one who Brent ripped to shreds!  Actually on second thought, be my guest.

I knew we would see you here eventually.

BTW, thanks for the t-shirt.  

[editor]

What about North Korea?  They say that if the US can make a preemptive strike, then they can too.  I consider this a threat to us.  Should we add them to your list, so we can nuke them before they nuke us?  They could cause us some SERIOUS harm.

Dear Retread:

Absolutley,  North Korea is on the list.  However, there is a subtle difference, let me explain.

Anyone who threatens the safety and security of America is what the framers of the Constitution called an "enemy."  They used the common dictionary definition of the word.  The constitution called for an army to protect the nation from enemies.  Simple and direct.  These same framers also warned against entangling foreign alliances, with which we are now engaged to the hilt.  This idiotic foreign policy is mostly to blame for our problems.  If we used the army on our enemies, and saved the diplomacy for our friends, things would be much clearer.  However, we now have this really stupid thing called the United Nations,  where we agree to use diplomats to negotiate with people who swear they want to kill us, while at the same time allowing a bunch of foreign beureacrats to put a leash on our army!  Madness!!

So, here is the difference.  While Korea is a nation, and the southern half is friendly, Islam is a religion, that has its roots in the mideast.  Islam is our enemy, at least that's what they teach in their mosques. There is no reasoning with these people, the only thing that will cause them to snap out of it is force, as I have suggested below.  These people promise to blow up Jews and Americans ASAP, and have demonstrated true consistency and honesty because their actions back up their words.  Ever hear of Nasser?

So, we have nukes, but we don't use 'em.  Russian has nukes, but they don't use 'em.  China has nukes, but they don't use 'em, same with Great Britain, Japan, Israel, India, France, Pakistan(very shakey here), Germany, North Korea, etc.

If an enemy threatens us, but has shown restraint and reasonableness, as did the USSR, then containment may be the best course of action.  We made it clear to Russia that MAD would assure their death minutes after they launched on us.  Because they were somewhat rational, they never launched, and our superior, free society ended up "winning."

However, these creeps with turbans, who marry several women, and treat them like dirt, do not think like this.  They think more along the lines of,  "Allah will stop the Infidel missiles in mid-air!  We do not be afraid to launch, Allah Akbar!  The American Infidels are to cowardly to fight back.  They will never capture our leader, Allah will give us victory!  Our youth will proudly die in order to kill the Jew and Christian..."

A policy of containment with these people is simply a policy of giving them more time to figure out how best to kill us.  The answer is to kill them now, quickly and decisively.

Korea may be different, in that they have had nukes for a while, and have not seen fit to light them off.  They need to be watched closely, and popped if necessary.  A cold-war approach, where we starve them economically, may be in order for North Korea, but DEFINITELY NOT FOR ISLAM!!

Brent

[retread]

...
Anyone who threatens the safety and security of America is what the framers of the Constitution called an "enemy."  They used the common dictionary definition of the word.  The constitution called for an army to protect the nation from enemies.  Simple and direct.  These same framers also warned against entangling foreign alliances, with which we are now engaged to the hilt.  This idiotic foreign policy is mostly to blame for our problems.  If we used the army on our enemies, and saved the diplomacy for our friends, things would be much clearer.  However, we now have this really stupid thing called the United Nations,  where we agree to use diplomats to negotiate with people who swear they want to kill us, while at the same time allowing a bunch of foreign beureacrats to put a leash on our army!  Madness!!
...

Wow, I couldn't have said it better.  As far as the UN goes, these are exactly my beliefs.  BTW, what are your thoughts on the Council on Foreign Relations, and their influence on US foreign policy.  I don't want to get you started here. (okay, maybe I do )

...
Because they were somewhat rational, they never launched, and our superior, free society ended up "winning."
...

Even though North Korea hasn't used any nukes, I fear that Kim Jong Il, may not exactly be "somewhat rational".

[Tanya]

My wife will warn you not to get me going on certain things, and this is one of them.  

   YIPES   I better not ask about those other things!


Oh, and by the way, I'll rip anyone to shreds if they advocate "No war," ....

   Warning..warning... my husband was a collegiate football player and wrestler.  Not that he advocates "no war," but it really is possible to have a different political viewpoint and still be friends... at least I thought so!  

[editor]

Hi Tanya and Aaron:

I put a wink/smiley by that comment about ripping people to shreds.  If I did rip anyone, it would be on the BB.  I really don't want to tangle with Aaron on the football field, or in wrestling.    Of course people can be friends when they have a different opinion.  Most of our friends are actually republican, but we do have one democrat family that we are close to.  We just don't talk about certain things with the republicans, and talk about very little other than family, weather and neutral subjects with the democrats...

Even though North Korea hasn't used any nukes, I fear that Kim Jong Il, may not exactly be "somewhat rational".

I don't think this guy is on par with Margaret Thatcher either, but the fact is, he hasn't launched yet.  That shows some rational thought and restraint.

Compare that with Hamas, or Islamic Jihad, not to mention Al Quaida.  These guys are quite happy to die, and will gladly launch anything that will kill.  Can you imagine flying a plane into a building in order to kill a bunch of people?

That's the difference.

The Council on Foreign Relations is just another way to water down our sovereignty and bleed off more of my tax dollars into the black hole of foreign countries and their messed up economies.  I much prefer the ideas that Thomas Jefferson so eloquently penned:

Free trade with willing partners, entangling foreign alliances with none.  (paraphrased slightly)

George Washington:  "Do not be involved with European wars."

It's all about freedom folks.  The more we get into the UN, social programs, and entangling alliances of all sorts, the less freedom we have, and the more complicated and hypocritical we become.  

deToqueville:  "America is great because America is good."  He said this after exhaustive study of American culture.  He was especially impressed with neighborhoods and churches, and the way people helped eachother out.  Of course, this sort of thing is laughed at now, which is why America is no longer great, only stronger than the other pathetic countries.

Brent

[retread]

I advocate massive nuclear destruction in the Mid-East, beginning with Iran and Saudi Arabia.  I am not kidding, this is what I really believe.

I have yet another question for you Brent.  If we don't accomplish "massive nuclear destruction of the Mid-East", and just focus on winning a war with Iraq (this is what our president is working on), do you think that this will do more harm than good? Will a cleanup of Iraq, end up in causing an increase in resolve amongst Muslims to more fervently seek to destroy us? Remember, these folks are fanatics.  A successful campaign in Iraq, will not win them over. So if you had to vote on a war with Iraq with no chance of "massive nuclear destruction of the Mid-East", where would you stand?  As for me, I still do not have peace over this decision.

[retread]

Congressman Ron Paul's speech at the Ludwig von Mises Institute on October 19, 2002:

   http://www.mises.org/mp3/20th/RonPaul.mp3

His view on preemptive war with Iraq, starts at about 40 minutes into the mp3.