Jump to content

Theme© by Fisana
 

Photo

What would it take for Russia to be #1?


  • Please log in to reply
7545 replies to this topic

#1661 donquijote

donquijote

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3919 posts

Posted 13 December 2003 - 06:14 PM

<There should be forums created in the public sector for the information to debate/circulate. But then that will be for many a place to water your horse but you cant make them go there let alone drink. - the weakness of democracy. Needs to be addressed by
proper education which no party political govt will be interested in.>

Howdy Bader
Education is the key area that needs to be addressed. Actually the magazine Tikkun that I quoted before has an specific article on the subject but, regrettably, it's not retrievable on line...:confused: What it does offer however is an article on the Space and Time needed for Democracy. At the end it offers a way around the lack of it--which we make use of: the Internet--and Pravda...;)

One Solution
Oddly, some of the very technologies that have constrained our time may enable us to take it back. For the most part, advances in technology have made us more productive but not saved time
  • 0

#1662 Bader

Bader

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1757 posts

Posted 14 December 2003 - 07:56 AM

I agree WOJ:
The free-market prescribes a flexible labour market. Thus a
reserve labour pool then effectively means the cost of labour can be held down, moved down or works longer for the same.
Thats what flexibility means. The immigration policy is tied in with this- more people competing for the jobs.
So when big business, economists, politicians express a desire for a more flexible labour market they arent looking for more jack of all trades that can turn their hand to anything to make businesses more efficient ( as if everyone was a benefiting shareholder) they simply means they want more losers to help the so called achievers more successful.
The brainy part is that the less people are paid the harder it is for industry to clears it products.

DonQ: I visited Tikkun earlier in the year. Some intelligent, observant and positive discussion. I had the impression they were basically socialist if I remember correctly which I say neutrally as intelligent stuff is produced by both right and left thinking people and the one may see what the other doesnt and should be made known.
The failure to gain from the work (time) which technology has done for man. I have covered this before months ago. Hand in hand with the time issue is the money issue.
The progress of technology and science should have both given man more time and financially better off so he could be more
healthily disposed in his life-socially and family and have the financial means to do so. No point in having time but stay at home and vegetate in front of a tv because there is no money to spare for activities.
The cause is the money racket.
Just think of the wages of technology and machines work that was once paid to man. The equivalent needs to be put into circulation socially so society can aquire the goods produced.
The banks do well out of it because people borrow against future income to pay for what was made yesterday!
The dole wouldnt come close and yet how people complain because someone is getting a pitence without working for it. Little wonder economics doesnt work it is continually countering inbalances and problems.
A hundred years ago people realising how industry was going to progress in leaps and bounds naturally saw the benefit as accruing to all, and thus they would work less for a better standard of living. Which is more realistic and intelligent than the thinking and practice of economics today. Society simply has been robbed. The wheel may well have been patented and royalties paid for every revolution.
It would be nice for people to make time to gather and get their heads around the fraudulent money system. That will bring revolt and competition to a monopoly.
  • 0

#1663 donquijote

donquijote

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3919 posts

Posted 14 December 2003 - 08:50 PM

"American democracy is in crisis because, for the most part, it no longer has yielded a government of the people, by the people, and for the people"

<A hundred years ago people realising how industry was going to progress in leaps and bounds naturally saw the benefit as accruing to all, and thus they would work less for a better standard of living. Which is more realistic and intelligent than the thinking and practice of economics today. Society simply has been robbed. The wheel may well have been patented and royalties paid for every revolution.
It would be nice for people to make time to gather and get their heads around the fraudulent money system. That will bring revolt and competition to a monopoly.>

Howdy Bader
Exactly, that's what I meant when I said before "the wheel of history always crushes the poor.";)

One solution for a truer democracy would be a shorter workweek, which we discussed before. Then the people can get together and solve problems instead of depending on some professional politician, which too often turns a fox...

In America, then, we can say "democracy" is just another concept tossed around like a mantra to please the masses.

(Tikkun, same article above)

'America is a republic based on a representative model of democracy. Politicians are supposed to represent the highest aspirations and deepest desires of the citizenry. Instead, American politics has turned into a marketplace, where candidates spend more time courting big donors than ordinary folk. Even worse, the market mentality extends down to the very way in which we conceptualize what it means to be a citizen. Rather than active participants in society with a stake in how we want our world to be, citizens are conceptualized as consumers, picking from a menu of pre-established choices that tend to stress only our material needs. Usually, we react to this kind of political marketing the way we react to other annoying commercials
  • 0

#1664 donquijote

donquijote

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3919 posts

Posted 14 December 2003 - 09:40 PM

Whatever you do, don't compete with the Lion

http://engforum.prav...?threadid=48757
  • 0

#1665 GIJOE

GIJOE

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 844 posts

Posted 14 December 2003 - 11:52 PM

Democracy anywhere in the world is constantly in crisis.
Those persons in this world that think they have the right to install leaders, simply because of their self rightiousness, like
woj1, are the prototypes that lead to genocidist rulers.
The American dream is still going STRONG, much to the chagrin of many on this forum.
I hope the events in Iraq give the creeps on this thread a sleepless night tonight.
The unrelenting search for Huysan, more then ever proves the resolve and power of the U S military, ALONG WITH ITS ETERNAL ALLY GREAT BRITAIN, plus a few other good men, from freedom loving nations like.
POLAND and Italy, and JAPAN, and SOUTH Korea, just to name a few.
Tyrants of the world, are thinking twice before involving their nations in a war against the U S.
GOOD EVENING, FROM G I Joe......
  • 0

#1666 Bader

Bader

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1757 posts

Posted 15 December 2003 - 07:33 AM

The A dream is still going strong and the reality is still going wrong

The US is still vulnerable as before, nothing has changed except Afghan and Iraq neither of which attacked the US.

The Guardian published a comment article by Michael Meacher
British MP, Minister of the Environment 1997-03, entitled
"This war on terrorism is bogus."

Its an excellent article and possibly the best overall that puts so much together, remember what you (GIJ) said before the Oil will pay for the expedition.
guardian.co.uk/comment/story/0,3604,1036571,00.html

This is not the dream the people have always had is it GIJ?

DonQ:
"The American democracy is in crisis because it no longer reflects
the values and highest aspirations of the individuals that form it."

Isnt it true that the media doesnt recognise the individual, its all about fashion, fads, etc that reinforces the herd mentality? Reference to the individual is rare. Secondly it may be partly true that democracy does reflect the values and aspirations
as conditioning has brought about.
It is covered in the article by Kaiser that regardless of the party in power the same results are achieved and voted for by the people
deluded by the two party system
Steal their vote, steal their power, steal their minds, steal their money, steal their freedom, steal their govt, steal their time, but dont steal their values, just replace them.
Little wonder the media is so sown up because it is the only means of waking people up/ alerting them to the games that go on.
Which comes back to the cafe/meeting place concept where
people can de-programme and re-educate/evaluate.

The point GIJ makes about democracy everywhere being in crisis,
is true, what Kaiser has spotlighted is true of much of the world.
  • 0

#1667 GIJOE

GIJOE

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 844 posts

Posted 15 December 2003 - 04:04 PM

Bader thank you for your kind words/
One thing is clear about most posters on thie forum, they truly want the best for the average joe, the common man, and this is something neither I nor anyone else of decent heart can object to. We neocons, need to reflect upon the fate of the rest of the world , and not only stay cought up with our own security.
A freer safer cleaner world, that our children and grandchildren can have a chance to live content and productive lives, is a world we all pray for, myself and my dear friend AE, as well as
THE BEAT. This we all aggree on, which shows there are areas where we all aggree, and they are the good of all mankind regardless of our own political persuasions and ideals.



UNDERSTANDING IS THE BRIDGE THAT WILL US BRING ACCROSS THE DEADLY HIGH CHASM OF CONFRONTATION AND WAR.
  • 0

#1668 donquijote

donquijote

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3919 posts

Posted 15 December 2003 - 07:54 PM

<Steal their vote, steal their power, steal their minds, steal their money, steal their freedom, steal their govt, steal their time, but dont steal their values, just replace them.>

Howdy Bader
Once again you strike hard at the hungry lion. I would question the use of the term "democracy" on these grounds:

We are proposing a change toward more democratic system--sticking to the meaning of "demo," which perhaps it should be reminded means "people"--real democracy that is, and people like GI--wheather naively or not--fears--or threatens--that it can make us be treated like the violent monkey of the story, even though we propose NONVIOLENCE. So WHAT THE HELL IS DEMOCRACY if it doesn't mean "people" or "freedom of speech"?

<Little wonder the media is so sown up because it is the only means of waking people up/ alerting them to the games that go on. >

The day the reporters make minimum wage--and work under a boss' whip--I would start believing them. In the meantime they look at the jungle and see no predators, if you know what I mean...;)
  • 0

#1669 Bader

Bader

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1757 posts

Posted 17 December 2003 - 05:10 AM

The point GIJ appeals to is the common ground that only those who forgot to take their medication wouldnt agree to.
This one of the characteristics of Demon-ocracy or demo-krazy
which every one choses. The vast majority of voter in the two
party dominated politics would agree to a substantial number of common ground policy but the divide and rule strategy of party politics prevents the majority from emerging and having the power over the politicians leaving them free to be prevailed upon by money power etc.

GIJ: I am reflecting on the fate of the rest of the world and not from any position of security. Both you and I are enjoying the last days of security, then we are as the rest.
The time it takes light to travel between the sun and earth is fifteen minutes (as I remember). If the sun suddenly went out
(which would mean eventual death to all life on the planet) we wouldnt know, we could look up and still see the light spot.
Thats where we are at in the free world, we cant see the end is approaching until its too late.
We disagree the most in this area- the US is speeding up what I have just explained. You think the US is addressing the problem.
There is stuff all over the net which indicate how serious it is but no alarm, no panic. Because the media and the politicians are
daily pumping out unreality and mis-information.
  • 0

#1670 Bader

Bader

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1757 posts

Posted 17 December 2003 - 09:04 AM

"..THE BRIDGE THAT WILL BRING US ACROSS THE DEADLY HIGH
CHASM OF CONFRONTATION AND WAR''

Excerts from Mike Ruppert: fromthewilderness.com
Section: The Economy
article:Drugs and Wall St
Nov 1999
"..The drug trade now has power because it is underwriting the investments of the largest corporations in the world. It under writes politicians. ..... Wall Street cannot afford to let the drug barons fall. Congress cannot afford to let the drug barons fall.
Presidents and their campaigne finances cannot afford to let the drug barons fall. Why? Because our top down economy
controlled by one percent , cannot take the risk of letting
competition (business or political) have the edge of using drug money........ and for every million dolars of increased sales or increased revenues from a buyout, the stock equity of the one percent who control Wall St increases twenty to thirty times.

"As we near the millenium one thing is clear to anyone who sees the economic system clearly. The system is on the verge of implosion.. Privately owned and operated prison companies trade on Wall St. One of these is, Wackenhut, is a virtual CIA proprietary.
We have enterred , at the end of the industrial age, a phase of growth where we must incarcerate an ever expanding number of people to sustain the growth of all companies profiting from law enforcement, crime,imprisonment and war. And the over heated stock market must grow or collapse. The reason this nation spends five dollars on prisons for every one dollar on higher education - even after seven straight years of falling crime rates - is because there is more profit in it than the current
economic model.

"...The only thing that will sustain the current economic system, and its dependance of drug capital, is a police state."

"...The Kosovo Liberation Army has been financed with drug money and has trained with Islamic terrorist Osama bin Laden.
The son of a documented drug trafficker, who very few people in this country even know anything about, is "scheduled" to become our next president simply because he has the most money and he and his backers control most of the Pop."

(Pop= the multiplier effect in stock values)

This is but one perspective ie drugs.
Reflections: the debt money system would have collapsed well before now. The CIA has played a major role for the international bankers (who probably were its authors).
The US has the highest ratio of imprisonment per head of population in the world.
Drugs and the CIA go back to the Viet Nam War - Golden Triangle.
We are forced to review the Russian invasion of Afghanistan
which is a major world drug grower and the reason the CIA employed bin Laden etc.
The Taleban put an end to the drug crop so no supprises they were driven out and the country is produces an expanding crop
today (while the Taleban is taking back much of the countryside again)
It doesn take much imagination to think who might support the Taleban to take back the country and bust the crops that are a major stay for the US dollar and war chest.
The un-tendered contracts for rebuilding bombed cities, building new military bases etc from the Bush wars are likely to create Pop benefits.
This is not just the US it is global - that is the system is now based on crime. Ruppert says the only thing that will sustain it
is a police state. Thats is what the Patriot laws and parallel laws
across the world in the name of fighting terrorism is about.
Watch what happens to countries that dont take the terrorist threat seriously. It is not just the US that threatens to become
a police state and it only needs a major crisis, easily set up , its the whole world system- the means of world govt.
Confrontation (GIJ): the nature of the situation- wars to seize resources (eg oil) and control drug production and supply which equals
an inside track on finance over competitors could well lead to a major or series of wars. The point made that the top one percent cannot allow any others access to cheaper money becasue that means they will be replaced at the top also applies globally.
So its gangland/territory stuff. GIJ identified "understanding" as the bridge. While it is an old and common view that lack of understanding between peoples
is a cause of mistrust, even war, we have repeated and repeated
many times on this thread how the people dont hold any power
over govt so the mis-understanding of people has no effect on govt. The lack of understanding is what and how makes the world go round (repeating history) so we can unite and seek to do something about it. Ruppert has put his finger on a major
piece of the jigsaw puzzle.
This is nothing new to top UN players yet they do nothing. We have already seen how people are prepared to give up freedom for security. This is the ticket to world govt for ther UN. They have already sorted out a world tax and dis-arment of civilians.
Jo Kaiser advocates a communal venue for people to meet and discus issues to come to an understanding about the real world. (Pravda Forum is a Kaiser cafe)
  • 0

#1671 Bader

Bader

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1757 posts

Posted 17 December 2003 - 05:30 PM

Howdy DonQ:

Amongst the articles in the fromthewilderness.com section on the economy is an article called-
Ethnic cleansing in the USA.
That will give you the background to the women who has the Solari.com site.
  • 0

#1672 donquijote

donquijote

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3919 posts

Posted 17 December 2003 - 09:13 PM

>Timothy Sutter wrote

> > It makes sense to me.

> Jesus did not come to 'change' God
> or suggest that God should be overthrown
> or suggest that YHWH was to be
> disrespected in any manner.

Thank you for your thoughtful if flawed answers...

To begin with, if someone was to be overthrown would be Satan, as he's
the one supposedly running the world nowadays, though I wouldn't take
it as disrespectful of you...

'we must realize that this is not God's world. God is not the author
of the broken homes, shattered marriages, violence, racial and ethnic
hatred, governmental corruption, greed, pollution, depression, disease
and persecution and the resultant suffering we see around us. Paul
pinpoints the cause of these sorrows: "the god of this
age"(2Corinthians 4:4), none other than Satan the devil.'

http://www.ucgstp.or...44/feature.html

> > Just that the Revolution--or whatever we call
> > change--should not be led by a shepherd, but
> > it must be owned by all the little animals...
>
> that's not what you mean, you mean that
> subversive owls should palm themself off
> as God-like when they are, in fact, nothing
> more than mortal animals who must capture
> mice to survive for a brief period
> and then, they die.

How about the "afterlife"? There should be no reward of those
challenging Satan? I'm sure the Owl should deserves some praise too...

> > HOW THE VULTURES BENEFIT FROM ORGANIZING THE LITTLE ANIMALS
>
> > One day the Vultures, who depended on the lion's leftovers, got
> > together to organize the little animals... One of the birds started
> > saying: "We should organize the Sheep to worship a poor Shepherd, who,

> what's of note in your little 'allegory'
> is that this "poor Shepherd" is not an animal.
>
> this "poor Shepherd" is a human being
> and as such, has the ability to tame
> and maintain animals.
>
> in fact, human beings have been known
> to tame and maintain falcons and other
> birds of prey, like owls.

Some humans beings have been also known for wiping out entire species
in order to bring "progress." To think all the trouble God went
through to save them with Noah's Ark, just for a few frontier men,
sports hunters and developers to turn the wild world into a tamed
suburban sprawl.

> and so, if we allow that these animals
> in this little story do not represent
> animals but represent human beings,
>
> then we may also suggest that this
> 'poor shepherd' does not represent
> a human being but represents God.
>
> you seem to insinuate that this shepherd
> was not very clever, at all, himself,
> and that animals got the best of him.
>
> and yet, we see more animals tamed by human
> beings than human beings being destroyed
> by wild animals, by far.

If being "smart" means wiping out the natural world, fauna and flora
alike, I don't want to see what "stupid" means...

> in like manner, it is entirely unbelievable
> that a group of human beings got together
> and outwitted God, simply capturing and
> forever killing God against God's will.

Maybe Satan--the one running the world--did...

> for anyone to intimate or insinuate that
> God can simply be taken and crucified -against-
> God's own will, by a simple human being, is
> wholly and woefully mistaken.
>
> simply the delusional thought pattern of
> over-stuffed egomania held by a particular
> set of self-bloated human individuals.
>
> and when they fall into the grave,
> no one will remember their
> delusional thinking.

Is it delusional thinking or a fact that Jesus felt betrayed by Judas
and the Mobs? If God had everything planned, did he plan for Judas and
the Mobs as well?
Or was it the Imperial Roman Lion to blame?

'Can you give me the straight dope on who in fact was formally and/or
morally responsible for the decision to execute Jesus? There's the
traditional "blame the Jews" reading of the New Testament, which has
fostered centuries of anti-Semitism, and there's the modern
interpretation that says the version of the story given in the Gospels
was a whitewash of the Roman authorities. How strong is the "blame the
Romans" argument? This is a horrendously touchy subject, but I feel I
can trust the Straight Dope to handle it objectively yet sensitively.
--Margaret Levin Phillips, assistant professor, University of Oklahoma
Health Sciences Center

SDSTAFF Dex replies:
(snip)
The first Christians were Jews who appealed to other Jews to accept
Jesus as the Jewish Messiah. Their preaching thus did not condemn the
Jews too harshly, laying most of the blame on the Romans. When the
Jews rejected conversion, many early Christians turned against the
Jews and looked for converts in the vast Roman Empire outside Judea.
Their preaching therefore was careful not to condemn the Romans too
harshly, but it was OK to blame Jews.'
So the early Christian turned on the Jews because they were powerless
but never picked on the Roman Lion because, well, you know, because
they weren't stupid... ;) That tradition lives on, doesn't it?

http://www.straightd...mjesuskill.html

(to be continued)
  • 0

#1673 donquijote

donquijote

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3919 posts

Posted 17 December 2003 - 09:15 PM

> > because he tried to save them, was crucified by the lion; but who left
> > the promise of the good sheep going to Paradise, in which there's no
> > lions..." Then another bird added: "Very clever. Likewise, we'll
> > organize them to denounce the abuses against the poor little animals
> > in 'other' jungles..."

> and still the only human in this drama is the shepherd.
>
> your little allegory seems to imply that
> the only human which, in likeness, must be a
> Godlike figure, was killed and killed forever,
> and has no say-so in the 'jungle' world
> after he was killed.
>
> just leaves promises for animals to use
> in a clever manner against each other.
>
> your little story paints man, the shepherd,
> in a way that is exactly false when compared
> to the way things actually happen on this planet.
>
> the ingenuity of man places him at
> a supreme advantage over the animals.

Not only over other animals but also over themselves, as it seems we
are living under the "law of the jungle"...

> in like manner, the far reaching sight of God
> and far superior Mind of Christ would simply
> level the human population with a breath.
>
> leaves no room for the disastrously
> nonsensical implications of this
> little allegory.
>
> no human device will ever ever ever
> overthrow the design and purpose of God.
>
> period.
>
> egomania notwithstanding.

Kings, Presidents, Dictators and even Popes seem to suffer from
"egomaniac desease" as they act like gods, do they not?

> > Meanwhile, an Owl who had been observing the problems of the jungle,
> > and who had been invited by mistake, spoke this way: "The lion was
> > able to kill the Shepherd because the little animals did nothing. Why
> > not organize them to save them from the lion?"

> this Owl is -not- an omniscient being
> who subsists on it's own will.
>
> at least, no Owl that lives on the
> earth goes long without food or drink

And so do the Human Lions, though there's little chance of they ever
going hungry or thirsty... ;)

> and so, if this Owl is entirely different
> from its animal namesake, then the entire
> 'allegory' is a useless exercise if obfuscation.
>
> if, however, this Owl is at
> all like its animal namesake,
>
> then this Owl would be succeptible
> to capture, training and taming
> by a Shepherd.

The only animal worth it of taming is the Lion, as he's the only one
preying on the little animals, it seems to me...

> if this shepherd was killed for any reason,
>
> this shepherd was killed for a reason that
> this shepherd devised and carried out as
> this shepherd had planned in advance.
>
> these vultures lions and owls do not plan
> in advance as well as the Godlike figure
> of the shepherd.
>
> at best, an owl or a lion or a vulture
> can only see into the very near future,
> as far ahead as a mouse in the grass
> which will adequately generate enough
> sustenance to last a brief period
>
> whereas a Shepherd can see much further
> ahead and make much more distant plans,
> even so far as to capture beasts and
> place them at his own disposal.
>
> even so far as to supercede
> any form of natural death,
>
> a thing which the owl the lion
> and the vultures can never do.
>
> the egomania of the Owl is his downfall.
>
> he deems himself as superior to his Maker.

The Owl ain't in no high place worth it of downfall. The Owl is a good
independent observant of the jungle. No need to plot against him, if
you know what I mean...

> little knowing realizing nor understanding that
> this "Shepherd" did not remain in the grave but
> lives still inasmuch as God cannot die.
>
> this Shepherd did not so much die for the
> the human population as this Shepherd lived
> as one of them, for them.
>
> the atoning bloodletting did not -interfere-
> with the far reaching plans of the Shepherd,
>
> the atoning bloodletting simply initiated
> the completion of the first stages of
> these far reaching plans.
>
> a thing no owl can see from its little
> perch before it fall in the dust.

The Owl got no fear, as he knows in Paradise there's no lion. His only
concern is having to put up with the lion everyday the way the other
little animals do. "It ain't no life worth living," he says.

> > And that's how the Vultures organized from then
> > on the little animals of the jungle--to defend
> > them from the subversive owls...

> if these subversive owls must be disemboweled
> so as to read their entrails, in all likelihood,
> the only relevant data that will be gathered
> up is that these owls served no useful purpose
> and did more to harm themselves than they
> ever did good or bad to any sheep.

Are some planning the dismemberment and dissection--or should I say
"Crucifixion"--of the Owl? The Owl says the sheep were meant to be
free not to live in herd, but there's no danger in that, is it?

> God is not overthrown, nor can God be overthrown.
>
> and Owls must search for mice.

The Owl knows the problem lies, not with the mice, but with the Lion.
No wonder Paradise is pictured with a tamed Lion...

http://webspawner.com/users/donquijote
  • 0

#1674 donquijote

donquijote

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3919 posts

Posted 17 December 2003 - 09:57 PM

Howdy Bader
I read some of your past posts and they were awesome. And now something thought provoking...;)

"The first Christians were Jews who appealed to other Jews to accept
Jesus as the Jewish Messiah. Their preaching thus did not condemn the
Jews too harshly, laying most of the blame on the Romans. When the
Jews rejected conversion, many early Christians turned against the
Jews and looked for converts in the vast Roman Empire outside Judea.
Their preaching therefore was careful not to condemn the Romans too
harshly, but it was OK to blame Jews."

So, this is how the tradition of never messing with the lion was
established by the early Christians, same tradition held today...
Though the Jews also learned themselves to allign themselves with the
lion, in which case everybody is in the same boat. So now they must
look for a new scapegoat. Well, enough nonsense... ;)
  • 0

#1675 Bader

Bader

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1757 posts

Posted 18 December 2003 - 10:22 AM

Yeah I agree.

"The first christians were Jews.."
then further down "Jews rejected conversion"
Duh!
The tradition of never messing with the lions began in the Roman arena where the Christians were sport items to the masses and that had nothing to do with blaming anyone but because they believed in the resurrection.
They dont appear to have read the four gospels the eye-witness accounts.
The whole point of it all is the resurrection. If Jesus never rose from the dead some would have had a grudge but even then because of Jewish persecution of the early church which included putting some people to death and Saul (Paul when converted) was rounding them up with all the passion of all the ADL put together, they wouldnt have been going around being anti-semitic to fellow Jews.
They effectively are saying the resurrection was such a disappointment that they resorted to blaming the Jews for setting it off.
The alternative is that the impact on faith, especially those linked to the Pharicees (eg Saul) who believed theretically at least in the resurrection, from the appearing of Jesus after his death was what enabled them to stand by their faith unto death, by stoning or lions.
Just as matter of interest, when Jesus was subjected to the trial
by the Sanhedron after his capture in the garden they violated
just about every protocol in their book, thats how much they were overcome with their determination to get rid of him. Historically speaking in regards persecution of Jews being singled out as the murderers of God, which was predominantly if not exclusively Roman Catholic is an indictment on their so called faith. On the basis of the resurrection, the cornerstone of Christianity only those who dont appreciate it/believe could disfunctionally revert to finding a scapegoat for his death as though there was no resurrection.
This is as bad as the paranoia of anti-jewism.
Ignorance also overlooks the fact that the New Testament was/
is exclusively "Jewish" as far as authors go and secondly within
the "gentile" members are exhorted to not to get too bigheaded and look down on the non-believing Jews whom God prunned away as he can just as easily graft them back in on the original tree.
Thirdly it is totally illogical for Jews (Christian ones) to point the finger at any Jews and blame them for the death of Jesus, across the Roman world. If believing Jew did become obcessed they could only have pointed the finger at the hirarchy in Jerusalem who influenced the crowd.
There are certain people who have pathological paranoia.
Why do they go on about something that happened two thousand years ago. There is a group of them in Canada and they are working to get these accounts in the New Testament
banned. I can imagine how some Jews would react if Christians
pointed a ban finger at parts of the Talmud, it would anti-semitism and hate.
Mel Gibson ( a Conservative Caotholic) has made a movie about the crucifixion, called The Passion. It grafically exposes the brutality and the suffering
and is even in Greek and Arabic which were the common languages, subtitles in English, in his attempt to make it realistic as possible. He has been harased by people who sport the anti-semitism paranoia, who even went as far as getting at Mels father
to try and stop the movie. All paranoia has done is create world
wide interest and make it a financial success regardless of how well it has been done.
But I should imagine given his commitment to his acting the movie will be well done.

Earlier DonQ, you were talking about revolutionaries. The Kennedy brothers were trying to unseat the Lion in the US, as far as I can see.
Has anybody got any comment on these brave men?
  • 0

#1676 donquijote

donquijote

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3919 posts

Posted 18 December 2003 - 04:28 PM

<"The first christians were Jews.."
then further down "Jews rejected conversion"
Duh!>

Howdy Bader
I see no contradiction. It could be like the 12 Apostles being Jew but the Jews at large rejecting the new faith. The Christians meanwhile were ready to be devoured by the lions until their new found faith was recognized by Constantine. From then on they joined the Lion in imposing the faith on Islam and others, say the American Indians, the Jews joining the Lion after being the prey in WWII. The rest is history...;)

Here's something I wrote elsewhere...

<The Darwinists and Secular Humanists have done exactly what you have proposed: they have created their own new religions--with catastrophic results, I might add. All you have to do is count the sheer (and unprecedented) number of corpses produced by the Stalins, Hitlers, Idi Amins, Ho Chi Minhs, Maos, and other likeminded high-priests of the Darwinian Atheist/Humanist worldview. >

They have done the same the Popes and the David Koreshes have done in the past or some other nations "chosen by God" are doing at present. But I don't think any of those names fits the name of "Humanist." The only possible link among all of the above plus the ones I mention is the "Lion"...
  • 0

#1677 GIJOE

GIJOE

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 844 posts

Posted 18 December 2003 - 04:39 PM

Donq,


Having read many of your posts over the past year, It is obvious that you are a true believer in the GOODNESS OF THE SON OF MAN.
It seems to me that if the SON OF GOD REAPPEARED TODAY,
he would probably be killed quickly by the new SAN HEDREN, the
ANTI CHRISTS OF THIS WORLD.

The only alliegence I personally hold higher then the one to my country, is my adoration and instruction from the LORD.

It is GOD AND COUNTRY, not COUNTRY AND GOD.

In the end of this life, we all must face our creator, at least this is my belief. Donq impresses me as a good soul, with a christian heart. Because of this fact, I can accept his opinions on things with witch I do not always aggree.

The current world situation is not work of true believers, it is the work of wolves in sheeps clothing.
All this talk about Allah from the terror groups is merely a ruse, to help a gang of demented gangsters recruit childlike minds to do their filthy deeds, and die in the process, as they stay alive, in a cave or a palace.
There are no GEORGE PATTONS in the bin laden gang, only foul smelling hypnotized crackpots, with infected brains.
And Donq, how can you ever continue a dialog with the likes of
woj1, the serbian moron?
This is one of things i cannot understand about you.
Inmates like him should be ignored, not tolerated.

time to go, G I Joe
  • 0

#1678 donquijote

donquijote

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3919 posts

Posted 18 December 2003 - 11:37 PM

< Having read many of your posts over the past year, It is obvious that you are a true believer in the GOODNESS OF THE SON OF MAN.
It seems to me that if the SON OF GOD REAPPEARED TODAY,
he would probably be killed quickly by the new SAN HEDREN, the
ANTI CHRISTS OF THIS WORLD.

Howdy GI
I'm sure the Son of God would be killed on the spot, being honest nowadays may be considered "subversive."

<This is one of things i cannot understand about you.
Inmates like him should be ignored, not tolerated.

time to go, G I Joe >

Thank you for your kind remarks though I may not fully meet your expectations of chosing America as the "chosen land"... Or may it's meant to be under a different approach and leadership... We are all together in this small spaceship called Earth and I can only repeat Rodney King's words (at the time of the LA riots): "Can't we all get along?";)

The reason I put a greater responsibility on America is because she is the head of power. She could decide to change Iraq, Africa and the rest of the world with a minimum loss of life, actually *with no loss of life* since all it takes is for her to change and nobody would be able to say "no." Sign the stupid Kyoto Protocol or come up with another one that works, kick the foxes out of government, expend in healthcare and education and everybody will say "yes."

Here's the latest debate...

> > They have done the same the Popes and the David Koreshes
>
> Don...are you listening/reasoning...or are you just another troll? The
> popes and Koreshes were not CHristians! Hello! Didn't you see the thing I
> just wrote to the other guy in the conversation..? How stupid it would be
> to assume someone is Christian just because they label themselves
> such....any more than it would be to hate all...what did I say Rhino's??? no
> kangaroos...that's right...because someone claiming to be one hurt a bunch
> of people. DO THEY DO WHAT JESUS CHRIST DID?? If not, you can't call them
> Christians. They are fakes. Right? Duh. Why are you allowing these fakes
> to discredit the real thing? ANSWER me....please.

OK, and the same goes for the "communists" that were not communists,
and the "democrats" who are not democrats and the list goes on and on.
These are foxes quick to grab on anything that serves them because
somehow they get something out of it. Perhaps we should judge things
by their results. Here we go again with another little story... ;)

HOW THE BLACK SHEEP WERE EXPELLED

One day the Lion, who had been thinking how to best eat the sheep,
decided to dress as a sheep... This way the sheep trusted the new
"sheep" more and more every day, some confessing to him, others voting
for him, and most allowing to be trimmed by him...

Meanwhile, the Black Sheep thought this way: "If he got paws and big
teeth and roars, lion he is..."

And that's the reason why from then on the Black Sheep weren't allowed
to mingle anymore with the simple and common sheep...
>
>
> have done in
> > the past or some other nations "chosen by God" are doing at present.
> again..who sez? the nation?

Let me see... God Bless America. Who says America is the "chosen
land"? Any particular reasons, was Rome chosen as well?

>
> > But I don't think any of those names fits the name of "Humanist."
>
> Humanism is a religion based around man's abiility to do what is right on
> his OWN. History has shown us that men and women in general take advantage
> of WHATEVER will work to their benefit...even hijacking other things like
> Christianity to accomlish their wicked design! You're going to make a
> religion based around...these kinds of people? Ohhhh yes you are :-) Isn't
> that...kind of crazy? (Voice of Henry from M.A.S.H.)

Don't call it crazy, call it "Quixotic"... ;) And here's another
story...

HOW CERVANTES WAS FOOLED

One day the Lie, which inhabits at the highest and most indredible
places such as the government and the pulpit, decided that such Don
Quixote was a very dangerous enemy because many others could follow
his example... This way in the famous occasion when the noble knight
was about to attack the Bad Giants, the Lie revealed itself to
Cervantes as windmills...

And that's how from then on more than one revolutionary was frustrated
for fear of being called crazy...

>
> The
> > only possible link among all of the above plus the ones I mention is
> > the "Lion"...
> >
> > THE LAW OF THE JUNGLE
> >
> > Once upon a time, in the deep jungle, lived a Lion and a Monkey... One
>
> Oh and off we go to fairy tale land again...no. You answer my question or
> in the killfile you go. -Bob

It ain't a fairy tale land, my friend, it's about *life in the Jungle*
as real as life and death...

Now YOU answer me this: Was Jesus revolutionary or
counter-revolutionary?
  • 0

#1679 GIJOE

GIJOE

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 844 posts

Posted 18 December 2003 - 11:51 PM

SAVIOR.
  • 0

#1680 donquijote

donquijote

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3919 posts

Posted 20 December 2003 - 05:42 PM

"it may not be long before American oil companies executives are invited to sip tea with Col Gaddafi in his tent in the desert."

You may conclude from this piece of news that the best policy for the Little Lions is to befriend the Big Lions. Or to put it another way, the Big Lions are always ready to befriend--and protect--the Little Lions so long as they don't represent 'competition'...;)

Nowhere the word "democracy" is to be found. Whatever happened though to the good old-fashioned word "hypocrisy"?:confused:

Gaddafi yielded to 'good cop, bad cop' trick

(Anton La Guardia reports on an about-turn by the man the West loved to hate who now seeks to distance himself from the enemies of America

Tony Blair's televised appearance late last night underlined his conviction that Libya's decision to come clean on its weapons of mass destruction was a vindication of his policy of "engagement" with rogue regimes in the Middle East.

But in Washington, the Bush administration will see the latest move as evidence that military action in Iraq is beginning to transform the whole of the Middle East.

The reality is probably somewhere in between, in which America and Europe have played a "good cop, bad cop" game with radical regimes in the Middle East.

Col Muammar Gaddafi was throughout the 1980s and 1990s the quintessential Middle Eastern rogue. But yesterday the Libyan leader demonstrated that he did not want to be included in America's "axis of evil".

He has long been suspected of developing weapons of mass destruction, particularly chemical weapons. But last night's revelation that his regime had been developing a full "nuclear cycle" - giving him the capability of making weapons-grade fissile material - will have come as a surprise to many experts.

The Libyan announcement came a day after Iran signed an agreement to allow intrusive inspections by United Nations inspectors of its nuclear industry. Last month, Iran admitted that it had lied about its nuclear programme for 18 years and had made small quantities of weapons-grade uranium and plutonium.

Libya was not formally part of President George Bush's original "axis of evil" in his State of the Nation speech in January 2002 when he named Iraq, Iran and North Korea as enemies who posed a mortal threat to the world because of their pursuit of weapons of mass destruction and their support for terrorism. Many in the Bush administration, notably John Bolton, under-secretary of state responsible for weapons proliferation, had openly enlarged the definition to include Syria, Libya and Cuba.

During a visit to London earlier this year, Mr Bolton had expressed alarm about Libya's nuclear programme. But British officials had studiously played down its significance, either out of naivety or because they were trying to negotiate a behind-the-scenes deal with Tripoli to abandon its weapons.

Although America has no official dealings with Libya, Britain began a process of rapprochement with Libya in the late 1990s.

Despite the bitterness over Col Gaddafi's generous arming of the IRA and of the murder of WPc Yvonne Fletcher outside the Libyan embassy in 1984, and suspicion of Libyan involvement in the destruction of Pan Am Flight 103 over Lockerbie in 1988, the climate of relations changed in 1998.

Britain said it would accept a third country trial for two Libyan agents, held under Scottish law, and in April 1999 Libya surrendered the two suspects. Diplomatic relations between Britain and Libya were resumed in 1999.

The September 11 attacks on America prompted a further warming of ties as Libya shared intelligence with America and Britain over al-Qa'eda.

Mike O'Brien, the Foreign Office minister, famously exchanged kisses with Col Gaddafi in his tent during a visit in August 2002. But the real turning point for Col Gaddafi came in January.

According to British officials, Libya "approached us" to resolve the suspicions over its weapons of mass destruction. Last month and earlier this month, American and British officials secretly inspected Libya's facilities.

It was an unprecedented move for Col Gaddafi, who years earlier had been bombed by President Reagan with the explicit support of Margaret Thatcher.

Libya has said it will inform the United Nations Security Council and place its facilities under inspection to give reassurance that it is ending its weapons programmes.

With the trail blazed by American scientists, and doubtless intelligence agents, it may not be long before American oil companies executives are invited to sip tea with Col Gaddafi in his tent in the desert.

http://www.telegraph.../ixnewstop.html
  • 0




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

Copyright © 2016 Pravda.Ru