Bye, bye Blair

90 posts / 0 new
Last post
Styx said: "So greed is good?" I don't agree with the label "greed". Attaching a negative label to an argument is clever, but not always a true comparative. I don’t think that a person who works hard, manages his money well and strives to get ahead is being greedy.
Okaaay I’ll speak very slowly. Paul, you are a little confused, I think, about what is being discussed as you are lumping all sorts of disparate issues in together. First there was Saddam Hussain. Ruthless, evil, sadistic dictator whose regime killed and tortured many. (I am a long time member and fund raiser for the Medical Foundation which treats those who have survived torture by countless regimes around the world. The stories issuing from Iraq were often amongst the most harrowing, but there are plenty other countries doing similar things.) Then there are the terrorists. (I take it when you refer to terrorists you mean fundamental muslim suicide bombers intent on the violent destruction of western ideals etc.) Saddam Hussain had nothing to do with Al Qaeda or 9/11, nor was he sponsoring Palestinian attacks on Israel. In fact, he ran what was a predominantly secular state – nothing to do with fundamental Islam. The likes of Afghanistan, Syria or Pakistan would have been the more obvious targets had targeting the real source of terrorists been the objective. Then there are the casualties. Firstly there was the suffering and death inflicted by Saddam on anyone who threatened him, with the rest of the country no doubt living in abject fear of him whilst suffering the harmful effects of sanctions. A very bad situation. With the overthrow of Saddam, the threat of death or torture by his hand was removed. Great. However, in it’s place – due in my opinion, to a hasty ill-thought out invasion with no real understanding of the country or constructive plan for it’s aftermath – we have *another* bad situation. You can’t just get rid of a dictator from the outside in, without there being a strong, popular, organised resistance on the inside willing and able to take power immediately. There was no such organisation and so there was an inevitable power vacuum. First this led to general lawlessness – a quite terrifying state of affairs for anybody living in it. Now the country has degenerated into virtual civil war, exacerbated by ‘insurgents’ from neighbouring countries hell bent on scuppering any hopes of a transition to a US friendly democracy. Paul, at no point did I state that the allied troops were responsible for the bombs and disappearances, however neither was Saddam Hussain. These casualties are being caused by ‘terrorists’ or ‘insurgents’ as a consequence *of* the invasion. I am not saying that innocents are being killed by us because terrorists are hiding behind them, I’m saying that the *terrorists* are killing the innocent and I do not give them a pass. I’m simply saying that their motivation and opportunity to do so, is a consequence *of* the invasion. It wasn’t happening before – it is now. It’s that simple. Take two dire situations, before and after, and compare them – which is the lesser of two evils? ~ www.fabulousmother.com
No one has mentioned oil: or the fact that we the west helped Saddam Hussain seize control; oh the irony.

 

"There were plenty of Christians with me on the anti-war marches (No there weren't. I don't know what you call plenty, but if that could happen, it could only happen in England.)" Christians have been a key part of peace movements across the world for hundreds of years. "(I don't care what they think. Don't talk to me about the Pope or any Bishop or Archbishop. I am not impressed. I am not a catholic. I do not follow the dictates of "The Church". I am too much of a Christian for that silliness. I follow the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob – not the Pope.)" I'm not especially impressed by Church leaders myself - although I'm sure many of them are nice people - but I think they're probably Christians.

 

"I don't agree with the label "greed"." Yes, because people who put their love of money before other people's health and lives are just hard workers. People who work hard but don't have the right cut-throat attitude - well, they deserve all they get, right? It's funny that you accuse other people of swallowing propoganda while your views are, somewhat mysteriously, utterly in line with what you government wants everyone to think.
Thanks 2LOU for speaking slowly (writing actually). But your wrong - just dead wrong. Saddam Hussain, did pay $25,000 to the parents of suicied bombers. Yeah - we've got some real problems over there. It wasn't because we did the wrong thing though. We made some mistakes - there is no doubt about that. But that doesn't mean that we shouldn't have gone in, and that we should leave now. We should have done things differently. We should now do those things and hopefully we are. But to leave now would be wrong - just wrong. This is my opinion - I hope I didn't write to fast.
Take two dire situations, before and after, and compare them – which is the lesser of two evils? That is far to subjective. If the question is right or wrong - I say we were and are right to go in there. You may not have the stomache for it - but it was right. Me must try to fight evil and free people from it if they want to be - It is that simple to me.
Christians have been a key part of peace movements across the world for hundreds of years. Oh get off it.
Jack Wade said: "Yes, because people who put their love of money before other people's health and lives are just hard workers. People who work hard but don't have the right cut-throat attitude - well, they deserve all they get, right?" I don't think that at all. I agree with you if you frame it that way. That is not how it was framed initially. People who put their love of money first is a whole different subject. The latter bit of your little ditty though does bring to mind that the poor probably isn't quite as able to help as are those with money. Christians believe in charity. It used to be, in the US that it was only the Christians who were organizing charities. Too bad the government got involved isn't it. Secular just isn't very good at it.
"You are a coward and just too dishonest to admit it. You hate this war, not because of our dead or the death of the innocent - or you would mention the dead of the innocent and our warriors. To come to such grand numbers, you can only be referring to the death of the enemy (which are much, much, much larger than ours - but do not get mentioned in the press). So it appears to be the enemy, those who purposely kill women and children and the elderly, that you are wanting to save, that you are morning for. Much better to kill the Christians. Be honest - that is the real reason you hate Blair and Bush - isn't it. You would rather that the whole world fall to terrorists and dictators than to have a Christian leader lead you into war against them. It really isn't Blair that you hate. It isn't Bush, terrorists, or dictatorship - it's Christianity. Jesus. God. But both Bush and Blair voiced a belief in the Christian God, so you hate them and stand against anything they try to do to make the world better, because if they succeed, you are afraid that people will see it as a Godly victory. Well, get used to it because He will be victorious in the end. You can be sure of that. And you WILL bow to Him." Paul, that was an absolutely disgraceful attack on buk unworthy of anyone who calls himself a christian. Most people have responded to your posts with cogent argument which you might not agree with and you respond with personal insult. And Tony Cook's not some little fascist pastor who'll chuck you out of his church if he detects a wrong doctrine, he's used to taking flak and the mere fact that you're here shows it's not just a lefty talking shop.
"Paul, that was an absolutely disgraceful attack on buk unworthy of anyone who calls himself a christian." Well, it certainly seemed slightly misdirected.

 

Plu Ca Change and all that. My scientist friend who's head explodes when I say that: but we're still fucking around in Arabia and what has changed?

 

Paul, that was an absolutely disgraceful attack on buk unworthy of anyone who calls himself a christian. (Nonsense. I can get angry too. Certain things do tick me off. I don't care a wit if you didn't like my comments. Those who answer my posts don't seem to care about their attacks on me, and neither do I, and - I might add - I don't see you objecting then either. I don’t have to conform to your idea of what a Christian is. I am what I am and I don’t have to wimp out to anyone. B.S. is B.S. and I can call it that if I want. What would you know about what is worthy of a Christian anyway? God tells us how to act and you have no idea how that is. So stick it in your ear, as they say. lol)
How about this: I won't bow to YOUR god nor allah nor bhudda nor the bloody tooth fairy. It's all the same to me. (Yes you will - remember who told you so.)
How about not bowing to any god Paul?

 

But you will. How about that?
Here is an example of what I mean by this kind of thinking: ENZO from an earlier post: Listen: I abhor regimes that oppress women, young people, old people, black people, white people, whatever. I don't think anyone should be able to run around killing innocent people, like the terrorists do. And for that reason I abhor the behaviour of people who share your views. Other self-richeous pseudo-religious (yes, PSEUDO religious) people with those ideas include suicide bombers and meglomaniacs and haters of true liberty and true freedoms. Me: Enzo is, in this statement, essentially saying that Christians are as bad as those terrorists who "...run around killing innocent people..." - who "oppress women, young people, old people, black people, white people, whatever." He said that it is because of THIS REASON he abhors people who share my views. Now how can any of you say that this is rational thinking? Is there any amoung you who would side with me on this, or will I get nothing but those who agree with Enzo - that Christians that think like me, are as bad as... well, you can read.
I'll be sure to let you know

 

Enzo v2.0
Anonymous's picture
"Me: Enzo is, in this statement, essentially saying that Christians are as bad as those terrorists who "...run around killing innocent people..." - who "oppress women, young people, old people, black people, white people, whatever."" I wasn't going to post on this thread anymore, but I wanted to be clear on this: Anyone who bothered to read what I wrote properly will have realised that in no way was I suggesting the above. I went out of my way to separate Paul's views from Christian views. I'll repeat myself: I referred to his views as PSEUDO RELIGIOUS (twice) by which I meant he is not a proper Christian. I was NOT saying ("essentially" or otherwise) that "Christians are as bad as" anyone. Or as good. Or anything of the sort. One more time for you: I wasn't talking about Christians at all in that quote, I was expressing a view about PEOPLE LIKE YOU. Hope that's clear, sweetheart. Ben..
PoetJude, how about moving up north? I don't know how much you've got away but you can get an ever so slightly unloved three bed terrace up here for around 70 000. I moved from London to the West Mids- I talk from experience. Also, sorry to break up the serious discussion.
It wasn't that serious.

 

I have considered it Ursula but my job keeps me in the capital and I am not quite ready to forsake it! My plan is to keep the apartment in London (I'll be moved to new housing association property when our council estate is demolished in 2 years) and buy a second home in East Anglia. My best friend from school has a gorgeous old terrace in Thorpe Hessley near Rotherham which cost far less than a studio box down here. I do get a little green! jude "Cacoethes scribendi" http://www.judesworld.net

 

"But you will. How about that?" How about this: none of us will *willingly*. Why would we bow down before the kind of tyrannical, murderous superbeing who shares your views? He'll have to force us to, by threat of death or torture. Which I guess makes him kinda like Saddam Hussein, eh? You aren't a Christian, Paul. You have nothing to do with the Christian god. You're the herald to some kind of omnipotent despot of your own imagining. "What would you know about what is worthy of a Christian anyway" More than you, evidently. You said: "We must try to fight evil and free people from it if they want to be - It is that simple to me" Then we'll fight the evil that you represent and try to free people from *that*. How about it?
And they will call the truth a lie and a lie the truth.
You've no idea when this bowing down is going to happen do you Paul? Only I'd rather not mess up my decent trousers.

 

Walking past a cathedral once, a friend remarked that if God existed, he must have one hell of an ego – first he makes everyone in his own image then he demands constant praise and hanging off his every word – and now with the bowing down. You’d think being omnipresent would be enough to satisfy most deities... ~ www.fabulousmother.com
Yes, Jesus said 'the Kingdom of God is within you'. Note, he didn't say the Bible, or a church. Or Poughkeepsie, for that matter...
Funny, I could've sworn Poughkeepsie was somewhere near my liver...
'Scuse me, has anyone seen the loony klaxon? I could use my kazoo if pushed, but I think the klaxon might have more effect.
Klaxon. See, that's a great word. People should use it more often.
yeahha... in the Registry of Hooters, Klaxon is King. Bow down before it. Shit, it's catching.
"And they will call the truth a lie and a lie the truth." It's that old category error. Because many great prophets have been derided - or even imprisoned and killed - for saying things people don't like, it's easy to believe that just by saying some things that people don't like, you become great. This is obviously not true.

 

"And they will call the truth a lie and a lie the truth." So the Bible warns that people will disagree with you, but whatever you do, don't open your mind to the possibility that they might be right! Any evidence they give you is made up, right? It's all trickses! What a morally bankrupt book.
Certainly not financially bankrupt. It is the best selling book worldwide...
Funny, I thought it was Readers' Digest. I must get out more.
Yeah, but it's well out of copyright so nobody's making all that much money out of it.

 

The way the church makes out, you wouldn't know it...
They give them away in hotel rooms you know.

 

I noticed the book of Mormon has become a hotel room staple as well. Any mormons here?

Pages

Topic locked