Guest James Beck Posted October 31, 2007 Posted October 31, 2007 In article <Jason-3110071334060001@67-150-123-199.lsan.mdsg- pacwest.com>, Jason@nospam.com says... > In article <5orgofFoc0p3U1@mid.individual.net>, "Robibnikoff" > <witchypoo@broomstick.com> wrote: > > > "Jason" <Jason@nospam.com> wrote in message > > news:Jason-3010071857410001@66-53-209-232.lsan.mdsg-pacwest.com... > > > In article <fg8g0r$2jh$01$2@news.t-online.com>, Tokay Pino Gris > > > <tokay.gris.beau@gmx.net> wrote: > > > > > >> Jason wrote: > > >> > In article <fg84j1$hmc$00$2@news.t-online.com>, Tokay Pino Gris > > >> > <tokay.gris.beau@gmx.net> wrote: > > >> > > > >> >> Jason wrote: > > >> >>> In article <fg7la3$h1k$00$2@news.t-online.com>, Tokay Pino Gris > > >> >>> <tokay.gris.beau@gmx.net> wrote: > > >> >>> > > >> >>>> Jason wrote: > > >> >>>>> In article <fg6k9n$i7e$03$3@news.t-online.com>, Tokay Pino Gris > > >> >>>>> <tokay.gris.beau@gmx.net> wrote: > > >> >>>>> > > >> >>>>>> Jason wrote: > > >> >>>>>>> In article <8YmdnUGVWrg5ULvanZ2dnUVZ_uninZ2d@comcast.com>, > > >> >>>>>>> Charles > > >> > & Mambo > > >> >>>>>>> Duckman <duckman@gfy.slf> wrote: > > >> >>>>>>> > > >> >>>>>>>> Jason wrote: > > >> >>>>>>>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> Prove that there was a primordial pond. Tell me the exact > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> location > > >> >>>>> of the > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> primordial pond. > > >> >>>>>>>>>> Earth. > > >> >>>>>>>>> Be more specific. > > >> >>>>>>>> Third planet from the Sun, Solar system, Milky Way Galaxy. > > >> >>>>>>> If you can't tell me the location of the primordial pond, don't > > >> > expect me > > >> >>>>>>> to tell you the location of heaven. > > >> >>>>>>> > > >> >>>>>>> > > >> >>>>>> He did. And I did. Earth. The ocean. Which then pretty much > > > covered the > > >> >>>>>> whole globe. I'd have thought you'd jump at that. Big flood and > > >> >>>>>> all. > > >> >>>>>> > > >> >>>>>> Tokay > > >> >>>>> Heaven is in another dimension. > > >> >>>>> > > >> >>>>> > > >> >>>> What is a dimension? > > >> >>>> > > >> >>>> Tokay > > >> >>> Google dimension > > >> >>> > > >> >>> > > >> >> I KNOW what a dimension is. Do you? > > >> >> > > >> >> > > >> >> Tokay > > >> > > > >> > try this term: alternate reality > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > >> Totally different term. WHAT is a dimension? > > >> > > >> > > >> Tokay > > > > > > I don't know which dimension in which heaven is located. > > > > Then what makes you think it's located in another dimension? > > It's my opinion. I don't remember the name of the preacher that came up > with that idea. His idea made more sense than any other ideas I have > heard. > Yep, gotta' try a little science speak to keep the sheeple entertained. Why does it make more sense? Because it gives you a pseudo science reason to keep believing in something that you have not one little bit of real proof of? Jim Quote
Guest James Beck Posted October 31, 2007 Posted October 31, 2007 In article <Jason-3110071336220001@67-150-123-199.lsan.mdsg- pacwest.com>, Jason@nospam.com says... > In article <5orgc3Fnl0toU1@mid.individual.net>, "Robibnikoff" > <witchypoo@broomstick.com> wrote: > > > "Jason" <Jason@nospam.com> wrote in message > > news:Jason-3010071233260001@66-53-215-221.lsan.mdsg-pacwest.com... > > > In article <5ooqf6Fnh429U1@mid.individual.net>, "Robibnikoff" > > > <witchypoo@broomstick.com> wrote: > > > > > >> "Jason" <Jason@nospam.com> wrote in message > > >> news:Jason-2910071114400001@67-150-122-25.lsan.mdsg-pacwest.com... > > >> > In article <5omfbiFnmodfU2@mid.individual.net>, "Robibnikoff" > > >> > <witchypoo@broomstick.com> wrote: > > >> > > > >> >> "Jason" <Jason@nospam.com> wrote > > >> >> > > >> >> snip > > >> >> > > > >> >> > There is a heaven and there is a hell. > > >> >> > > >> >> Then prove it. > > >> > > > >> > Prove that there was a primordial pond. Tell me the exact location of > > >> > the > > >> > primordial pond. > > >> > > >> Since I never claimed there was a primordial pond, I don't have to prove > > >> anything. > > >> > > >> YOU made the assertion about heaven and hell. YOU prove it. > > > > > > The location: another dimension > > > > Uh huh. Prove it. > > If I knew the exact dimension where heaven is located, I would tell you. > It's my guess that it's in the 9th Dimension ) > Well, that number is as good (or bad) as any other you could pull out of your butt. Jim Quote
Guest Kelsey Bjarnason Posted October 31, 2007 Posted October 31, 2007 [snips] On Wed, 31 Oct 2007 13:21:24 -0800, Jason wrote: > You should have provided better options. > > For example, I could ask you: > > Would you choose to kill your wife or your son? > > Either one of those choices is a bad choice. Yes, and that was kinda the point: sometimes all the choices suck, but generally some suck worse than others. In the exemplar, you could cave in to the terrorist demands and kill the one kid, but risk repeat performances since they know this sort of thing will work. Or you could blow up the (boat, I think it was), killing the threat, but also killing several kids. Or you could do nothing, thus killing millions. Your choice? Maximum possible harm to the maximum number of people. As choices go, that's about as bad as it gets. Let's hope you're never in a position to make serious decisions affecting others, because you suck at it. -- “The xians are one live body short of a resurrection.” Rudzinski Quote
Guest Free Lunch Posted October 31, 2007 Posted October 31, 2007 On Wed, 31 Oct 2007 12:13:37 -0400, in alt.atheism Al Klein <rukbat@pern.invalid> wrote in <29ahi3houucl8cvb6s8a4no2mlaji3tn1l@4ax.com>: >On Wed, 31 Oct 2007 00:08:54 -0800, Jason@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > >>How many times has Iran attacked America? > >None. Niggling little criticism. Attacking an embassy or consulate does count as attacking a country (see flap about US bombing of Chinese Embassy). Of course Jason is still way off base. >Hint: Defending isn't attacking. > >How many times has the US made UNPROVOKED attacks on the Middle East. > >Hint: Many, many times, both directly and through clients - during one >such attack we were counter-attacked. Quote
Guest Free Lunch Posted October 31, 2007 Posted October 31, 2007 On Wed, 31 Oct 2007 00:16:50 -0800, in alt.atheism Jason@nospam.com (Jason) wrote in <Jason-3110070016500001@66-53-216-130.lsan.mdsg-pacwest.com>: >In article <81klv4-drh.ln1@spanky.localhost.net>, Kelsey Bjarnason ><kbjarnason@gmail.com> wrote: > >> [snips] >> >> On Tue, 30 Oct 2007 18:38:05 -0800, Jason wrote: >> >> > RAFSANJANI SAYS MUSLIMS SHOULD USE NUCLEAR WEAPON AGAINST ISRAEL >> >> Bush says we should start a war in Iraq! For no justifiable reason! >> Which we can't get out of! Let's go kick some heathen butt! >> >> Yup, when religious loonies are in charge, you get problems. Which isn't >> to say atheists in charge wouldn't have problems, either, but at least >> they're not living an entire life of delusions of magic and pixies and >> muddleheaded nonsense - nonsense which often induces horrific crimes in >> its name. >> >> I'm sure you had a point, but other than demonstrating that religion >> should not be allowed in office - which we're happy to agree with - the >> point isn't clear. >> >> Oh, you mean it's okay if religion is in office as long as it's your >> religion, just not if it's the other guy's religion? Nah, can't be. From >> the outside, they're about equally meaningless - and about equally >> dangerous. > >America had no desire to take over the world. Otherwise, Americans would >now have total control over Germany and Japan. The Muslims have made it >clear that their end goal is to take over the world. The Muslims from the >Middle East are presently taking over the Sudan. > America had no such desire, but we are ruled by George Bush now and he chose to go to war, to conquer and occupy Iraq. That is imperialism, nothing else. Quote
Guest Free Lunch Posted October 31, 2007 Posted October 31, 2007 On Tue, 30 Oct 2007 23:55:50 -0800, in alt.atheism Jason@nospam.com (Jason) wrote in <Jason-3010072355500001@66-53-216-130.lsan.mdsg-pacwest.com>: >In article <56jlv4-ol7.ln1@spanky.localhost.net>, Kelsey Bjarnason ><kbjarnason@gmail.com> wrote: > >> [snips] >> >> On Tue, 30 Oct 2007 18:34:44 -0800, Jason wrote: >> >> >> You do know that the US fought Mexicans (christians), Germans >> >> (christians), each other (christians), Spain (christians), and the >> >> english (christians). That's just the what I could pull out of my head >> >> quickly about the USA. The list goes on and on, no jews, muslims, >> >> shintos, buddists, or the like required. Do you REALLY want to keep >> >> going there? >> >> >> > The major difference is that nuclear weapons were not used in any of >> > those wars. >> >> Were they available then? As far as I'm aware they weren't. Other >> weapons - guns, bombs, knives, you name it - were available, and were >> used. Thus we know they used the available weaponry, and we have no >> reason to think they wouldn't have resorted to other weapons if pressed, >> now do we? Thus their not using nukes in those wars is pretty much >> irrelevant. >> >> > If Iran starts an assembly line for nuclear weapons, >> > millions of people in various cities will be killed. More people will >> > die in one year than died in all of those wars that you mentioned in >> > your post. >> >> Last I checked, it wasn't Iran that was the problem, any more than it's >> the US that's the problem. In the US it's more generally a pack of >> psychotic yipyos who get in power that are the problem; in Iran, much the >> same, the only difference is that those yipyos are just like you - >> believers in magic and rewards on the other side. You know, the very >> stuff you spew, the stuff that gives them very little reason to value life >> _here_ very much. >> >> > The only option is to destroy the nuclear facilities in Iran >> > before (not after) they start producing dozens of nuclear weapons per >> > year. Read this report: >> >> And there you go; let's go in, guns blazing. Your respect for life shows >> its colors - pretty much the same as theirs. Strike first, strike fast. >> Kill 'em now while we have a chance. >> >> > Please answer this question: Do you want to allow a religious nut case >> > to have total control over dozens of nuclear tipped missiles? >> >> You mean like Bush? Oh, wait. No, you're right, we don't. So your >> question, really, is do we want a religious nut case of the "wrong" >> religion to have control? No, actually, we don't, but the problem is, >> they're _all_ the wrong religion. >> >> This week, it's the Islamics getting the bad rap. For the last 20 >> centuries or so, it's been the Christians doing most of it. I don't see >> how that argues that _your_ brand of religious nut job is any better than >> their brand, and frankly, none of them should have such power. Still, you >> don't seem all that upset that the US has nukes, and a religious nut case >> at the helm. Why is that? Oh, right, because it doesn't actually matter >> that he's a religious nut case, what matters is that he's a religious nut >> case of the same religion as you. >> >> > http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2006/01/14/wiran14.xml >> > >> > Divine mission' driving Iran's new leader >> >> You mean like Bush's "Faith-based" initiative? Yes, well. > >Perhaps you will wake up from your dream world after Iran fires a nuclear >tipped missile at Israel. You must have sleeped thru 9/11. > You are one arrogant little follower of Satan. Quote
Guest Jason Posted November 1, 2007 Posted November 1, 2007 In article <MPG.2192bf729011ee7498a297@newsgroups.bellsouth.net>, James Beck <jim@reallykillersystems.com> wrote: > In article <Jason-3110071313440001@67-150-123-199.lsan.mdsg- > pacwest.com>, Jason@nospam.com says... > > In article <l79hi3tc5n5ncp4440nt82vhvijdm0pqgj@4ax.com>, Al Klein > > <rukbat@pern.invalid> wrote: > > > > > On Tue, 30 Oct 2007 13:32:06 -0800, Jason@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > > > > > > >If you believe that the president of Iran is making nuclear materials to > > > >be used for peaceful purposes > > > > > > The SCIENTISTS who have inspected the facilities KNOW he is. > > > > Nuclear materials can be used to make nuclear weapons. > > > > Ah, but it has to be CERTAIN materials. Iran either already has those CERTAIN materials or can easily buy those CERTAIN materials. Quote
Guest Jason Posted November 1, 2007 Posted November 1, 2007 In article <3t4ii3th1lc8t37l4frmmuhj3ls4amt8cp@4ax.com>, Free Lunch <lunch@nofreelunch.us> wrote: > On Wed, 31 Oct 2007 00:16:50 -0800, in alt.atheism > Jason@nospam.com (Jason) wrote in > <Jason-3110070016500001@66-53-216-130.lsan.mdsg-pacwest.com>: > >In article <81klv4-drh.ln1@spanky.localhost.net>, Kelsey Bjarnason > ><kbjarnason@gmail.com> wrote: > > > >> [snips] > >> > >> On Tue, 30 Oct 2007 18:38:05 -0800, Jason wrote: > >> > >> > RAFSANJANI SAYS MUSLIMS SHOULD USE NUCLEAR WEAPON AGAINST ISRAEL > >> > >> Bush says we should start a war in Iraq! For no justifiable reason! > >> Which we can't get out of! Let's go kick some heathen butt! > >> > >> Yup, when religious loonies are in charge, you get problems. Which isn't > >> to say atheists in charge wouldn't have problems, either, but at least > >> they're not living an entire life of delusions of magic and pixies and > >> muddleheaded nonsense - nonsense which often induces horrific crimes in > >> its name. > >> > >> I'm sure you had a point, but other than demonstrating that religion > >> should not be allowed in office - which we're happy to agree with - the > >> point isn't clear. > >> > >> Oh, you mean it's okay if religion is in office as long as it's your > >> religion, just not if it's the other guy's religion? Nah, can't be. From > >> the outside, they're about equally meaningless - and about equally > >> dangerous. > > > >America had no desire to take over the world. Otherwise, Americans would > >now have total control over Germany and Japan. The Muslims have made it > >clear that their end goal is to take over the world. The Muslims from the > >Middle East are presently taking over the Sudan. > > > America had no such desire, but we are ruled by George Bush now and he > chose to go to war, to conquer and occupy Iraq. That is imperialism, > nothing else. If the rulers of Iran want America to leave that country, we will leave that country. Quote
Guest Jason Posted November 1, 2007 Posted November 1, 2007 In article <3p4ii3pu7vf0m7788kbvnjptfdbccnfmvh@4ax.com>, Free Lunch <lunch@nofreelunch.us> wrote: > On Wed, 31 Oct 2007 12:13:37 -0400, in alt.atheism > Al Klein <rukbat@pern.invalid> wrote in > <29ahi3houucl8cvb6s8a4no2mlaji3tn1l@4ax.com>: > >On Wed, 31 Oct 2007 00:08:54 -0800, Jason@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > > > >>How many times has Iran attacked America? > > > >None. > > Niggling little criticism. Attacking an embassy or consulate does count > as attacking a country (see flap about US bombing of Chinese Embassy). > Of course Jason is still way off base. > > >Hint: Defending isn't attacking. > > > >How many times has the US made UNPROVOKED attacks on the Middle East. > > > >Hint: Many, many times, both directly and through clients - during one > >such attack we were counter-attacked. I also seem to recall that they attacked one of our war ships. Quote
Guest Charles & Mambo Duckman Posted November 1, 2007 Posted November 1, 2007 Jason wrote: > The president of Iran stated "Israel must be wiped off from the map of the > world." Bwaaaaaaaaaaaaak!!! The president of Iran stated "Israel must be wiped off from the map of the world. Bwaaaaaaaaaaaaak!!! The president of Iran stated "Israel must be wiped off from the map of the world. Bwaaaaaaaaaaaaak!!! The president of Iran stated "Israel must be wiped off from the map of the world. Bwaaaaaaaaaaaaak!!! The president of Iran stated "Israel must be wiped off from the map of the world. Bwaaaaaaaaaaaaak!!! The president of Iran stated "Israel must be wiped off from the map of the world. Bwaaaaaaaaaaaaak!!! The president of Iran stated "Israel must be wiped off from the map of the world. Bwaaaaaaaaaaaaak!!! The president of Iran stated "Israel must be wiped off from the map of the world. Bwaaaaaaaaaaaaak!!! The president of Iran stated "Israel must be wiped off from the map of the world. Bwaaaaaaaaaaaaak!!! The president of Iran stated "Israel must be wiped off from the map of the world. Bwaaaaaaaaaaaaak!!! The president of Iran stated "Israel must be wiped off from the map of the world. Bwaaaaaaaaaaaaak!!! The president of Iran stated "Israel must be wiped off from the map of the world. Bwaaaaaaaaaaaaak!!! The president of Iran stated "Israel must be wiped off from the map of the world. Bwaaaaaaaaaaaaak!!! The president of Iran stated "Israel must be wiped off from the map of the world. Bwaaaaaaaaaaaaak!!! The president of Iran stated "Israel must be wiped off from the map of the world. Bwaaaaaaaaaaaaak!!! The president of Iran stated "Israel must be wiped off from the map of the world. Bwaaaaaaaaaaaaak!!! The president of Iran stated "Israel must be wiped off from the map of the world. -- Come down off the cross We can use the wood Tom Waits, Come On Up To The House Quote
Guest Charles & Mambo Duckman Posted November 1, 2007 Posted November 1, 2007 Jason wrote: > I am shocked that so many atheists have so much trust in religious nut > cases like the president of Iran and one of the chief clerics in Iran. I, otoh, am shocked that so many theists have so much trust in religious nut cases like the president of USA and chief clerics in USA. -- Come down off the cross We can use the wood Tom Waits, Come On Up To The House Quote
Guest Charles & Mambo Duckman Posted November 1, 2007 Posted November 1, 2007 Jason wrote: >>>Hint: Defending isn't attacking. >>> >>>How many times has the US made UNPROVOKED attacks on the Middle East. >>> >>>Hint: Many, many times, both directly and through clients - during one >>>such attack we were counter-attacked. > > > I also seem to recall that they attacked one of our war ships. So has Israel. -- Come down off the cross We can use the wood Tom Waits, Come On Up To The House Quote
Guest Jason Posted November 1, 2007 Posted November 1, 2007 In article <qdbnv4-2sk.ln1@spanky.localhost.net>, Kelsey Bjarnason <kbjarnason@gmail.com> wrote: > [snips] > > On Wed, 31 Oct 2007 13:21:24 -0800, Jason wrote: > > > You should have provided better options. > > > > For example, I could ask you: > > > > Would you choose to kill your wife or your son? > > > > Either one of those choices is a bad choice. > > Yes, and that was kinda the point: sometimes all the choices suck, but > generally some suck worse than others. > > In the exemplar, you could cave in to the terrorist demands and kill the > one kid, but risk repeat performances since they know this sort of thing > will work. > > Or you could blow up the (boat, I think it was), killing the threat, but > also killing several kids. > > Or you could do nothing, thus killing millions. > > Your choice? Maximum possible harm to the maximum number of people. As > choices go, that's about as bad as it gets. Let's hope you're never in a > position to make serious decisions affecting others, because you suck at > it. Let's say that you were president of America. The president of Iran clearly states: "Israel must be wiped off from the map of the world". You know that he already has missiles. You also know that he is in the process of making nuclear materials that can later be used to make nuclear warheads that are designed to be placed on his missiles. The head of the CIA shows you satellite photos of people in Iran mounting warheads on several missiles. The head of the CIA advises you to destroy those missiles and the nuclear facilites in Iran. Would you give the order to destroy the missiles and the nuclear facilities in Iran? My answer would be to destroy the missiles and nuclear facilities in Iran. What is your answer? Read this report before you provide an answer: This report was from the Wasington Post. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A57465-2004Nov17.html washingtonpost.com Powell Says Iran Is Pursuing Bomb Evidence Cited of Effort to Adapt Missile By Robin Wright and Keith B. Richburg Washington Post Foreign Service Thursday, November 18, 2004; Page A01 SANTIAGO, Chile, Nov. 17 -- The United States has intelligence that Iran is working to adapt missiles to deliver a nuclear weapon, further evidence that the Islamic republic is determined to acquire a nuclear bomb, Secretary of State Colin L. Powell said Wednesday. Separately, an Iranian opposition exile group charged in Paris that Iran is enriching uranium at a secret military facility unknown to U.N. weapons inspectors. Iran has denied seeking to build nuclear weapons. Mohammad Mohaddessin, of the National Council for Resistance in Iran, uses satellite imagery to pinpoint what the group says is a previously unknown nuclear facility in Iran. (Laurent Rebours -- AP) "I have seen some information that would suggest that they have been actively working on delivery systems. . . . You don't have a weapon until you put it in something that can deliver a weapon," Powell told reporters traveling with him to Chile for an Asia-Pacific economic summit. "I'm not talking about uranium or fissile material or the warhead; I'm talking about what one does with a warhead." Powell's comments came just three days after an agreement between Iran and three European countries -- Britain, France and Germany -- designed to limit Tehran's ability to divert its peaceful nuclear energy program for military use. The primary focus of the deal, accepted by Iran on Sunday and due to go into effect Nov. 22, is a stipulation that Iran indefinitely suspend its uranium enrichment program. The issue of adapting a missile is separate from the question of enriching uranium for use in a weapon. "I'm talking about information that says they not only have these missiles, but I am aware of information that suggests that they were working hard as to how to put the two together," Powell said, referring to the process of matching warheads to missiles. He spoke to reporters during a refueling stop in Manaus, Brazil. "There is no doubt in my mind -- and it's fairly straightforward from what we've been saying for years -- that they have been interested in a nuclear weapon that has utility, meaning that it is something they would be able to deliver, not just something that sits there," Powell said. Iran has long been known to have a missile program, while denying that it was seeking a nuclear bomb. Powell seemed to be suggesting that efforts not previously disclosed were underway to arm missiles with nuclear warheads. Joseph Cirincione, director of the Non-Proliferation Project at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, said Powell's remarks indicated that Iran was trying to master the difficult technology of reducing the size of a nuclear warhead to fit on a ballistic missile. "Powell appears to be saying the Iranians are working very hard on this capability," Cirincione said. He said Powell's comments were striking because the International Atomic Energy Agency said this week that it had not seen any information that Iran had conducted weapons-related work. In a 32-page report, IAEA chief Mohamed ElBaradei wrote that "all the declared nuclear material in Iran has been accounted for, and therefore such material is not diverted to prohibited activities," such as weapons programs. But ElBaradei said that he could not rule out the possibility that Iran was conducting a clandestine nuclear weapons program. Powell also told reporters that the United States had not decided what action to take following Sunday's agreement. The Bush administration had insisted that Iran's past violations warranted taking the matter to the U.N. Security Council. Powell said the United States would monitor verification efforts "with necessary and deserved caution because for 20 years the Iranians have been trying to hide things from the international community." Meanwhile, in Paris, the exile group charged that Iran was still enriching uranium and would continue to do so despite the pledge made Sunday to European foreign ministers. The group, the National Council for Resistance in Iran, or NCRI, also claimed that Iran received blueprints for a Chinese-made bomb in the mid-1990s from the global nuclear technology network led by the Pakistani scientist Abdul Qadeer Khan. The Khan network sold the same type of bomb blueprint to Libya, which has since renounced its nuclear ambitions. Quote
Guest Jason Posted November 1, 2007 Posted November 1, 2007 In article <MPG.2192bfac54f3bcd898a298@newsgroups.bellsouth.net>, James Beck <jim@reallykillersystems.com> wrote: > In article <Jason-3110071317160001@67-150-123-199.lsan.mdsg- > pacwest.com>, Jason@nospam.com says... > > In article <leahi319r50tea720ajlukkn9hhlc65p99@4ax.com>, Al Klein > > <rukbat@pern.invalid> wrote: > > > > > On Tue, 30 Oct 2007 18:40:45 -0800, Jason@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > > > > > > >The president of Iran and one of the chief clerics in Iran both have > > > >stated that they want to use nuclear weapons against Israel. > > > > > > The US has said that it wants to eradicate Islam. > > > > > > > As you know, > > > >we are obligated to protect Israel since they are an ally of America. > > > > > > Since there's been no attack, there's nothing to defend. "Defending" > > > against an attack that MAY happen, some nebulous time in the future, > > > is known as "attacking", and we're NOT obligated to START a war. (That > > > we've done it a few times doesn't mean that there's any treaty that > > > obligates us to do it.) > > > > I am shocked that so many atheists have so much trust in religious nut > > cases like the president of Iran and one of the chief clerics in Iran. > > > > We don't have any faith in ANY relious nut cases, including the > christian ones in this country. > > Jim What about the religious nut case that is the president of Iran? Quote
Guest Free Lunch Posted November 1, 2007 Posted November 1, 2007 On Wed, 31 Oct 2007 16:08:55 -0800, in alt.atheism Jason@nospam.com (Jason) wrote in <Jason-3110071608550001@67-150-124-24.lsan.mdsg-pacwest.com>: >In article <3p4ii3pu7vf0m7788kbvnjptfdbccnfmvh@4ax.com>, Free Lunch ><lunch@nofreelunch.us> wrote: > >> On Wed, 31 Oct 2007 12:13:37 -0400, in alt.atheism >> Al Klein <rukbat@pern.invalid> wrote in >> <29ahi3houucl8cvb6s8a4no2mlaji3tn1l@4ax.com>: >> >On Wed, 31 Oct 2007 00:08:54 -0800, Jason@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: >> > >> >>How many times has Iran attacked America? >> > >> >None. >> >> Niggling little criticism. Attacking an embassy or consulate does count >> as attacking a country (see flap about US bombing of Chinese Embassy). >> Of course Jason is still way off base. >> >> >Hint: Defending isn't attacking. >> > >> >How many times has the US made UNPROVOKED attacks on the Middle East. >> > >> >Hint: Many, many times, both directly and through clients - during one >> >such attack we were counter-attacked. > >I also seem to recall that they attacked one of our war ships. Which one? Before or after we shot one of their civiliam planes out of the sky? Quote
Guest Free Lunch Posted November 1, 2007 Posted November 1, 2007 On Wed, 31 Oct 2007 16:07:28 -0800, in alt.atheism Jason@nospam.com (Jason) wrote in <Jason-3110071607280001@67-150-124-24.lsan.mdsg-pacwest.com>: >In article <3t4ii3th1lc8t37l4frmmuhj3ls4amt8cp@4ax.com>, Free Lunch ><lunch@nofreelunch.us> wrote: > >> On Wed, 31 Oct 2007 00:16:50 -0800, in alt.atheism >> Jason@nospam.com (Jason) wrote in >> <Jason-3110070016500001@66-53-216-130.lsan.mdsg-pacwest.com>: >> >In article <81klv4-drh.ln1@spanky.localhost.net>, Kelsey Bjarnason >> ><kbjarnason@gmail.com> wrote: >> > >> >> [snips] >> >> >> >> On Tue, 30 Oct 2007 18:38:05 -0800, Jason wrote: >> >> >> >> > RAFSANJANI SAYS MUSLIMS SHOULD USE NUCLEAR WEAPON AGAINST ISRAEL >> >> >> >> Bush says we should start a war in Iraq! For no justifiable reason! >> >> Which we can't get out of! Let's go kick some heathen butt! >> >> >> >> Yup, when religious loonies are in charge, you get problems. Which isn't >> >> to say atheists in charge wouldn't have problems, either, but at least >> >> they're not living an entire life of delusions of magic and pixies and >> >> muddleheaded nonsense - nonsense which often induces horrific crimes in >> >> its name. >> >> >> >> I'm sure you had a point, but other than demonstrating that religion >> >> should not be allowed in office - which we're happy to agree with - the >> >> point isn't clear. >> >> >> >> Oh, you mean it's okay if religion is in office as long as it's your >> >> religion, just not if it's the other guy's religion? Nah, can't be. From >> >> the outside, they're about equally meaningless - and about equally >> >> dangerous. >> > >> >America had no desire to take over the world. Otherwise, Americans would >> >now have total control over Germany and Japan. The Muslims have made it >> >clear that their end goal is to take over the world. The Muslims from the >> >Middle East are presently taking over the Sudan. >> > >> America had no such desire, but we are ruled by George Bush now and he >> chose to go to war, to conquer and occupy Iraq. That is imperialism, >> nothing else. > >If the rulers of Iran want America to leave that country, we will leave >that country. > We have occupied Iraq and made it clear that we aren't going anywhere. Even our hired thugs are allowed to murder Iraqis without being arrested. Quote
Guest Al Klein Posted November 1, 2007 Posted November 1, 2007 On Wed, 31 Oct 2007 13:12:42 -0800, Jason@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: >If Iran is allowed to develop hundreds of nuclear weapons They don't have the equipment to START developing ONE nuclear weapon. >Would you prefer to destroy the nuclear facilities in Iran or allow >millions of people in various countries to be killed? Would you prefer to live as a woman or a wombat? -- Al at Webdingers dot com "My earlier views of the unsoundness of the Christian scheme of salvation and the human origin of the scriptures, have become clearer and stronger with advancing years and I see no reason for thinking I shall ever change them." - Abraham Lincoln Quote
Guest Al Klein Posted November 1, 2007 Posted November 1, 2007 On Wed, 31 Oct 2007 17:36:36 -0400, James Beck <jim@reallykillersystems.com> wrote: >In article <Jason-3110071313440001@67-150-123-199.lsan.mdsg- >pacwest.com>, Jason@nospam.com says... >> In article <l79hi3tc5n5ncp4440nt82vhvijdm0pqgj@4ax.com>, Al Klein >> <rukbat@pern.invalid> wrote: >> >> > On Tue, 30 Oct 2007 13:32:06 -0800, Jason@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: >> > >> > >If you believe that the president of Iran is making nuclear materials to >> > >be used for peaceful purposes >> > >> > The SCIENTISTS who have inspected the facilities KNOW he is. >> >> Nuclear materials can be used to make nuclear weapons. >Ah, but it has to be CERTAIN materials. And it's NOT the materials Iran has, and thus Jason's fantasy ends. -- Al at Webdingers dot com "My earlier views of the unsoundness of the Christian scheme of salvation and the human origin of the scriptures, have become clearer and stronger with advancing years and I see no reason for thinking I shall ever change them." - Abraham Lincoln Quote
Guest Al Klein Posted November 1, 2007 Posted November 1, 2007 On Wed, 31 Oct 2007 13:17:16 -0800, Jason@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: >In article <leahi319r50tea720ajlukkn9hhlc65p99@4ax.com>, Al Klein ><rukbat@pern.invalid> wrote: > >> On Tue, 30 Oct 2007 18:40:45 -0800, Jason@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: >> >> >The president of Iran and one of the chief clerics in Iran both have >> >stated that they want to use nuclear weapons against Israel. >> >> The US has said that it wants to eradicate Islam. >> >> > As you know, >> >we are obligated to protect Israel since they are an ally of America. >> >> Since there's been no attack, there's nothing to defend. "Defending" >> against an attack that MAY happen, some nebulous time in the future, >> is known as "attacking", and we're NOT obligated to START a war. (That >> we've done it a few times doesn't mean that there's any treaty that >> obligates us to do it.) > >I am shocked that so many atheists have so much trust in religious nut We have NO trust in Bush. I'm surprised that so many so-called "Christians" refuse to admit that Bush is a VERY DANGEROUS religious nut. -- Al at Webdingers dot com "My earlier views of the unsoundness of the Christian scheme of salvation and the human origin of the scriptures, have become clearer and stronger with advancing years and I see no reason for thinking I shall ever change them." - Abraham Lincoln Quote
Guest Al Klein Posted November 1, 2007 Posted November 1, 2007 On Wed, 31 Oct 2007 13:22:41 -0800, Jason@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: >In article <fgabm7$cfl$1@news04.infoave.net>, Mike ><prabbit1@shamrocksgf.com> wrote: > >> Al Klein wrote: >> > On Wed, 31 Oct 2007 02:10:46 -0700, Kelsey Bjarnason >> > <kbjarnason@gmail.com> wrote: >> > >> >> [snips] >> >> >> >> On Tue, 30 Oct 2007 18:48:12 -0800, Jason wrote: >> >> >> >>>> So, why would you choose to let NYC be nuked? Are you really persuaded >> >>>> that NYC is a den of iniquity and that God wants it nuked? >> >>> Of the options you provided, it was my favorite. >> >> Of course it would; you're a member of a death cult and this is the only >> >> option that allows the death of 8+ million people, rather than one or a >> >> few. >> > >> > And Jason believes that only COMISSIONS are sins - that doing nothing >> > can't be a sin. >> >> And, in that case, he should be willing to sit back and watch Iran bomb >> Israel. "Hypocrisy, thy name is 'Jason.'" >> >> Unless - IN HIS SOLE OPINION - his god would want him >> > to kill millions. Then that's not a sin either. >> > >> > The kind of "Christian" that should be locked in a rubber room with >> > the door welded shut. Like Shrub. > >Was one of the choices to destroy the nuclear facilites? > One of whose choices? Destroy which nuclear facilities? The facilities of the ONLY nation to EVER use nuclear weapons? A nation led by a CHRISTIAN president at the time, and by a CHRISTIAN religious nut now who has killed over a million innocent people just to make a profit? -- Al at Webdingers dot com "My earlier views of the unsoundness of the Christian scheme of salvation and the human origin of the scriptures, have become clearer and stronger with advancing years and I see no reason for thinking I shall ever change them." - Abraham Lincoln Quote
Guest Al Klein Posted November 1, 2007 Posted November 1, 2007 On Wed, 31 Oct 2007 13:18:45 -0800, Jason@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: >In article <fs8hi3p9uicde8hc9npmclr6r0cr3o7424@4ax.com>, Al Klein ><rukbat@pern.invalid> wrote: > >> On Wed, 31 Oct 2007 00:00:34 -0800, Jason@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: >> >> >I disagree. Roy Mooore worships God. >> >> Then why did he violate the law in an attempt to place a rock in a >> court house? You usually make no sense, Jason, but this is stupid >> even for you. > >I have heard Roy Moore preach a sermon and he mentioned in that sermon >that he worships God. > Then why did he violate the law in an attempt to place a rock in a court house? -- Al at Webdingers dot com "My earlier views of the unsoundness of the Christian scheme of salvation and the human origin of the scriptures, have become clearer and stronger with advancing years and I see no reason for thinking I shall ever change them." - Abraham Lincoln Quote
Guest Al Klein Posted November 1, 2007 Posted November 1, 2007 On Wed, 31 Oct 2007 13:08:27 -0800, Jason@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: >In article <gtahi31b7fnaj3mpb8deh2kbfgcau1mj46@4ax.com>, Al Klein ><rukbat@pern.invalid> wrote: > >> On Mon, 29 Oct 2007 21:10:58 -0800, Jason@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: >> >> >I have seen pictures of at least of Iran's nuclear facilities on a >> >television news show. >> >> Have you seen pictures of US nuclear facilities? (I live within the >> 10 mile evacuation zone of one.) >> >> What's the difference? > > >The president of Iran stated "Israel must be wiped off from the map of the >world." But he has no means to do it, so it's just empty rhetoric. Unlike your CHRISTIAN president who HAS killed over a million innocent people JUST TO MAKE A PROFIT. >Unless you are brain dead, you should now realize the >reason Iran has invested millions of dollars to develop nuclear materials. Unless you're brain dead, you should know the difference between reactor fuel and bomb material. -- Al at Webdingers dot com "My earlier views of the unsoundness of the Christian scheme of salvation and the human origin of the scriptures, have become clearer and stronger with advancing years and I see no reason for thinking I shall ever change them." - Abraham Lincoln Quote
Guest Al Klein Posted November 1, 2007 Posted November 1, 2007 On Wed, 31 Oct 2007 13:26:33 -0800, Jason@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: >In article <ivbhi3pdi8u37pkidlrjhq1qpcdq5m5e1e@4ax.com>, Al Klein ><rukbat@pern.invalid> wrote: > >> On Mon, 29 Oct 2007 17:05:10 -0800, Jason@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: >> >> >In article <fg5te3$89h$02$3@news.t-online.com>, Tokay Pino Gris >> ><tokay.gris.beau@gmx.net> wrote: >> >> Jason wrote: >> >> >> > The option is for people to watch their relatives spend several weeks or >> >> > even several months dying in terrible pain and agony. I watched my father >> >> > die in pain and agony of lung cancer. I wish that a doctor would have >> >> > committed a mercy killing. >> >> >> Why didn't you do it? >> >> >I was 12 years old. There were several people in the hospital room. If I >> >had been an adult, I probably would have found a way to do it--perhaps by >> >unhooking one of the machines that were keeping him alive. >> >> Did your father ask to die? If not, unhooking the machine would have >> been murder, plain and simple, even if there had been an assisted >> suicide law on the books. > >It's no longer an issue. You're still alive, so your hypocrisy and immorality ARE still an issue. > I don't know whether or not he wanted to end his >life by spending three weeks in a hospital bed having great amounts of >pain and agony. Then pulling the plug would have been murder, and YOU would have been guilty of it. So you rationalized another crime. -- Al at Webdingers dot com "My earlier views of the unsoundness of the Christian scheme of salvation and the human origin of the scriptures, have become clearer and stronger with advancing years and I see no reason for thinking I shall ever change them." - Abraham Lincoln Quote
Guest Jason Posted November 1, 2007 Posted November 1, 2007 In article <kg8ii3903hjb8u27imco3supu5oqluo5oo@4ax.com>, Al Klein <rukbat@pern.invalid> wrote: > On Wed, 31 Oct 2007 13:18:45 -0800, Jason@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > > >In article <fs8hi3p9uicde8hc9npmclr6r0cr3o7424@4ax.com>, Al Klein > ><rukbat@pern.invalid> wrote: > > > >> On Wed, 31 Oct 2007 00:00:34 -0800, Jason@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > >> > >> >I disagree. Roy Mooore worships God. > >> > >> Then why did he violate the law in an attempt to place a rock in a > >> court house? You usually make no sense, Jason, but this is stupid > >> even for you. > > > >I have heard Roy Moore preach a sermon and he mentioned in that sermon > >that he worships God. > > > Then why did he violate the law in an attempt to place a rock in a > court house? He claims to have the law on his side related to this issue. Of course, various liberal judges disagreed with him related to this issue. As you may know, liberal judges have an agenda. Quote
Guest Jason Posted November 1, 2007 Posted November 1, 2007 In article <dh8ii31mlrdq887o2a80hjemberns4g2is@4ax.com>, Al Klein <rukbat@pern.invalid> wrote: > On Wed, 31 Oct 2007 13:08:27 -0800, Jason@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > > >In article <gtahi31b7fnaj3mpb8deh2kbfgcau1mj46@4ax.com>, Al Klein > ><rukbat@pern.invalid> wrote: > > > >> On Mon, 29 Oct 2007 21:10:58 -0800, Jason@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > >> > >> >I have seen pictures of at least of Iran's nuclear facilities on a > >> >television news show. > >> > >> Have you seen pictures of US nuclear facilities? (I live within the > >> 10 mile evacuation zone of one.) > >> > >> What's the difference? > > > > > >The president of Iran stated "Israel must be wiped off from the map of the > >world." > > But he has no means to do it, so it's just empty rhetoric. I disagree--a nuclear tipped missile will allow him to do exactly what he stated that he wants to do. Unlike > your CHRISTIAN president who HAS killed over a million innocent people > JUST TO MAKE A PROFIT. > > >Unless you are brain dead, you should now realize the > >reason Iran has invested millions of dollars to develop nuclear materials. > > Unless you're brain dead, you should know the difference between > reactor fuel and bomb material. Read this: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A57465-2004Nov17.html washingtonpost.com Powell Says Iran Is Pursuing Bomb Evidence Cited of Effort to Adapt Missile By Robin Wright and Keith B. Richburg Washington Post Foreign Service Thursday, November 18, 2004; Page A01 SANTIAGO, Chile, Nov. 17 -- The United States has intelligence that Iran is working to adapt missiles to deliver a nuclear weapon, further evidence that the Islamic republic is determined to acquire a nuclear bomb, Secretary of State Colin L. Powell said Wednesday. Separately, an Iranian opposition exile group charged in Paris that Iran is enriching uranium at a secret military facility unknown to U.N. weapons inspectors. Iran has denied seeking to build nuclear weapons. Mohammad Mohaddessin, of the National Council for Resistance in Iran, uses satellite imagery to pinpoint what the group says is a previously unknown nuclear facility in Iran. (Laurent Rebours -- AP) Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.