Guest Al Klein Posted November 5, 2007 Posted November 5, 2007 On Sun, 04 Nov 2007 16:12:53 -0800, Jason@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: >If you was president of America and the director of the CIA showed you a >satellite photo of people in Iran loading warheads on two long range >missiles-- Would you order the military to destroy the nuclear facilites >in Iran and also destroy the long range missiles? Richard was correct the first time: Since it's KNOWN that the CIA fakes evidence to give the president justification for whatever he wants, I would TOTALLY discount ANY "evidence" presented by the CIA. I would consider it even LESS reliable if the director of the CIA were an evangelical. OTOH, the scenario is impossible because if I WERE president of the United States (there's no president of America), the director of the CIA wouldn't be presenting me with satellite photos of people loading warheads on missiles. He'd be presenting me with evidence of things that were REALLY happening. Warheads aren't loaded on the surface. Even nosecones aren't put in place on the surface. So, unless we've installed Superman in one of our satellites, any pictures of people mounting warheads on missiles are faked. And nuclear warheads? How do you determine that from a satellite picture? By consulting the Bible codes? -- Al at Webdingers dot com "A man's ethical behavior should be based effectually on sympathy, education and social ties and needs; no religious basis is necessary. Man would indeed be in a poor way if he had to be restrained by fear of punishment and hope of reward after death." - Albert Einstein Quote
Guest Al Klein Posted November 5, 2007 Posted November 5, 2007 On Sun, 04 Nov 2007 15:37:06 -0800, Jason@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: >In article <2td105-ou2.ln1@spanky.localhost.net>, Kelsey Bjarnason ><kbjarnason@gmail.com> wrote: > >> [snips] >> >> On Sat, 03 Nov 2007 18:41:53 -0800, Jason wrote: >> >> > Did you know that many of the people that campaign at abortion clinics >> > have been sued? They now have to campaign far away from the entrance of >> > abortion clinics. >> >> Based on certain past incidents, one might argue anywhere within sniper >> range is too close. Keep 'em back, oh, five miles. > >Those same rules should apply to people that campaign at the funerals of >soldiers. > That's up to the families of the deceased. Funerals are private affairs, clinics are open to the public. -- Al at Webdingers dot com "There is something feeble and a little contemptible about a man who cannot face the perils of life without the help of comfortable myths. Almost inevitably some part of him is aware that they are myths and that he believes them only because they are comforting. But he dare not face this thought! Moreover, since he is aware, however dimly, that his opinions are not rational, he becomes furious when they are disputed." - Bertrand Russell Quote
Guest Al Klein Posted November 5, 2007 Posted November 5, 2007 On Sun, 04 Nov 2007 15:24:10 -0800, Jason@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: >In article <1re105-ou2.ln1@spanky.localhost.net>, Kelsey Bjarnason ><kbjarnason@gmail.com> wrote: > >> [snips] >> >> On Fri, 02 Nov 2007 11:25:30 -0800, Jason wrote: >> >> >> About the same as any other nation (except those that already have >> >> nukes - LIKE THE US). >> > >> > They have already modified their long range missiles so that nuclear >> > warheads can be mounted on them. >> >> Goodie. And the US has several thousand nukes ready to go and the >> "distinction" of being the only nation in the world to actually have used >> nukes in combat. Oh, and they're led by a religious nut case. >> >> You persist in ignoring this, for some reason. Oh, right - because a >> religious nut case is fine, as long as he's _your_ religion. > >I have no trust in the president of Iran since he clearly stated: "Israel >must be wiped off from the map of the world." I have no trust in the president of the US since he clearly stated that Iraq HAD WMD, and WAS TRYING to buy yellowcake, and we KNOW that he LIED both times. And he's CHRISTIAN. CHRISTIANS LIE! -- Al at Webdingers dot com "It is fashionable to wax apocalyptic about the threat to humanity posed by the AIDS virus, 'mad cow' disease, and many others, but I think a case can be made that faith is one of the world's great evils, comparable to the smallpox virus but harder to eradicate." - Richard Dawkins Quote
Guest Al Klein Posted November 5, 2007 Posted November 5, 2007 On Sun, 04 Nov 2007 15:28:38 -0800, Jason@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: >In article <lue105-ou2.ln1@spanky.localhost.net>, Kelsey Bjarnason ><kbjarnason@gmail.com> wrote: > >> [snips] >> >> On Fri, 02 Nov 2007 11:30:34 -0800, Jason wrote: >> >> > It's much easier to fire cruise missles at the nuclear facilities in Iran >> > or use our bombers to drop bunker buster bombs on their nuclear >> > facilities. >> >> Far-reaching technical operations in which any of a thousand things can go >> wrong, and in which even if everything goes right, collateral damage is >> significant. >> >> > I don't have the skills needed to assassinate any person. >> >> Beating someone over the head with a stick does not require significant >> skill. > >A long range sniper rifle would be needed Only if you wanted a decent chance of survival, which would be pretty unChristian - worrying about yourself when you could be saving the lives of millions. -- Al at Webdingers dot com Imagine the people who believe such things and who are not ashamed to ignore totally all the patient findings of thinking minds through all the centuries since the Bible was written. And it is these ignorant people, the most uneducated, the most unimaginative, the most unthinking among us who would make themselves the guides and leaders of us all, who would force their feeble and childish beliefs on us, who would invade our schools and libraries and homes. - Isaac Asimov Quote
Guest Al Klein Posted November 5, 2007 Posted November 5, 2007 On Sun, 4 Nov 2007 10:21:48 -0800, Kelsey Bjarnason <kbjarnason@gmail.com> wrote: >[snips] > >On Sat, 03 Nov 2007 18:36:26 -0800, Jason wrote: > >> You appear to be a fan of a religious nut case. > >No, we'd be quite pleased to have Bush out of office. Meanwhile, for some >reason, you persist in ignoring the fact he's a religious nut case with >his finger on the button, and that America has thousands of nukes ready to >go. AND that he's just drooling over the thought of invading Iran. What "dangerous" country is next? Malta? Oh, no, that's kind of Christian, and they have no oil. -- Al at Webdingers dot com "Atheism is the world of reality, it is reason, it is freedom. Atheism is human concern, and intellectual honesty to a degree that the religious mind cannot begin to understand. And yet it is more than this. Atheism is not an old religion, it is not a new and coming religion, in fact it is not, and never has been, a religion at all. The definition of Atheism is magnificent in its simplicity: Atheism is merely the bed-rock of sanity in a world of madness." [Atheism: An Affirmative View, by Emmett F. Fields] Quote
Guest Al Klein Posted November 5, 2007 Posted November 5, 2007 On Sun, 4 Nov 2007 10:22:46 -0800, Kelsey Bjarnason <kbjarnason@gmail.com> wrote: >[snips] > >On Fri, 02 Nov 2007 11:46:54 -0800, Jason wrote: > >> I'm hoping the rapture will happen soon. > >That'd be nice. No more Christians to ruin things for everyone else. About as close to heaven as an atheist can get. -- Al at Webdingers dot com "A myth is a fixed way of looking at the world which cannot be destroyed because, looked at through the myth, all evidence supports the myth." - Edward De Bono Quote
Guest hhyapster@gmail.com Posted November 5, 2007 Posted November 5, 2007 On Nov 5, 10:19 am, Al Klein <ruk...@pern.invalid> wrote: > On Sun, 04 Nov 2007 15:21:50 -0800, Ja...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > >If you was president of America > > I would have to be a moron, because I'd be functionally illiterate, > just like your question. > > But let's look at hypotheticals, since you seem to like them: > > If you could go back in time, and save Jesus from the cross, meaning > that you would lose your chance to be saved, would you save his life? > Or would you selfishly let him die so that you could be saved? > -- > Al at Webdingers dot com > "Creationists make it sound like a "theory" is something > you dreamt up after being drunk all night." > - Isaac Asimov Every one is selfish, whether he is a loon or not. I would never imagine that even a deep-rooted loon like Jason would want to sacrifice himself.....no way. The only scenario that one would possibly sacrifice is to save his son/ daughter during a very critical moment. But this is still a if...... But to sacrifice for jesus, or even the god, go and ask all the loons, or pope.....you would find none.......want to bet? Quote
Guest Al Klein Posted November 5, 2007 Posted November 5, 2007 On Sat, 03 Nov 2007 19:42:33 -0700, Charles & Mambo Duckman <duckman@gfy.slf> wrote: >Jason wrote: >>>Many people (the majority of human beings, in fact) believe that Jesus >>>WAS NOT the son of any god. I guess that means that you'll be giving >>>up Christianity, right? >> You might let those people know that they were not alive when Jesus was on >> this earth so how would they know. >Good thing all Christians are over 2000 years old A very good thing, because once their generation has passed Jesus loses his chance to fulfill his prophesy. -- Al at Webdingers dot com "As democracy is perfected, the office of president represents, more and more closely, the inner soul of the people. On some great and glorious day the plain folks of the land will reach their heart's desire at last and the White House will be adorned by a downright moron." - H. L. Mencken Quote
Guest cactus Posted November 5, 2007 Posted November 5, 2007 Jason wrote: > In article <hSsXi.2201$b%1.2036@trnddc01>, Richard Clayton > <pockZIGetnZIGerd@verizon.net> wrote: > >> Jason wrote: >>> In article <1wsXi.16271$Rg1.8897@trnddc05>, Richard Clayton >>> <pockZIGetnZIGerd@verizon.net> wrote: >>> >>>> Jason wrote: >>>>> In article <fgkpmf$8le$1@news04.infoave.net>, Mike >>>>> <prabbit1@shamrocksgf.com> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Jason wrote: >>>>>>> In article <fgf89f$93i$2@news04.infoave.net>, Mike >>>>>>> <prabbit1@shamrocksgf.com> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Jason wrote: >>>>>>>>> Iran is the problem since they have a religious nut case as a > president. >>>>>>>> Jason, you've already sat there and admitted that you'd rather see >>>>>>>> 8,000,000 people definitely die in NYC rather than blow up a sub > full of >>>>>>>> "religious nut case" and some kids when those "religious nut > case" >>>>>>>> are definitely armed with multiple nukes and ready, willing and > able to >>>>>>>> use them in a matter of hours. Now you want to blow up the "religious >>>>>>>> nut case" as well as possibly thousands of innocent people in order >>>>>>>> to POSSIBLY save several million when you don't know if these > "religious >>>>>>>> nut case" even HAVE any nukes at all yet, much less the > authority or >>>>>>>> will to use them. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Can you get any MORE deranged? >>>>>>> 55% of Americans agree with me related to this issue. >>>>>> So? That doesn't make you any less deranged. >>>>> If you was president of America and the director of the CIA showed you a >>>>> satellite photo of people in Iran loading warheads on two long range >>>>> missiles-- Would you order the military to destroy the nuclear facilites >>>>> in Iran and also destroy the long range missiles? >>>> The last time the President and cherry-picked CIA spokespeople >>> insisted >>>> a country had weapons of mass destruction, it turned out to be a lie. >>>> Why should anybody trust them a second time? >>> You failed to answer a simple question. >> The answer was implicit, but since you seem to have missed it, here's >> the simple version: No. The President lacks credibility. > > I did not ask you what President Bush would do. I asked you what YOU would > do if YOU were president. So let's try again. Here is the question: > > If you was president of America and the director of the CIA showed you a > satellite photo of people in Iran loading warheads on two long range > missiles-- Would you order the military to destroy the nuclear facilites > in Iran and also destroy the long range missiles? > > To rephrase my earlier post, if I were president, I would tell the DCIA to get additional credible confirmation before doing anything. The CIA has a rather poor track record for tracking and/or finding real WMDs, so there is no reason to believe them without corroboration. I would then communicate with Iran using back channels to resolve the matter without violence, posturing or bloodshed. If the US and the USSR could do it in 1962 with missiles actually in Cuba, we could do it now. That is, almost anyone besides Shrub and his bellicose handlers could. Quote
Guest Jason Posted November 5, 2007 Posted November 5, 2007 In article <fgloch$76g$03$2@news.t-online.com>, Tokay Pino Gris <tokay.gris.beau@gmx.net> wrote: > Jason wrote: > > In article <lue105-ou2.ln1@spanky.localhost.net>, Kelsey Bjarnason > > <kbjarnason@gmail.com> wrote: > > > >> [snips] > >> > >> On Fri, 02 Nov 2007 11:30:34 -0800, Jason wrote: > >> > >>> It's much easier to fire cruise missles at the nuclear facilities in Iran > >>> or use our bombers to drop bunker buster bombs on their nuclear > >>> facilities. > >> Far-reaching technical operations in which any of a thousand things can go > >> wrong, and in which even if everything goes right, collateral damage is > >> significant. > >> > >>> I don't have the skills needed to assassinate any person. > >> Beating someone over the head with a stick does not require significant > >> skill. > > > > A long range sniper rifle would be needed and it would be difficult to > > smuggle that sort of rifle from America into Iran. > > > > > > Ehm. No, not exactly. Quite easy, in fact. > > Tokay It would be much easier for a member of NCRI to do it. They stated: Meanwhile, in Paris, NCRI 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 5, 2007 Posted November 5, 2007 In article <fvusi3d50icsp9d8ufee6j1b8edhc1eh6o@4ax.com>, Al Klein <rukbat@pern.invalid> wrote: > On Sun, 04 Nov 2007 15:33:38 -0800, Jason@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > > >In article <v7gsi3ddancgq75k6p64qkmqrg4uo35ua5@4ax.com>, Al Klein > ><rukbat@pern.invalid> wrote: > >> On Sat, 03 Nov 2007 18:31:59 -0800, Jason@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > > >> > Ask any > >> >nurse if they know about any mercy killings. I know two local nurses. > > >> I know dozens of nurses, That has nothing to do with your failure to > >> provide evidence to back up your claim. > > >If you choose to believe > > Don't you understand the difference between "choose to believe" (what > YOU do) and "there's no evidence" (my stand)? > > > that doctors do not conduct mercy killings on a regular basis > > You said "EVERY DAY", not "on a regular basis" (the US holds > presidential elections on a regular basis). So far there have been > fewer than 100 of them. If there have been fewer than 100 assisted > suicides in the history of the United States, there's nothing to > discuss. I did not mean that every doctor does mercy killings every day. My point was that many different doctors conduct mercy killings every day. That could mean that some doctors NEVER conduct mercy killings. There are efforts underway in California to make mercy killings legal. Quote
Guest Jason Posted November 5, 2007 Posted November 5, 2007 In article <wUvXi.803$0Q5.13@nlpi070.nbdc.sbc.com>, cactus <cactus@nonespam.com> wrote: > Jason wrote: > > In article <hSsXi.2201$b%1.2036@trnddc01>, Richard Clayton > > <pockZIGetnZIGerd@verizon.net> wrote: > > > >> Jason wrote: > >>> In article <1wsXi.16271$Rg1.8897@trnddc05>, Richard Clayton > >>> <pockZIGetnZIGerd@verizon.net> wrote: > >>> > >>>> Jason wrote: > >>>>> In article <fgkpmf$8le$1@news04.infoave.net>, Mike > >>>>> <prabbit1@shamrocksgf.com> wrote: > >>>>> > >>>>>> Jason wrote: > >>>>>>> In article <fgf89f$93i$2@news04.infoave.net>, Mike > >>>>>>> <prabbit1@shamrocksgf.com> wrote: > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Jason wrote: > >>>>>>>>> Iran is the problem since they have a religious nut case as a > > president. > >>>>>>>> Jason, you've already sat there and admitted that you'd rather see > >>>>>>>> 8,000,000 people definitely die in NYC rather than blow up a sub > > full of > >>>>>>>> "religious nut case" and some kids when those "religious nut > > case" > >>>>>>>> are definitely armed with multiple nukes and ready, willing and > > able to > >>>>>>>> use them in a matter of hours. Now you want to blow up the "religious > >>>>>>>> nut case" as well as possibly thousands of innocent people in order > >>>>>>>> to POSSIBLY save several million when you don't know if these > > "religious > >>>>>>>> nut case" even HAVE any nukes at all yet, much less the > > authority or > >>>>>>>> will to use them. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Can you get any MORE deranged? > >>>>>>> 55% of Americans agree with me related to this issue. > >>>>>> So? That doesn't make you any less deranged. > >>>>> If you was president of America and the director of the CIA showed you a > >>>>> satellite photo of people in Iran loading warheads on two long range > >>>>> missiles-- Would you order the military to destroy the nuclear facilites > >>>>> in Iran and also destroy the long range missiles? > >>>> The last time the President and cherry-picked CIA spokespeople > >>> insisted > >>>> a country had weapons of mass destruction, it turned out to be a lie. > >>>> Why should anybody trust them a second time? > >>> You failed to answer a simple question. > >> The answer was implicit, but since you seem to have missed it, here's > >> the simple version: No. The President lacks credibility. > > > > I did not ask you what President Bush would do. I asked you what YOU would > > do if YOU were president. So let's try again. Here is the question: > > > > If you was president of America and the director of the CIA showed you a > > satellite photo of people in Iran loading warheads on two long range > > missiles-- Would you order the military to destroy the nuclear facilites > > in Iran and also destroy the long range missiles? > > > > > To rephrase my earlier post, if I were president, I would tell the DCIA > to get additional credible confirmation before doing anything. The CIA > has a rather poor track record for tracking and/or finding real WMDs, so > there is no reason to believe them without corroboration. > > I would then communicate with Iran using back channels to resolve the > matter without violence, posturing or bloodshed. If the US and the USSR > could do it in 1962 with missiles actually in Cuba, we could do it now. > That is, almost anyone besides Shrub and his bellicose handlers could. Thank goodness you are not the president. If I was president, I would order the members of the military to bomb the nuclear facilities and nuclear missiles in Iran. I would also order the CIA to fund the members of NCRI (National Council for Resistance in Iran). Quote
Guest Jason Posted November 5, 2007 Posted November 5, 2007 In article <uevsi3p41md2s128ntcobgtblsuf1j467f@4ax.com>, Al Klein <rukbat@pern.invalid> wrote: > On Sun, 04 Nov 2007 16:12:53 -0800, Jason@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > > >If you was president of America and the director of the CIA showed you a > >satellite photo of people in Iran loading warheads on two long range > >missiles-- Would you order the military to destroy the nuclear facilites > >in Iran and also destroy the long range missiles? > > Richard was correct the first time: > > Since it's KNOWN that the CIA fakes evidence to give the president > justification for whatever he wants, I would TOTALLY discount ANY > "evidence" presented by the CIA. I would consider it even LESS > reliable if the director of the CIA were an evangelical. > > OTOH, the scenario is impossible because if I WERE president of the > United States (there's no president of America), the director of the > CIA wouldn't be presenting me with satellite photos of people loading > warheads on missiles. He'd be presenting me with evidence of things > that were REALLY happening. Warheads aren't loaded on the surface. > Even nosecones aren't put in place on the surface. So, unless we've > installed Superman in one of our satellites, any pictures of people > mounting warheads on missiles are faked. > > And nuclear warheads? How do you determine that from a satellite > picture? By consulting the Bible codes? It would be an educated guess since Iran is developing nuclear materials. Quote
Guest Jason Posted November 5, 2007 Posted November 5, 2007 In article <virgil-D1DC01.17171004112007@comcast.dca.giganews.com>, Virgil <virgil@comcast.net> wrote: > In article > <Jason-0411071612530001@67-150-124-217.lsan.mdsg-pacwest.com>, > Jason@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > > > In article <hSsXi.2201$b%1.2036@trnddc01>, Richard Clayton > > <pockZIGetnZIGerd@verizon.net> wrote: > > > > > Jason wrote: > > > > In article <1wsXi.16271$Rg1.8897@trnddc05>, Richard Clayton > > > > <pockZIGetnZIGerd@verizon.net> wrote: > > > > > > > >> Jason wrote: > > > >>> In article <fgkpmf$8le$1@news04.infoave.net>, Mike > > > >>> <prabbit1@shamrocksgf.com> wrote: > > > >>> > > > >>>> Jason wrote: > > > >>>>> In article <fgf89f$93i$2@news04.infoave.net>, Mike > > > >>>>> <prabbit1@shamrocksgf.com> wrote: > > > >>>>> > > > >>>>>> Jason wrote: > > > >>>>>>> Iran is the problem since they have a religious nut case as a > > president. > > > >>>>>> Jason, you've already sat there and admitted that you'd rather see > > > >>>>>> 8,000,000 people definitely die in NYC rather than blow up a sub > > full of > > > >>>>>> "religious nut case" and some kids when those "religious nut > > case" > > > >>>>>> are definitely armed with multiple nukes and ready, willing and > > able to > > > >>>>>> use them in a matter of hours. Now you want to blow up the > > > >>>>>> "religious > > > >>>>>> nut case" as well as possibly thousands of innocent people in > > > >>>>>> order > > > >>>>>> to POSSIBLY save several million when you don't know if these > > "religious > > > >>>>>> nut case" even HAVE any nukes at all yet, much less the > > authority or > > > >>>>>> will to use them. > > > >>>>>> > > > >>>>>> Can you get any MORE deranged? > > > >>>>> 55% of Americans agree with me related to this issue. > > > >>>> So? That doesn't make you any less deranged. > > > >>> If you was president of America and the director of the CIA showed you > > > >>> a > > > >>> satellite photo of people in Iran loading warheads on two long range > > > >>> missiles-- Would you order the military to destroy the nuclear > > > >>> facilites > > > >>> in Iran and also destroy the long range missiles? > > > >> The last time the President and cherry-picked CIA spokespeople > > > > insisted > > > >> a country had weapons of mass destruction, it turned out to be a lie. > > > >> Why should anybody trust them a second time? > > > > > > > > You failed to answer a simple question. > > > > > > The answer was implicit, but since you seem to have missed it, > > > here's > > > the simple version: No. The President lacks credibility. > > > > I did not ask you what President Bush would do. I asked you what YOU would > > do if YOU were president. So let's try again. Here is the question: > > > > If you was president of America and the director of the CIA showed you a > > satellite photo of people in Iran loading warheads on two long range > > missiles-- Would you order the military to destroy the nuclear facilites > > in Iran and also destroy the long range missiles? > > When Cuba got such from the USSR, did we destroy Cuba? Or the USSR? > > There are better ways. We came close to bombing Cuba. Quote
Guest Jason Posted November 5, 2007 Posted November 5, 2007 In article <h11ti3l1otd7cch7ap8cmq3jq7r2ho85am@4ax.com>, Al Klein <rukbat@pern.invalid> wrote: > On Sun, 4 Nov 2007 10:21:48 -0800, Kelsey Bjarnason > <kbjarnason@gmail.com> wrote: > > >[snips] > > > >On Sat, 03 Nov 2007 18:36:26 -0800, Jason wrote: > > > >> You appear to be a fan of a religious nut case. > > > >No, we'd be quite pleased to have Bush out of office. Meanwhile, for some > >reason, you persist in ignoring the fact he's a religious nut case with > >his finger on the button, and that America has thousands of nukes ready to > >go. > > AND that he's just drooling over the thought of invading Iran. What > "dangerous" country is next? Malta? Oh, no, that's kind of > Christian, and they have no oil. There is a vast amount of difference between firing a dozen cruise missiles at the nuclear facilities in a country and invading that same country. Quote
Guest Jason Posted November 5, 2007 Posted November 5, 2007 In article <fglo5a$76g$03$1@news.t-online.com>, Tokay Pino Gris <tokay.gris.beau@gmx.net> wrote: > Jason wrote: > > In article <fgkptb$8le$2@news04.infoave.net>, Mike > > <prabbit1@shamrocksgf.com> wrote: > > > >> Jason wrote: > >>> In article <jdtpi31jp62epc1ccrturfpdgtjiqng65v@4ax.com>, Al Klein > >>> <rukbat@pern.invalid> wrote: > >>>> Many people (the majority of human beings, in fact) believe that Jesus > >>>> WAS NOT the son of any god. I guess that means that you'll be giving > >>>> up Christianity, right? > >>> You might let those people know that they were not alive when Jesus was on > >>> this earth so how would they know. > >> Neither were you. So how deep is that hole that you're digging, anyways? > > > > I trust the testimony of the witnesses that were alive during that time period. > > > > > > Name one... > > > Tokay Matthew, Mark, Luke and John. Quote
Guest cactus Posted November 5, 2007 Posted November 5, 2007 Jason wrote: > In article <wUvXi.803$0Q5.13@nlpi070.nbdc.sbc.com>, cactus > <cactus@nonespam.com> wrote: > >> Jason wrote: >>> In article <hSsXi.2201$b%1.2036@trnddc01>, Richard Clayton >>> <pockZIGetnZIGerd@verizon.net> wrote: >>> >>>> Jason wrote: >>>>> In article <1wsXi.16271$Rg1.8897@trnddc05>, Richard Clayton >>>>> <pockZIGetnZIGerd@verizon.net> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Jason wrote: >>>>>>> In article <fgkpmf$8le$1@news04.infoave.net>, Mike >>>>>>> <prabbit1@shamrocksgf.com> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Jason wrote: >>>>>>>>> In article <fgf89f$93i$2@news04.infoave.net>, Mike >>>>>>>>> <prabbit1@shamrocksgf.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Jason wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> Iran is the problem since they have a religious nut case as a >>> president. >>>>>>>>>> Jason, you've already sat there and admitted that you'd rather see >>>>>>>>>> 8,000,000 people definitely die in NYC rather than blow up a sub >>> full of >>>>>>>>>> "religious nut case" and some kids when those "religious nut >>> case" >>>>>>>>>> are definitely armed with multiple nukes and ready, willing and >>> able to >>>>>>>>>> use them in a matter of hours. Now you want to blow up the > "religious >>>>>>>>>> nut case" as well as possibly thousands of innocent people > in order >>>>>>>>>> to POSSIBLY save several million when you don't know if these >>> "religious >>>>>>>>>> nut case" even HAVE any nukes at all yet, much less the >>> authority or >>>>>>>>>> will to use them. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Can you get any MORE deranged? >>>>>>>>> 55% of Americans agree with me related to this issue. >>>>>>>> So? That doesn't make you any less deranged. >>>>>>> If you was president of America and the director of the CIA showed you a >>>>>>> satellite photo of people in Iran loading warheads on two long range >>>>>>> missiles-- Would you order the military to destroy the nuclear facilites >>>>>>> in Iran and also destroy the long range missiles? >>>>>> The last time the President and cherry-picked CIA spokespeople >>>>> insisted >>>>>> a country had weapons of mass destruction, it turned out to be a lie. >>>>>> Why should anybody trust them a second time? >>>>> You failed to answer a simple question. >>>> The answer was implicit, but since you seem to have missed > it, here's >>>> the simple version: No. The President lacks credibility. >>> I did not ask you what President Bush would do. I asked you what YOU would >>> do if YOU were president. So let's try again. Here is the question: >>> >>> If you was president of America and the director of the CIA showed you a >>> satellite photo of people in Iran loading warheads on two long range >>> missiles-- Would you order the military to destroy the nuclear facilites >>> in Iran and also destroy the long range missiles? >>> >>> >> To rephrase my earlier post, if I were president, I would tell the DCIA >> to get additional credible confirmation before doing anything. The CIA >> has a rather poor track record for tracking and/or finding real WMDs, so >> there is no reason to believe them without corroboration. >> >> I would then communicate with Iran using back channels to resolve the >> matter without violence, posturing or bloodshed. If the US and the USSR >> could do it in 1962 with missiles actually in Cuba, we could do it now. >> That is, almost anyone besides Shrub and his bellicose handlers could. > > Thank goodness you are not the president. > > If I was president, I would order the members of the military to bomb the > nuclear facilities and nuclear missiles in Iran. I would also order the > CIA to fund the members of NCRI (National Council for Resistance in Iran). > > Thank goodness you are not the president. You would plunge us into a horrible, unconventional conflict that we would lose the same way we did in Viet Nam. Don't be like so many others Jason, and allow yourself to be blinded by ideology. Don't take the immediate satisfaction of the easy way out. Quote
Guest Free Lunch Posted November 5, 2007 Posted November 5, 2007 On Sun, 04 Nov 2007 20:29:13 -0800, in alt.atheism Jason@nospam.com (Jason) wrote in <Jason-0411072029130001@66-53-208-24.lsan.mdsg-pacwest.com>: >In article <fglo5a$76g$03$1@news.t-online.com>, Tokay Pino Gris ><tokay.gris.beau@gmx.net> wrote: > >> Jason wrote: >> > In article <fgkptb$8le$2@news04.infoave.net>, Mike >> > <prabbit1@shamrocksgf.com> wrote: >> > >> >> Jason wrote: >> >>> In article <jdtpi31jp62epc1ccrturfpdgtjiqng65v@4ax.com>, Al Klein >> >>> <rukbat@pern.invalid> wrote: >> >>>> Many people (the majority of human beings, in fact) believe that Jesus >> >>>> WAS NOT the son of any god. I guess that means that you'll be giving >> >>>> up Christianity, right? >> >>> You might let those people know that they were not alive when Jesus was on >> >>> this earth so how would they know. >> >> Neither were you. So how deep is that hole that you're digging, anyways? >> > >> > I trust the testimony of the witnesses that were alive during that >time period. >> > >> > >> >> Name one... >> >> >> Tokay > >Matthew, Mark, Luke and John. > You failed Bible history. Quote
Guest stoney Posted November 5, 2007 Posted November 5, 2007 On Fri, 02 Nov 2007 07:52:09 GMT, cactus <cactus@nonespam.com> wrote: >Jason wrote: >> In article <5om7l7Fnefo1U1@mid.individual.net>, "Robibnikoff" >> <witchypoo@broomstick.com> wrote: >> >>> "Jason" <Jason@nospam.com> >>> >>> snip >>>> But what if you are wrong and I am right? >>> But what if I'm right and you're wrong? >> >> Our bodies will be eaten by worms and that will be the end of our existence. >> >> If you are wrong, I will be spending eternity in heaven and you will be >> spending eternity in hell--unless you become a Christian before you die. >> >> >If someone else was right, who knows where any of us will be? That's been pointed out myriad times to the mindless one. Gassy, of course, can't understand the point. Quote
Guest Hiroshima Facts Posted November 5, 2007 Posted November 5, 2007 On Oct 31, 4:36 am, Kelsey Bjarnason <kbjarna...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Tue, 30 Oct 2007 23:55:50 -0800, Jason wrote: > > 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. > > No, I didn't. Tell me, do the names Hiroshima and Nagasaki mean anything > to you? I'll give you a hint: nukes were used. By Truman. You know > his religion? Baptist. Little hint for you: that makes him a > Christian. Meaning that a Christian leader effectively wiped two entire > cities off the map. > > Oh, but wait. Let us not forget the rest. Last I checked, _every_ US > president since then has been some flavour of Christian - and the number > of such weapons has increased from a mere few back then to some 10,455 > stockpiled non-strategic weapons. > > So, by your reasoning, the single biggest threat the planet faces is the > God-befuddled minds of the American leadership, which has created an > enormous nuclear weapons stockpile and is the only nation to have > actually used the things in combat. > > So on the one hand we have fundy christofreaks sitting on a stockpile of > thousands of weapons and a precedent for using them, but we're supposed > to be all worried about someone else building one or two or a dozen, and > the rationale is... er... oh, right, they're a fundy non-christofreak. Does the fact that we used nukes to try to end Japan's genocidal reign of terror make it wrong for us to try to ensure that Iran can't nuke Israel? Quote
Guest Hiroshima Facts Posted November 5, 2007 Posted November 5, 2007 On Oct 31, 10:57 am, Al Klein <ruk...@pern.invalid> wrote: > On Tue, 30 Oct 2007 18:34:44 -0800, Ja...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > > > If Iran starts an assembly line for nuclear weapons > > You're willing to wipe out MILLIONS of people on an "if"? If we bomb Iran, it is unlikely that millions would die (although I wouldn't want to be downwind from Isfahan when the uranium conversion facility is bombed). On Oct 31, 7:35 pm, Al Klein <ruk...@pern.invalid> wrote: > On Wed, 31 Oct 2007 13:12:42 -0800, Ja...@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. Iran's centrifuge facility at Natanz could be used to make weapons- grade uranium. And Iran is working, albeit slowly, on a plutonium production reactor at Arak. On Oct 31, 11:08 am, Al Klein <ruk...@pern.invalid> wrote: > On Wed, 31 Oct 2007 00:16:50 -0800, Ja...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > >America had no desire to take over the world. > > Which is why we invaded Afghanistan and Iraq. > > It couldn't have been because either country was planning to attack > us, because neither one had that capability. Afghanistan managed to attack us on 9/11. Quote
Guest Hiroshima Facts Posted November 5, 2007 Posted November 5, 2007 On Oct 31, 4:49 am, Kelsey Bjarnason <kbjarna...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > The Muslims have made it > > clear that their end goal is to take over the world. > > Really? Which Muslims? Al-Qa'ida. (Though I wouldn't characterize them as representing the views of all Muslims.) Quote
Guest James Beck Posted November 5, 2007 Posted November 5, 2007 In article <Jason-0211071119300001@67-150-170-169.lsan.mdsg- pacwest.com>, Jason@nospam.com says... > In article <MPG.219508a6202bdb4898a2a8@newsgroups.bellsouth.net>, James > Beck <jim@reallykillersystems.com> wrote: > > > In article <5p0qd2Fod26dU1@mid.individual.net>, witchypoo@broomstick.com > > says... > > > > > > "Jason" <Jason@nospam.com> wrote in message > > > news:Jason-3110071702060001@67-150-175-249.lsan.mdsg-pacwest.com... > > > > 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. > > > > > > He can claim whatever he wants, but he's still wrong. > > > > > > > The results, also, tend to show otherwise. > > If his claim were accurate, they wouldn't have had to haul that > > monstrosity off. > > > > Jim > > Have you heard of the free exercise clause? > I'm sure carrying that thing off was all the free exercise they wanted. Jim Quote
Guest James Beck Posted November 5, 2007 Posted November 5, 2007 In article <1194272875.051535.89600@50g2000hsm.googlegroups.com>, hiroshima_facts@yahoo.com says... > On Oct 31, 4:36 am, Kelsey Bjarnason <kbjarna...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Tue, 30 Oct 2007 23:55:50 -0800, Jason wrote: > > > 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. > > > > No, I didn't. Tell me, do the names Hiroshima and Nagasaki mean anything > > to you? I'll give you a hint: nukes were used. By Truman. You know > > his religion? Baptist. Little hint for you: that makes him a > > Christian. Meaning that a Christian leader effectively wiped two entire > > cities off the map. > > > > Oh, but wait. Let us not forget the rest. Last I checked, _every_ US > > president since then has been some flavour of Christian - and the number > > of such weapons has increased from a mere few back then to some 10,455 > > stockpiled non-strategic weapons. > > > > So, by your reasoning, the single biggest threat the planet faces is the > > God-befuddled minds of the American leadership, which has created an > > enormous nuclear weapons stockpile and is the only nation to have > > actually used the things in combat. > > > > So on the one hand we have fundy christofreaks sitting on a stockpile of > > thousands of weapons and a precedent for using them, but we're supposed > > to be all worried about someone else building one or two or a dozen, and > > the rationale is... er... oh, right, they're a fundy non-christofreak. > > Does the fact that we used nukes to try to end Japan's genocidal reign > of terror make it wrong for us to try to ensure that Iran can't nuke > Israel? I guess the BIG question is, why do we have to worry about it? I'm sure Israel is more than capable of handling the threat, that is if they really thought it was one. They have done it before in Iraq. http://news.bbc.co.uk/onthisday/hi/dates/stories/june/7/newsid_ 3014000/3014623.stm Jim Quote
Guest stoney Posted November 5, 2007 Posted November 5, 2007 On Wed, 31 Oct 2007 17:37:37 -0400, 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. As usual, Gassy shows his usual Christian Ethics by lying his ass off. 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.