PDA

View Full Version : Avenging 9/11 and doing 'Almighty God's' work for freedom...GWB


memyselfI
08-24-2005, 07:44 PM
Looks like DUHbya is pulling out all the stops in his 'hooray for war' tour. He's playing the 9/11 card again. And is again insinuating that it's not America who wants freedom in the world but God... :shake: :rolleyes:

Full text here: http://www.earnedmedia.org/wh0824.htm


Your service is needed in these dangerous times. We remain a nation at war. The war reached our shores on September the 11th, 2001, when terrorists murdered nearly 3,000 of our citizens. And since then, they've continued to kill -- in Madrid, in Istanbul, in Jakarta, Casablanca, Riyadh, Bali, Baghdad, London, Sharm el-Sheikh and elsewhere. Our enemies murder because they despise our freedom and our way of life. We believe in human rights, and the human dignity of every man, woman and child on this Earth. The terrorists believe that all human life is expendable. They share a hateful ideology that rejects tolerance and crushes all dissent. They envision a world where women are beaten, children are indoctrinated, and all who reject our ideology of violence and extremism are murdered.

During the last few decades, the terrorists grew to believe that if they hit America hard, as in Lebanon and Somalia, America would retreat and back down. Before September the 11th, Osama bin Laden said that an attack could make America run in less than 24 hours. So now they're trying to break our will with acts of violence. They'll kill women and children, knowing that the images of their brutality will horrify civilized people. Their goal is to force us to retreat. See, they have a strategy. They want us to retreat so they can topple governments in the Middle East and turn that region into a safe haven for terrorism.

We saw the terrible harm the terrorists did when they took effective control of the failed state of Afghanistan. After all, it was there that they trained and plotted and planned the attack that killed thousands of our citizens. We will not allow the terrorists to establish new places of refuge in failed states from which they can recruit and train and plan new attacks on our citizens. (Applause.)

On September the 11th, 2001, we saw the future that the terrorists intend for our country and the lengths they're willing to go to achieve their aims. We faced a clear choice. We could hunker down, retreating behind a false sense of security, or we could bring the war to the terrorists, striking them before they could kill more of our people. (Applause.)

I made a decision -- America will not wait to be attacked again. Our doctrine is clear: We will confront emerging threats before they full materialize. And if you harbor a terrorist, you're just as guilty as the terrorist. (Applause.)

We will stay on the offense. We'll complete our work in Afghanistan and Iraq. An immediate withdrawal of our troops in Iraq, or the broader Middle East, as some have called for, would only embolden the terrorists and create a staging ground to launch more attacks against America and free nations. So long as I'm the President, we will stay, we will fight, and we will win the war on terror. (Applause.)

Since September the 11th, we've followed a clear strategy to defeat the terrorists and protect our people. First, we are defending the homeland. We've strengthened our intelligence capabilities; we've trained more than 800,000 first responders; we have taken critical steps to protect or cities and borders and infrastructure. We have taken the fight to the enemy in our midst. We've disrupted terrorist cells and financing networks in California and Oregon and Illinois and New Jersey and Virginia, and other states. (Applause.)

This is a different kind of war. Today's enemies do not mass armies on borders, or navies on high seas. They blend in with the civilian population. They emerge to strike, and then they retreat back into the shadows. And that's why there are thousands of our fellow citizens running down every single piece of intelligence we can find, doing everything we can to disrupt folks that might be here in America trying to hurt you.

The second part of our strategy is this -- and it's based upon this fact: In an open society like ours -- and we will keep it open and we will keep it free -- it is impossible to protect against every threat. That's a fact we have to deal with. In a free society it is impossible to protect against every possible threat. And so the only way to defend our citizens where we live is to go after the terrorists where they live. (Applause.)

When the terrorists spend their days and nights struggling to avoid death or capture, they are less capable of arming and training and plotting new attacks on America and the rest of the civilized world. So we're after the enemy across the globe. And we're determined, and we're relentless, and we will stay on the hunt until the terrorists have nowhere to run and nowhere to hide. (Applause.)

And the third part of our strategy is this: We're spreading the hope of freedom across the broader Middle East. In the long run, the only way to defeat the terrorists is by offering an alternative to their ideology of hatred and fear. So a key component of our strategy is to spread freedom. History has proven that free nations are peaceful nations, that democracies do not fight their neighbors. (Applause.) And so, by advancing the cause of liberty and freedom in the Middle East, we're bringing hope to millions, and security to our own citizens. By bringing freedom and hope to parts of the world that have lived in despair, we're laying the foundation of peace for our children and grandchildren. (Applause.)

We're using all elements of our national power to achieve our objectives -- military power, diplomatic power, financial, intelligence and law enforcement. We're fighting the enemy on many fronts -- from the streets of the Western capitals to the mountains of Afghanistan, to the tribal regions of Pakistan, to the islands of Southeast Asia and the Horn of Africa. You see, this new kind of war, the first war of the 21st century, is a war on a global scale. And to protect our people, we've got to prevail in every theater. And that's why it's important for us to call upon allies and friends to join with us -- and they are.

One of the most important battlefronts in this war on terror is Iraq. Terrorists have converged on Iraq. See, they're coming into Iraq because they fear the march of freedom. Their most prominent leader is a Jordanian named Zarqawi, who has declared his allegiance with Osama bin Laden. The ranks of these folks are filled with foreign fighters who come from places like Saudi Arabia and Syria and Iran and Egypt and Sudan and Yemen and Libya. They lack popular support so they're targeting innocent Iraqis with car bombs and suicide attacks. They know the only way they can prevail is to break our will and the will of the Iraqi people before democracy takes hold. They are going to fail. (Applause.)

The stakes in Iraq could not be higher. The brutal violence in Iraq today is a clear sign of the terrorists' determination to stop democracy from taking root in the Middle East. They know that the success of a free Iraq, who can be a key ally in the war on terror and a symbol of success for others, will be a crushing blow to their strategy to dominate the region, and threaten America and the free world. They know that when their hateful ideology is defeated in Iraq, the Middle East will have a clear example of freedom and prosperity and hope. And the terrorists will begin to lose their sponsors and lose their recruits and lose the sanctuaries they need to plan new attacks.

And so they're fighting these efforts in Iraq with all the brutality they can muster. Yet, despite the violence we see every day, we're achieving our strategic objectives in Iraq. The Iraqi people are determined to build a free nation, and we have a plan to help them succeed. America and Iraqi forces are on the hunt, side-by-side, to defeat the terrorists. And as we hunt down our common enemies, we will continue to train more Iraqi security forces.

Like free people everywhere, Iraqis desire to defend their own country. That's what they want to do. They want to be in a position to defend their own freedom and their own democracy. And we're helping to achieve that goal. Our approach can be summed up this way: As Iraqis stand up, we will stand down. And when the Iraqi forces can defend their freedom by taking more and more of the fight to the enemy, our troops will come home with the honor they have earned. (Applause.)

At the same time, we're helping the Iraqi people establish a secure democracy. The people of Iraq have made a choice. In spite of the threats and assassinations, eight and a half million Iraqis went to the polls in January. (Applause.) By casting their ballots in defiance of the terrorists, they sent a clear and unmistakable message to the world: It doesn't matter where you're born; it doesn't matter what faith you follow, embedded in every soul is the deep desire to live in freedom. (Applause.) I understand freedom is not America's gift to the world; freedom is an Almighty God's gift to each man and woman in this world. (Applause.)

The Iraqi people want to live in freedom. Part of securing America for our children and grandchildren is to help then secure their freedom. Members of the Idaho Guard know the Iraqi people's desire for liberty because they've seen it up close. Specialist Matt Salisbury is with us today. (Applause.) He helped provide security for the election. He described seeing an Iraqi family helping an elderly man to the polls vote that day.

Is it all right if I quote you? (Laughter.) "The pride radiating from his face was unmistakable," Matt said. "With one act, he recovered his dignity which had been stolen by a tyrant. How can I possibly describe the return of hope and dignity that I saw in these people's eyes? It is worth the sacrifice of leaving families, jobs and a safe life. I am proud to be a citizen soldier in the 116th Brigade Combat Team serving in Iraq. And I'm proud to stand on my watch." (Applause.)

You see, the Iraqi election that Matt witnessed was more than a momentary victory for the Iraqi people. It was part of a series of defeats for the terrorists. The terrorists have sworn havoc and destruction across -- sown havoc and destruction across Iraq. Yet the violence has not stopped the Iraqi people from building a free Iraq. The terrorists failed to stop the transfer of sovereignty. They failed to stop Iraqis from running for office and going to the polls. They have failed to stop a democratic government from taking power in Iraq. The terrorists can kill the innocent, but they cannot stop the political process which ultimately will lead to freedom.

And right now, the Iraqi people are achieving another important victory over the terrorists. Despite threats, intimidation and the assassination of some of its members, Iraq's Constitutional Drafting Committee has submitted a constitution to Iraq's Transitional National Assembly. Iraqi negotiators are now further debating and revising the text. The establishment of a democratic constitution will be a landmark event in the history of Iraq and the history of the history of the Middle East. It will bring us closer to a day when Iraq is a nation that can govern itself, sustain itself, and defend itself. (Applause.)

It will send a clear signal to the people across the Middle East who are desperate for freedom that the future belongs to freedom. See, producing a constitution is a difficult process. It involves a lot of debate and compromise. We know that from our own history. Our Constitutional Convention was the home to political rivalries and regional disagreements. And the document that our founders produced in Philadelphia was not the final word. After all, it has been amended many times over the century.

Iraqis are now at the beginning of a long process, and like our founders, they're grappling with difficult issues, such as the role of the federal government. Idaho people have a pretty good view of the role of the federal government. (Laughter and applause.) Like, limit it. (Applause.) They're arguing about the proper place of religion in the life of their nation. And like our founders, they will come up with a system that respects the traditions of their country and guarantees the rights of all their citizens.

They understand that in order to have a free democracy, you must have minority rights. The will of the majority, coupled with minority rights and human dignity and rights for women is important for a free society. They understand that. (Applause.) But what's important is that the Iraqis are resolving these issues through debate and discussion, not at the barrel of a gun. (Applause.) And we admire their thoughtful deliberations, and we salute the determination of the Iraqi leaders to lay the foundation of a lasting democracy amid the ruins of a brutal dictatorship. (Applause.)

The battle lines in Iraq are now clearly drawn for the world to see, and there is no middle ground. Transforming a country that was ruled by an oppressive dictator who sponsored terror into a free nation that is an ally in the war on terror will take more time, more sacrifice, and continued resolve. Terrorists will emerge from Iraq one of two ways: emboldened or defeated. Every nation -- every free nation -- has a stake in the success of the Iraqi people. If the terrorists were to win in Iraq, the free world would be more vulnerable to attacks on innocent civilians. And that is why, for the sake of our children and our grandchildren, the terrorists will be defeated. (Applause.)

There will be more difficult moments on the path to victory, yet we can have confidence in the future. We have seen freedom conquer evil and secure the peace before. In World War II, free nations came together to fight the ideology of fascism. Freedom prevailed. And today, the enemies of World War II are allies in the cause of peace. (Applause.) In the Cold War, freedom defeated the ideology of communism and led to a Europe that is whole, free and at peace. Now, once again, freedom is confronting the followers of a murderous ideology, and like the hate-filled ideologies that came before it, the darkness of terror will be defeated, and the forces of freedom and moderation will prevail throughout the Muslim world. (Applause.)

In the end, the terrorists will fail because they have nothing positive to offer. The terrorist Zarqawi sums up their appeal this way: Anyone who stands in the way of our struggle is our enemy and target of the swords. That's the sum of his grim vision. They're brutal, but nothing more. They seek to exploit a great religion, but in truth, they are animated by nothing but their own lust for power and their desire for dominion over others. And while they may sow death and destruction for a time, the history of the last half-century is clear -- the will to power cannot withstand the will to live in freedom. (Applause.)

We will prevail in this struggle because freedom is the permanent hope of mankind, and because we have on our side the greatest force for freedom in the history of the world -- the brave men and women of the United States Armed Forces. (Applause.)

Since the founding of our republic, every generation has produced patriots willing to sacrifice for our freedom. Since the morning of September the 11th, we have known that the war on terror required great sacrifice, as well. In this war, we have said farewell to some very good men and women, including 491 heroes of the National Guard and Reserves. We mourn the loss of every life. We pray for their loved ones. These brave men and women gave their lives for a cause that is just and necessary for the security of our country, and now we will honor their sacrifice by completing their mission. (Applause.)

The men and women of the Idaho Guard are serving freedom's cause with courage and distinction, and your courage is changing the world. Specialist Charles Glenn of Boise has been on the front lines in Iraq. He has seen the progress firsthand, and he says, "I know Idaho has made a big difference here. We have been a part of history." The citizen soldiers of Idaho are making history. You're fighting to ensure that our freedom, like the state of Idaho, may endure forever. Americans are grateful for your devotion to duty and your courage under fire. We live in freedom and peace because of your determination to prevail.

I want to thank you for your service. May God bless the people of this great state. May God bless our troops. And may God continue to bless the United States of America. (Applause.)

ChiefsCountry
08-24-2005, 07:47 PM
Why don't you just go f*** yourself? It seems to be your one damn passion in life to post worthless information on a football board.

memyselfI
08-24-2005, 07:49 PM
Why don't you just go f*** yourself? It seems to be your one damn passion in life to post worthless information on a football board.

I agree the POTUS words are worthless. These speeches are supposed to be rallying his base and stoking patriotic fervor in the rest of us.

Oh, and weren't you one who wanted to ban? Haven't figured out that ignore button yet, eh?

Brock
08-24-2005, 07:51 PM
"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.–

Yeah, imagine the nerve of that nimrod.

mlyonsd
08-24-2005, 08:43 PM
That's one of the best speeches I've ever read.

mlyonsd
08-24-2005, 09:05 PM
He's playing the 9/11 card again. And is again insinuating that it's not America who wants freedom in the world but God... :shake: :rolleyes:



It's true. You really don't understand what it means to be a true American do you?

Declaration of Independence:

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness....

I've tried defending you before but the tripe you post really does expose your true sentiments. If you really hate America and what it was founded on so much do us a favor and move to France. You can always claim you helped with our revolution and gave us that really nice statue.

Logical
08-24-2005, 09:22 PM
It's true. You really don't understand what it means to be a true American do you?

Declaration of Independence:

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness....

I've tried defending you before but the tripe you post really does expose your true sentiments. If you really hate America and what it was founded on so much do us a favor and move to France. You can always claim you helped with our revolution and gave us that really nice statue.Cmon I understand people disliking DEnise's opinions and positions but surely you don't believe that America represents and is doing God's bidding? No one who claims to understand the foundation of the US can believe that heretical non-sense that flies in the very face of what our Country is and should be based upon. Sorry I sound like I am scolding but please rethink your position if you really feel this way. If you are making such statements just in reaction to DEnise you might want to rethink your reactions.

Logical
08-24-2005, 09:27 PM
It's true. You really don't understand what it means to be a true American do you?

Declaration of Independence:

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness....

I've tried defending you before but the tripe you post really does expose your true sentiments. If you really hate America and what it was founded on so much do us a favor and move to France. You can always claim you helped with our revolution and gave us that really nice statue.
One more thing are we annexing Iraq as part of our country, if not then the Declaration of Independence and the words therein have no application to a foreign country. Same goes for Lincoln's speeches they apply to the US not foreign countries.

Pitt Gorilla
08-24-2005, 09:52 PM
Why don't you just go f*** yourself? It seems to be your one damn passion in life to post worthless information on a football board.If it's worthless, why read and respond to it?

DanT
08-24-2005, 10:21 PM
The White House also has a transcript. I suspect that the word "our" in the following was intended to be "their".

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2005/08/20050824.html
... They envision a world where women are beaten, children are indoctrinated, and all who reject our ideology of violence and extremism are murdered.

I'm especially glad to see that President Bush understands that freedom is a gift from God. That's exactly how I see it, too. The idea that my freedom comes from a government employee or anyone else other than God is a clear untruth.

I understand freedom is not America's gift to the world; freedom is an Almighty God's gift to each man and woman in this world.

Saggysack
08-24-2005, 11:46 PM
Freedom isn't a gift from god. Freedom is a gift from those that have fought and died for it.

Taco John
08-24-2005, 11:50 PM
Originally Posted by President Bush
... They envision a world where women are beaten, children are indoctrinated, and all who reject our ideology of violence and extremism are murdered.

Children indoctrinated? Sounds like public school.

Taco John
08-24-2005, 11:54 PM
Freedom isn't a gift from god. Freedom is a gift from those that have fought and died for it.



Here I thought freedom was a gift from politicians who bought and lied for it. :)

Brock
08-25-2005, 07:01 AM
One more thing are we annexing Iraq as part of our country, if not then the Declaration of Independence and the words therein have no application to a foreign country. Same goes for Lincoln's speeches they apply to the US not foreign countries.

You are wrong.

oldandslow
08-25-2005, 07:14 AM
You are wrong.

So you are telling me that the constitution DOES apply to those who are not American citizens, but are being held by us with no trial and no charge.

Damn, I wish you neocons could get your stories straight.

Brock
08-25-2005, 07:21 AM
So you are telling me that the constitution DOES apply to those who are not American citizens, but are being held by us with no trial and no charge.

Damn, I wish you neocons could get your stories straight.

oldandscared - Where did I ever say it does not? Can you even keep straight who you are talking to?

jiveturkey
08-25-2005, 07:26 AM
It's true. You really don't understand what it means to be a true American do you?

Declaration of Independence:

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness....
Their Creator is different than ours.

the Talking Can
08-25-2005, 07:27 AM
"And if you harbor a terrorist, you're just as guilty as the terrorist. (Applause.)"

Unless, of course, you're Saudi Arabia or Pakistan or.....

Area 51
08-25-2005, 07:29 AM
Cmon I understand people disliking DEnise's opinions and positions but surely you don't believe that America represents and is doing God's bidding? No one who claims to understand the foundation of the US can believe that heretical non-sense that flies in the very face of what our Country is and should be based upon. Sorry I sound like I am scolding but please rethink your position if you really feel this way. If you are making such statements just in reaction to DEnise you might want to rethink your reactions.

Just exactly what is your opinion of the Freedom of Religion in the U.S.?

Denise's attack on the President seems to be purely from someone that just hates republicans and that is a shame. Regardless of party we are all Americans.

Adept Havelock
08-25-2005, 10:28 AM
Can't and won't speak for Vlad, but for me Freedom of religion is simple. You have the right to worship or not, however you please.

Your right to foist your religion on me is limited only by the sentiment espoused by that great Jurist Oliver Wendell Holmes: "The right to swing my fist ends where the other man's nose begins".

JMO, and (thankfully) apparently that of the Supreme Court.

Michael Michigan
08-25-2005, 11:27 AM
Bush has had two really good speeches this week.

Wash, rinse, repeat and the poll numbers will climb.

He should reiterate:

On September 11, 2001 the president clearly defined the enemy:

"We will make no distinction between those who committed these acts and those who harbor them."

He followed that up on September 20th:

"Our war on terror begins with al Qaeda, but it does not end there.

He made it clear that it would take a long time to achieve victory in that same speech:

"Americans should not expect one battle, but a lengthy campaign, unlike any other we have ever seen."

Keep that up and you'll clear out most of the complainers except the moonbats.

Logical
08-25-2005, 12:11 PM
You are wrong.No I am not and any American that believes otherwise portrays the arrogance that brought down the Romans and the USSR as empires. They mistakenly believed that they had the right to impose their beliefs on the rest of the world.

Logical
08-25-2005, 12:14 PM
Just exactly what is your opinion of the Freedom of Religion in the U.S.?

Denise's attack on the President seems to be purely from someone that just hates republicans and that is a shame. Regardless of party we are all Americans.I believe Freedom of Religion includes and actually mandates the right to Freedom From Religion. Freedom from the tyranny of religion interfering in our government and by extension our foreign policy.

Brock
08-25-2005, 12:16 PM
No I am not and any American that believes otherwise portrays the arrogance that brought down the Romans and the USSR as empires. The mistakenly believed that they had the right to impose their beliefs on the rest of the world.

Yes, you are wrong. Your comments about Romans and Russians are irrelevant and are wrong in any case. One of the framing documents of this country states that ALL MEN are entitled to the freedoms granted them by their creator. Not all Americans. Whether we should be trying to live up to those words are another argument entirely.

Logical
08-25-2005, 12:18 PM
oldandscared - Where did I ever say it does not? Can you even keep straight who you are talking to?So you advocate giving the detainees on Guantanomo the right to a fair trial with full legal representation and you will live with them being freed if the court rules it so?

Also are you saying that our constitutional protections extent to every citizen in every country, sure sounds like that is what you are implying.

Logical
08-25-2005, 12:20 PM
Yes, you are wrong. Your comments about Romans and Russians are irrelevant and are wrong in any case. One of the framing documents of this country states that ALL MEN are entitled to the freedoms granted them by their creator. Not all Americans. Whether we should be trying to live up to those words are another argument entirely.First and foremost we have the right to believe there is no creator thus that non-existing entity can grant no freedoms that is what is self-evident.

vailpass
08-25-2005, 12:33 PM
First and foremost we have the right to believe there is no creator thus that non-existing entity can grant no freedoms that is what is self-evident.

Wouldn't it be funny Vlad if after you die you end up in Heaven and God say's "hey, glad you are here. While alive you were certainly one of my most entertaining creations"?

Brock
08-25-2005, 12:37 PM
First and foremost we have the right to believe there is no creator thus that non-existing entity can grant no freedoms that is what is self-evident.

Well, those that founded this country obviously disagree with you. Ergo, your opinion really isn't important at all.

Logical
08-25-2005, 12:38 PM
Wouldn't it be funny Vlad if after you die you end up in Heaven and God say's "hey, glad you are here. While alive you were certainly one of my most entertaining creations"?I full well expect that to be the case. I am pointing out that people have the right to believe there is no creator and therefore logic says that no freedoms can be granted from a non-existing entity.

Logical
08-25-2005, 12:40 PM
Well, those that founded this country obviously disagree with you. Ergo, your opinion really isn't important at all.Apparently the Supreme Court has sided with that opinion more than it has yours. Freedom from Religion is a well established right as ruled on by the Supreme Court.

vailpass
08-25-2005, 12:43 PM
I full well expect that to be the case. I am pointing out that people have the right to believe there is no creator and therefore logic says that no freedoms can be granted from a non-existing entity.

:) Good on ya'

mlyonsd
08-25-2005, 01:01 PM
Cmon I understand people disliking DEnise's opinions and positions but surely you don't believe that America represents and is doing God's bidding? No one who claims to understand the foundation of the US can believe that heretical non-sense that flies in the very face of what our Country is and should be based upon. Sorry I sound like I am scolding but please rethink your position if you really feel this way. If you are making such statements just in reaction to DEnise you might want to rethink your reactions.

I'm not rethinking anything.

Her statement:
He's playing the 9/11 card again. And is again insinuating that it's not America who wants freedom in the world but God...

Was pointed at Bush saying:
freedom is an Almighty God's gift to each man and woman in this world

Which is as close as it gets to:
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness....


I'm not saying America is doing God's bidding. I'm saying Bush is agreeing with the Founding Fathers by believing that the Creator/God gave each man the right to pursue freedom.

Just because she doesn't necessarily believe in God doesn't give her a free pass to belittle those that do. And if she does then maybe she should go find another place to live because that's not what was intended 200+ years ago.

Area 51
08-25-2005, 01:16 PM
I believe Freedom of Religion includes and actually mandates the right to Freedom From Religion. Freedom from the tyranny of religion interfering in our government and by extension our foreign policy.

Do you live in an institution like Osawattomie?

The religious freedom is what the founding fathers were after. I you were to read about them you might understand their aspect at the founding of the US. The freedom FROM religion has been forced upon us by those that feel there is no God. That is my belief and it is just as pertinent as your belief.

memyselfI
08-25-2005, 01:20 PM
I'm not rethinking anything.

Her statement:


Was pointed at Bush saying:


Which is as close as it gets to:


I'm not saying America is doing God's bidding. I'm saying Bush is agreeing with the Founding Fathers by believing that the Creator/God gave each man the right to pursue freedom.

Just because she doesn't necessarily believe in God doesn't give her a free pass to belittle those that do. And if she does then maybe she should go find another place to live because that's not what was intended 200+ years ago.

Mark, you are being dishonest here and you know it. I've stated numerous times (as has Logical) that I do believe in God. Where you and I differ is I don't believe in a religion that states God chose one person and then subsequently their religion as THE way to get to Heaven.

GWB has said he felt guided by God to go to war. He's also stating that 'freedom' (GWB's version, I presume) is granted by God.

You do the math...

memyselfI
08-25-2005, 01:22 PM
"And if you harbor a terrorist, you're just as guilty as the terrorist. (Applause.)"

Unless, of course, you're Saudi Arabia or Pakistan or.....

Bravo.

memyselfI
08-25-2005, 01:23 PM
Their Creator is different than ours.

Bravo. I also don't recall anyone named Mohammed signing the Declaration of Independence.

memyselfI
08-25-2005, 01:24 PM
So you are telling me that the constitution DOES apply to those who are not American citizens, but are being held by us with no trial and no charge.

Damn, I wish you neocons could get your stories straight.

Bravo.

mlyonsd
08-25-2005, 01:46 PM
Mark, you are being dishonest here and you know it. I've stated numerous times (as has Logical) that I do believe in God. Where you and I differ is I don't believe in a religion that states God chose one person and then subsequently their religion as THE way to get to Heaven.

GWB has said he felt guided by God to go to war. He's also stating that 'freedom' (GWB's version, I presume) is granted by God.

You do the math...

I wasn't being dishonest cause I haven't been paying attention enough to know you do believe in God. And btw, I don't believe in organized religion either.

But what Bush said in his speech is exactly what the Founding Fathers wrote in the DOI. You're making it out to be something else but it's not. You're the one being dishonest.

Area 51
08-25-2005, 02:12 PM
I wasn't being dishonest cause I haven't been paying attention enough to know you do believe in God. And btw, I don't believe in organized religion either.

But what Bush said in his speech is exactly what the Founding Fathers wrote in the DOI. You're making it out to be something else but it's not. You're the one being dishonest.

She isn't being dishonest. She is being disrespectful of what the founding fathers wrote and why they were called founding fathers.

I think that if witches were still burned at the stake, denise would be sweating being found!

ChiefsGirl
08-25-2005, 02:19 PM
I think that if witches were still burned at the stake, denise would be sweating being found!

I think that would be a legitimate concern considering there are people like you in the world.

Area 51
08-25-2005, 02:57 PM
I think that would be a legitimate concern considering there are people like you in the world.

I don't advocate burning witches at the stake. I do not agree with denises penchant for dissing anything to do with the President, especially after the debaucle clinton was in office.

Logical
08-25-2005, 03:04 PM
Do you live in an institution like Osawattomie?

The religious freedom is what the founding fathers were after. I you were to read about them you might understand their aspect at the founding of the US. The freedom FROM religion has been forced upon us by those that feel there is no God. That is my belief and it is just as pertinent as your belief.What kind of silly argument is this, freedom from religion is part of the core of what Thomas Jefferson and James Madison wrote about in their letters and papers.

As far as your Ossawatomie comment that was just petty nonsense from someone who lacks creativity.

Logical
08-25-2005, 03:08 PM
I don't advocate burning witches at the stake. I do not agree with denises penchant for dissing anything to do with the President, especially after the debaucle clinton was in office.If you would have told me in 2003 that I would say that Clinton was a better President than Bush I would have told you, you were nuts. But after he has botched everything he has done from 2004 and on I am ready to say that it is definitely true. At least Clinton had the common sense to keep religion away from our government and did not completely botch an occupation to where we are allies with the terrorist Al Sadr.

ChiefsGirl
08-25-2005, 03:17 PM
I don't advocate burning witches at the stake. I do not agree with denises penchant for dissing anything to do with the President, especially after the debaucle clinton was in office.

Do you think that people of your ideology didn't "diss" everything to do with Clinton when he was president? I would bet you were one of them.

Radar Chief
08-25-2005, 03:24 PM
Do you think that people of your ideology didn't "diss" everything to do with Clinton when he was president? I would bet you were one of them.

I’ll take, “what is the moral equivalency game” for a thousand Alex. ;)

memyselfI
08-25-2005, 03:28 PM
She isn't being dishonest. She is being disrespectful of what the founding fathers wrote and why they were called founding fathers.

I think that if witches were still burned at the stake, denise would be sweating being found!

I was not being disrespectful to the founding fathers. I WAS being critical of GWB using similiar language in a war he started half way around the world and only after his initial justifications for the war fell flat then all of a sudden he discovered 'freedom' as motive.

As far as witches, I'd rather be a pagan witch than a brainless lambs...

go bowe
08-25-2005, 03:41 PM
I* * *
Oh, and weren't you one who wanted to ban? Haven't figured out that ignore button yet, eh?all right now...

quit taunting the ban the bitch crowd...

Area 51
08-25-2005, 03:41 PM
Do you think that people of your ideology didn't "diss" everything to do with Clinton when he was president? I would bet you were one of them.

At that time I was restricted from saying anything about Clinton. I might not have approved of his actions but he was the boss at the time.

Area 51
08-25-2005, 03:44 PM
What kind of silly argument is this, freedom from religion is part of the core of what Thomas Jefferson and James Madison wrote about in their letters and papers.

As far as your Ossawatomie comment that was just petty nonsense from someone who lacks creativity.

You are incorrect with your statement about freedom from religion. I see that your mind is set in concrete so it would be redundant to try to explain to you what all of the reasons were that prompted the ff to start the good ole US of A.

Say what you might, I think that some of your rantings here indicate that you might have an institutional background.

Area 51
08-25-2005, 03:45 PM
I was not being disrespectful to the founding fathers. I WAS being critical of GWB using similiar language in a war he started half way around the world and only after his initial justifications for the war fell flat then all of a sudden he discovered 'freedom' as motive.

As far as witches, I'd rather be a pagan witch than a brainless lambs...

I'd classify you as a brainless witch or a wrainless b*tch.

memyselfI
08-25-2005, 04:05 PM
all right now...

quit taunting the ban the bitch crowd...

Oh, you mean pointing out their hypocrisy is 'taunting?' Damn, I thought I was doing them a favor reminding them of their desire to see me gone and their ability to personally do it for themselves...vs. responding to me because I'm here.

I like to think of it as sort of a Chiefsplanet Public Service Announcement. :p

go bowe
08-25-2005, 04:13 PM
* * *
I'm not saying America is doing God's bidding. I'm saying Bush is agreeing with the Founding Fathers by believing that the Creator/God gave each man the right to pursue freedom.
* * *well, if you're gonna put it like that, i have no choice but to agree with you...

the question seems to be more of whether we should impose that belief on others, by force of arms...

we'll see once iraq has stablized...

if a theology-based quasi-democracy emerges (and a big if), then maybe it is good thing to liberate people...

but we just can't afford to do this very much...

at a couple hundred billion a pop, this could become a very expensive habit...

memyselfI
08-25-2005, 04:25 PM
well, if you're gonna put it like that, i have no choice but to agree with you...

the question seems to be more of whether we should impose that belief on others, by force of arms...

we'll see once iraq has stablized...

if a theology-based quasi-democracy emerges (and a big if), then maybe it is good thing to liberate people...

but we just can't afford to do this very much...

at a couple hundred billion a pop, this could become a very expensive habit...

But if freedom is God's gift would not everyone have it and if they don't wouldn't God have the ability to fix that himself without faulty UN pronouncements, billions of dollars, and lots of dead folks?

Logical
08-25-2005, 04:53 PM
You are incorrect with your statement about freedom from religion. I see that your mind is set in concrete so it would be redundant to try to explain to you what all of the reasons were that prompted the ff to start the good ole US of A.

Say what you might, I think that some of your rantings here indicate that you might have an institutional background.Well first you are correct I do have an institutional background.

I have an MBA from San Diego State
I have an Electronic Engineering Bachelor of Sciences degree
I also have 87 hours towards a BS in Chemistry
I am a mid level manager in charge of a 100 million dollar defense department contract for my corporation
So in that respect I do have an institutional background.

Here are some quotes from Jefferson: "No man shall be compelled to frequent or support any religious worship, place, or ministry whatsoever, nor shall be enforced, restrained, molested, or burthened in his body or goods, nor... otherwise suffer on account of his religious opinions or belief... All men shall be free to profess and by argument to maintain their opinions in matters of religion, and... the same shall in no wise diminish, enlarge, or affect their civil capacities." --Thomas Jefferson: Statute for Religious Freedom, 1779. ME 2:302, Papers 2:546 "From the dissensions among Sects themselves arise necessarily a right of choosing and necessity of deliberating to which we will conform. But if we choose for ourselves, we must allow others to choose also, and so reciprocally, this establishes religious liberty." --Thomas Jefferson: Notes on Religion, 1776. Papers 1:545 "Everyone must act according to the dictates of his own reason, and mine tells me that civil powers alone have been given to the President of the United States, and no authority to direct the religious exercises of his constituents." --Thomas Jefferson to Samuel Miller, 1808. ME 11:429 I particularly think you should pay attention to this one from Jefferson:"I do not know that it is a duty to disturb by missionaries the religion and peace of other countries, who may think themselves bound to extinguish by fire and fagot the heresies to which we give the name of conversions, and quote our own example for it. Were the Pope, or his holy allies, to send in mission to us some thousands of Jesuit priests to convert us to their orthodoxy, I suspect that we should deem and treat it as a national aggression on our peace and faith." --Thomas Jefferson to Michael Megear, 1823. ME 15:434 "In every country and in every age, the priest has been hostile to liberty. He is always in alliance with the despot, abetting his abuses in return for protection to his own." --Thomas Jefferson to Horatio G. Spafford, 1814. ME 14:119

Logical
08-25-2005, 05:07 PM
How about John Adams

John Adams Adams, a Unitarian, flatly denied the doctrine of eternal damnation. In a letter to Thomas Jefferson, he wrote: "I almost shudder at the thought of alluding to the most fatal example of the abuses of grief which the history of mankind has preserved -- the Cross. Consider what calamities that engine of grief has produced!" In his letter to Samuel Miller, 8 July 1820, Adams admitted his unbelief of Protestant Calvinism: "I must acknowledge that I cannot class myself under that denomination.
"The United States of America have exhibited, perhaps, the first example of governments erected on the simple principles of nature; and if men are now sufficiently enlightened to disabuse themselves of artifice, imposture, hypocrisy, and superstition, they will consider this event as an era in their history. Although the detail of the formation of the American governments is at present little known or regarded either in Europe or in America, it may hereafter become an object of curiosity. It will never be pretended that any persons employed in that service had interviews with the gods, or were in any degree under the influence of Heaven, more than those at work upon ships or houses, or laboring in merchandise or agriculture; it will forever be acknowledged that these governments were contrived merely by the use of reason and the senses. ". . . Thirteen governments thus founded on the natural authority of the people alone, without a pretence of miracle or mystery, and which are destined to spread over the northern part of that whole quarter of the globe, are a great point gained in favor of the rights of mankind."

Logical
08-25-2005, 05:08 PM
What sayeth James Madison

Called the father of the Constitution, Madison had no conventional sense of Christianity. In 1785, Madison wrote in his Memorial and Remonstrance against Religious Assessments: "During almost fifteen centuries has the legal establishment of Christianity been on trial. What have been its fruits? More or less in all places, pride and indolence in the Clergy, ignorance and servility in the laity; in both, superstition, bigotry and persecution." "What influence, in fact, have ecclesiastical establishments had on society? In some instances they have been seen to erect a spiritual tyranny on the ruins of the civil authority; on many instances they have been seen upholding the thrones of political tyranny; in no instance have they been the guardians of the liberties of the people. Rulers who wish to subvert the public liberty may have found an established clergy convenient auxiliaries. A just government, instituted to secure and perpetuate it, needs them not."

Logical
08-25-2005, 05:10 PM
Thomas Paine This freethinker and author of several books, influenced more early Americans than any other writer. Although he held Deist beliefs, he wrote in his famous The Age of Reason: "I do not believe in the creed professed by the Jewish church, by the Roman church, by the Greek church, by the Protestant church, nor by any church that I know of. My own mind is my church. " "Of all the systems of religion that ever were invented, there is no more derogatory to the Almighty, more unedifiying to man, more repugnant to reason, and more contradictory to itself than this thing called Christianity. "

Logical
08-25-2005, 05:14 PM
And what of the Treaty of Tripoli

Officially called the "Treaty of peace and friendship between the United States of America and the Bey and Subjects of Tripoli, of Barbary," most refer to it as simply the Treaty of Tripoli. In Article 11, it states: "As the Government of the United States of America is not in any sense founded on the Christian religion; as it has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion, or tranquillity, of Musselmen; and as the said States never have entered into any war or act of hostility against any Mehomitan nation, it is declared by the parties that no pretext arising from religious opinions shall ever produce an interruption of the harmony existing between the two countries."

go bowe
08-25-2005, 06:27 PM
Oh, you mean pointing out their hypocrisy is 'taunting?' Damn, I thought I was doing them a favor reminding them of their desire to see me gone and their ability to personally do it for themselves...vs. responding to me because I'm here.

I like to think of it as sort of a Chiefsplanet Public Service Announcement. :pyes, making fun of them because they can't ban you is taunting...

tsk tsk...

and, yes, flaunting the ignore option and/or the don't respond if you don't like it option is taunting too...

you're such a naughty girl... :harumph: :harumph: :harumph:

HolyHandgernade
08-25-2005, 10:03 PM
Vlad, you're my hero!

I've posted this numerous times before, but maybe we just get some new blood every once and a while so I'll go over it step by step what is actually written in the first ammendment concerning "The Establishment Clause". I do not appeal to what the framers were supposedly thinking, because if we were to do so, it would be abundantly clear as Vlad has already posted (and there is much more where that came from). I will do so grammatically:

The first lesson is, "What is a clause?" A clause is an independent thought of expression including a subject and predicate but not constituting a complete sentence . So let us look at the "Establishment Clause":

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion or prohibit the free exersize thereof.

OK class, how many clauses make up the Establishment Clause? The key to deceifering if there is more than one is to look for a conjunction because a conjunction does what? A conjunction is the grammatical relation between linguistic units (words or phrases or clauses) that are connected by words such as and/but/or.

So we are looking for two independant thoughts joined by a conjunctionary word. So let's start at the beginning and go til we hit a conjunction:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion....

OR

....prohibit the free exersize thereof.

Well the first clause is a complete sentence unto itself, the second is a subordinate clause which means it draws elements of the first clause to support it. To figure out this mystery we determine what is missing. We have the subjective phrase but are lacking the subject and predicate. What is the subject and predicate of the main clause?

Congress shall make no law....

which we can add the subjective phrase:

prohibit(ing) the free exersize thereof.

So now we have our two clauses which can be written independentaly as :

Congress shall make no law establishing religion.

Congress shall make no law prohibit(ing) the free exersize thereof.

We have one last item to figure out, the adverb "thereof". Thereof means "of that" or "of it", that is, it references back. So, what word does it reference back to? The only logical choice is "religion". So we can finalize our investigation as:

Congress shall make no law establishing religion.

Congress shall make no law prohibit(ing) the free exersize of religion.

Now, unless your argument is that the Founding Fathers were a bit daft regarding the use of grammar in the English language or that they just wanted to be redundant, it is obvious there are two independent ideas within the Establishment Clause. The first one is your freedom FROM religion. Only the government has the power to coerce your actions through legal punishment. This is your protection that the government can do no such thing because it is none of the government's business. For it to be none of the government's business it must not associate itself with such. The second clause is your freedom OF religion. This states you have the liberty of opinion regarding religious ideas.

This two-part inclusion is necessary. It does one no good to have libertyof opinion about religion if you don't have freedom from it being coerced upon you. And it does not matter even if you happen to agree with the religious opinion being coerced because it prevents you the liberty of later changing your mind which is the essence of tyranny.

Freedom from religion is not some made up 1950's conception retrofitted upon the majority religion. If someone of the opposing view can offer a grammatical refutation of what I believe is clearly written, then please go ahead. Otherwise, you are entitled to your own opinion but you have no objective standard to back it up.

-HH

mlyonsd
08-26-2005, 07:50 AM
well, if you're gonna put it like that, i have no choice but to agree with you...

the question seems to be more of whether we should impose that belief on others, by force of arms...

we'll see once iraq has stablized...

if a theology-based quasi-democracy emerges (and a big if), then maybe it is good thing to liberate people...

but we just can't afford to do this very much...

at a couple hundred billion a pop, this could become a very expensive habit...

Fair, well thought out post.

Brock
08-26-2005, 07:59 AM
I am a mid level manager

I never would have guessed that.