WORLD WAR III
See other WORLD WAR III Articles
Title: Top US General Says American Troops Should be Prepared to Die—for ISRAEL
Source:
Free Thought Project
URL Source: http://thefreethoughtproject.com/to ... al-american-troops-die-israel/
Published: Mar 20, 2018
Author: The Free Thought Project
Post Date: 2018-03-21 09:27:17 by Deckard
Keywords: None
Views: 12405
Comments: 83
“I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same…” This is the oath of enlistment that every American military service member or federal employee takes upon entry into government service (with slight variation for commissioned officers). With the largest joint U.S.-Israeli air defense exercise ever conducted having recently concluded, which involved over 2,500 American service personnel, and in the midst of heightened Israeli involvement in the Syrian war, we find ourselves asking… Are US troops ready to fight and to die for Earlier this month, in the midst of the 9th annual 12-day massive joint exercise named “Juniper Cobra” which was hailed in Israeli media as the largest of its kind, simulating a “battle on three fronts” (namely, Syria-Lebanon-Gaza Strip) US Third Air Force Commander Lt. Gen. Richard Clark spelled out just such a scenario wherein US troops could be asked to fight and to die for defense of While major joint military exercises involving significant troop deployments are nothing new for the US and its allies (Juniper Cobra itself has been conducted annually for nearly a decade), Lt. Gen. Clark’s words to Israeli media are truly precedent setting and shocking, especially as he is among the highest ranking military officers in the US armed forces. It is well worth reading the alarming scenario Gen. Clark laid out while speaking to the Jerusalem Post in its entirety: “The United States and Israel enjoy a strong and enduring military-to-military partnership built on a trust that has been developed over decades of cooperation,” said USAF Third Air Force commander Lt.-Gen. Richard Clark, who also serves as the commander for the deploying Joint Task Force – Israel. “The Juniper Cobra exercises continue to strengthen this relationship, providing us with the opportunity to bolster interoperability and develop seamless integration with our Israeli partners.” According to Clark, the US and Israeli troops will work side-by-side under each other’s relevant chain of command. But this is where Clark pushes far across the normative “military-to-military partnership” characteristic of joint drills with other allied nations. He says that US troops should be prepared to die for the Jewish State: “As far as decision-making, it is a partnership,” he continued, stressing nonetheless that “at the end of the day it is about the protection of Israel – and if there is a question in regards to how we will operate, the last vote will probably go to Zvika [Brig.-Gen. Zvika Haimovitch, head of the IDF’s Aerial Defense Division].” Washington and Israel have signed an agreement which would see the US come to assist Israel with missile defense in times of war and, according to [Israeli commander] Haimovitch, “I am sure once the order comes we will find here US troops on the ground to be part of our deployment team to defend the State of Israel.” And those US troops who would be deployed to Israel, are prepared to die for the Jewish state, Clark said. “We are ready to commit to the defense of Israel anytime we get involved in a kinetic fight there is always the risk that there will be casualties. But we accept that – as every conflict we train for and enter, there is always that possibility,” he said. And it appears that both military leaders are in agreement on this point – that they are ready and willing to put US troops in harm’s way in pursuit of Israeli defense policy. Disturbingly, Clark acknowledges willingness for life-and-death battlefield decisions impacting American soldiers to be placed in the hands of the Israeli chain of command in saying: “if there is a question in regards to how we will operate, the last vote will probably go to [Israeli General] Zvika.” While in more stable times in the Middle East, Clark’s words might possibly be dismissed as hyperbole and misplaced enthusiasm for “the mission” – his words come as Israel is already actively involved on two fronts: Gaza and Syria. And according to many analysts and reports, including one recently leaked internal Israeli defense memo, Israel is ramping up for devastating engagement along a third front as Tel Aviv continues to view Lebanese Hezbollah to its north as the prime threat to Israeli security. Should broader war break out between Israel, Hezbollah, Iran, and Syria, will US troops who find themselves working closely with the IDF be forced to obey the commands of Israeli generals, even to the point of death? We can’t find anything in the oath of enlistment or the Constitution [federal statute in 10 U.S.C. 502, and based in Article VI of the Constitution] that requires US citizens or soldiers to defend and fight for a foreign nation. Poster Comment: And those US troops who would be deployed to Israel, are prepared to die for the Jewish state, Clark said. “We are ready to commit to the defense of Israel anytime we get involved in a kinetic fight there is always the risk that there will be casualties. But we accept that – as every conflict we train for and enter, there is always that possibility,” he said.America’s Israel’s defense? …We think not, but there are US generals out there enthusiastically promoting the idea. America Israel – even to the point of being placed under Israeli commanders responsible for battlefield decision making.
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#1. To: Deckard (#0)
Good. We face a common enemy. Just like we helped the Britts in WWII. Repeat after me 3 times. Israel good, muslims bad. Israel good, muslims bad. Israel good, muslims bad.
When you are at war and there are allies in the field, somebody has to be the supreme allied commander, to coordinate operations and decide who will be where. Example: When US forces deployed into the trenches of the Western Front, in France in 1918, the Supreme Commander of Allied Forces was Field Marshall Ferdinand Foch of the French Army. The Supreme Allied commander was ultimately command of all allied troops - French, British, Belgian, American, Canadian, Australian, etc.: everybody fighting on the ground or in the air against the Germans on the Western Front. Similarly, we would assume that in the event of a shooting war in Israel sufficient to require the US Army to actually intervene in the field, that there would be a supreme allied commander. If the fight is in Israel, given Israeli integrated air defense, security forces, etc., relative size of the forces, it is logical that US forces would be integrated into the Israeli forces under Israeli command. That would make logical sense.
The above is what he said,which is bad enough,but he did NOT say what the thread title claims he said. Someone is putting words in his mouth. Still,he went WAAAAY too far in his comments. Lowly USAF Generals do NOT make foreign policy decisions,or even the decision to go to war. Those decisions are made by our elected representatives. Seems to me his choices are either to issue a speedy correction,or put in his retirement papers for even suggesting US troops in war come under Israeli command. Or the command of the leaders of ANY other nation. In the entire history of the world,the only nations that had to build walls to keep their own citizens from leaving were those with leftist governments.
I will give you "Israel MUCH better than Muslims",but we ain't their daddy and we don't need to fight their fights. BTW,even when we were allies with the British and other nations during WW-2,US troops did NOT take orders from the leaders of any other nation or military.
In the entire history of the world,the only nations that had to build walls to keep their own citizens from leaving were those with leftist governments.
ONLY theoretically. Foch made RECOMMENDATIONS that might or might not have been followed,but he did NOT give orders to US troops. In the entire history of the world,the only nations that had to build walls to keep their own citizens from leaving were those with leftist governments.
Dear Zionist state-established abominators of Nature, "Lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) rights in Israel are the most tolerant in the Middle East, and among the most tolerant in Asia. Although same- Thanks and have a nice day, =A.T.Partyer
P.S. { crickets crickets crickets } Two Hundred Years Together is a monumental work of historical scholarship by Soviet dissident and 1970 Nobel literature laureate, Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn dealing with the relationship between Russians and Jews inside the Russian and Soviet Empires. Solzhenitsyn authored it in Russian and the original work was published in Russian in 2001/2, with published translations in German and French following soon after. However, for reasons that will be obvious to those who have read it, it has never found an English language publisher https://wikispooks.com/wik i/200_Years_Together
We do have permanently assigned military in Israel. We have staff officer exchanges and we do operate that extremely advanced radar system in the desert there with our own personnel (no Israelis). The radar has anecdotally been described as being able to see if someone throws a soccer ball in the air in Tehran. It's considered one of the most advanced radars in the world though you don't read much about it. So it makes sense that, in the event of a major threat or attack on Israel, those military elements present in the country would be used as Israel wants them used. We would likely unlock and grant full access to the radar system (among other things like missile defense units) and place them at the disposal of the IDF general staff. We also do routine intel sharing of space-based recon satellites with Israel. These are limited in peacetime but part of the agreements we have with Israel are that we would unlock their access to our full array of intel assets in the Mideast, including raw feeds from our spy satellites.
Good. I don't care what people do, as long as they don't do it in the street and disturb the horses. I DO care about those people who care so much about what other people do in private that they feel the need (and the right) to go after them. Those are the people who need to be held back, defanged. Some bozos buttfugging has no real impact on my life. But some officials with guns who can surveil to see whether or not bozos are buttfugging - they are the dangerous ones, and they need to be defeated. Tolerance is exactly the right answer to people's sexual pecadilloes. Do it in private and I don't care. That's the right answer, the right balance of rights and decency. Digging into private life to enforce somebody's religious code is an intolerable violation, and has to be thrown back.
Sounds good to me. Israel is a fact. Removing it would require genocide. Worse, removing it would mean giving Islam a huge win. Not acceptable. SHOULD Israel have been put there and supported? No. It's a colony. It should never have been created in the Middle East. It should have been carved out of Germany. Berlin and Brandenburg should not have been a four- way occupied city, it should have been the new capital of a Jewish state. All of the ethnic Germans should have been driven out of Brandenburg, and "East Germany" should have been rebuilt as the Jewish state in Europe. That would have assigned the permanent loss of land to the people who perpetrated the holocaust, and put the Jews right in the heart of where most of the Jews lived before the Nazis: Germany and Poland. But we didn't do that. So now Israel is a fact. And given that it is a fact, and that undoing it would require a genocide; also that the people who so desperately want to undo it are no better than the Nazis were, keeping Israel from being destroyed is a worthy goal - mainly because it pisses off the people who ought to be pissed off. I dislike the extent of Israeli and Jewish influence in American politics, but then, I dislike a lot of things. We're in Israel. We support Israel. It's the right call (not because of the KJV or some other sacrilegious dopey Christian nonsense, but because of real things in the real world). The fact that it makes the people I like least go non-linear means that I want it maintained as a grain of salt in the eye of the people I don't like. It makes them very unhappy, and their unhappiness makes me happy. Therefore, I support Israel. Now, unfortunately, Israel also makes other people I don't like very happy, and that's irritating, but we can't have everything in this world, can we?
You Catholics never read Ezekiel huh?
No we didn't did we. Histories course cannot be altered even by Catholics conspiring with Nazis to wipe Jews from the earth. https://www.vanityfair.com/style/1999/10/pope-pius-xii-199910
Oh. Right. Says the apple who fell from the crazy tree. I guess the moral framework of the HIV infested care taker who you claim stole your all your money had nooooo impact at all. Did you say Bozo? {click}
Yup. And after that the Temple was rebuilt, Israel regathered, went totally corrupt, Jesus came, pronounced the final doom on the Temple, was killed by the Temple authorities - who thereby brought the Deuteronomic doom upon Israel. Israel of the Temple is gone. The old bottle burst. The only covenant that matters is the New Covenant with Christ. Jesus imposed the penalty clause of Deuteronomy on the old Temple and its priesthood, and sent the Roman Army to utterly wipe out the Temple and its priesthood forever, until the end of the world. Christians who fail to read and listen to what Jesus had to say get caught up in intermediate stuff and lose the thread. It's nonsense. The modern state of Israel is a Western European colony, of European Jews, established in the Middle East for two reasons - (1) The Jews wanted out of Europe and wanted THAT land in particular, for reasons that have to do with their myths of themselves - and they were owed something (in most people's minds) because of the Holocaust, and (2) Europeans still didn't like Jews even after the Holocaust, and leapt at the idea of the Jews all self-deporting from Europe to this new Israel. So, Israel is there. It'll be there as long as the West pours in money and arms. After the West stops, Israel will be swamped by the Muslims. The historical parallel is Crusader Outremer, which lasted a bit over a century. Once the West lost interest in propping it up, it was overrun. I don't want to see the overrun, because that will be a genocide, also because it will be a big win for the Muslims, and that's not acceptable. So I'm willing to provide defense assistance to Israel for now. The notion that Christians need to pay tax dollars to uphold the European Jewish colony in Palestine is a weird Protestant fantasy that isn't really supported by the Bible if the Bible is actually read fully and carefully. But Proddies think it is.
Wrong! I guess you don't believe Ezekiel. Looks like you don't believe revelation either.
Did you say Bozo? {click} That's right. No impact at all. My money was not stolen because of homosexual sex. It was stolen because people some people steal money, and that guy did. There is no impact on my thinking because, unlike you, I understand cause and effect. I understand that one person's sexual sins does not make another person commit financial crimes against third person. In this, I am a reasonable, intelligent person. You're just a raving bigot. You think of sodomy and your mind goes queer and you cease to think. It's why you come off the way you do. In the process you end up isolated - nobody on this site could ever work with you on anything, because you're such a mean, spiteful, small-minded bigoted jackass. The problem with that is that nobody can form meaningful alliances with people like you. So you sit out there alone, rave about what you care about, are too disgusting and nasty person for anybody to ally with you on anything. And then you die and pass from a world that steadily marched away from you. And then you wake up to judgment and find out that God doesn't like assholes either. You lose here. You lose there. You just lose. Go die in a hole.
I guess you don't believe Ezekiel. Looks like you don't believe revelation either. When you get right down to it, you're right. I don't believe that either of those things can or should be taken literally. Because they're not literally true.
You care more about Jews than you do your own people. This is how Protestantism makes people stupid.
Looks like you don't believe revelation either. When you get right down to it, you're right. I don't believe that either of those things can or should be taken literally. Because they're not literally true. 2 Timothy 3:16-17 King James Version (KJV) 16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: 17 That the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works. Par for the course you follow the pope man not the word of God. You just said so, so don't get mad at me.
We are supposed to love everyone are we not? How is me pointing out that the "unfallable perfect god pope" was helping the nazis make me love my people any less then Jews?
Looks like you don't believe revelation either. When you get right down to it, you're right. I don't believe that either of those things can or should be taken literally. Because they're not literally true. Since revelation relates to Genesis. I guess you can throw Genesis in the trash too.
Have to throw out Timothy also. He said all scripture is good and from God. Which you don't believe. How many other books should be removed from the Bible? So far we have Ezekiel, Revelation, Timothy, and Genesis. You didn't say Genesis but implied it imo.
I don't throw any of these things into the trash. I read them, see the parts that are flawed or apparently in error, look at the original language to see if the text can be salvaged, and where not, read it metaphorically or allegorically, if I can, or I just shrug my shoulders and dismiss it as a human error in a human book. My belief in God isn't much related to the Bible.
The only language in the Bible I take as authority are the direct words of Christ given as commandments. The rest of it is background information and the opinions of other men. It's interesting, and sometimes wise, but it's not law.
The rest of it is background information and the opinions of other men. It's interesting, and sometimes wise, but it's not law. 2 Timothy 3:16-17 King James Version (KJV) 16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: I just don't get people who claim to believe in God but think they are smarter then God and pick and choose which parts they want to. It is a pretty silly way to go about it.
So far we have Ezekiel, Revelation, Timothy, and Genesis. You didn't say Genesis but implied it imo. The only parts of the Bible that I consider to be authority from God that apply to ME are the direct words of Jesus (and the Father) in the four gospels and the first part of Acts, the single quote of Jesus in the letters of Paul, and what Jesus says directly in Revelation. The rest is interesting, but it's not authority.
I know. You and the pope correct God because he is to stupid to get it right. Listen to Vic not the Bible. He knows more. Yeah I got it.
God healed my broken neck, raised two dead animals in my hands, drove away a physical demon, and talks to me out loud. He did this before I ever read your idolatrous little book. My religion does not come from your book, and I don't need your book. I recognize the parts of your book that are God speaking, and I also recognize in your little book when it's some man speaking. No aspect of my religion came from your book. I knew God before I read it, and my reading of it didn't change anything regarding my knowledge of God, other than cause me to think about scenarios I have not personally experienced, and to understand how God has interacted with other people. I don't think I'm smarter than God. For me to do what you do would be to walk AWAY from God and think that the book is above God. And that's blasphemy. I criticize the Catholic Church for what it deserves to be criticized for. I mostly stay away from discussing God with Protestants because your minds are closed to him. You worship your little book, and the opinions of men about your little book. You don't talk about GOD with me at all, and you defile God and claim that the God who has kept me alive and sustain me isn't even God. Your ilk calls me a liar and ascribes the miracles I have experienced to Satan, even, because it doesn't fit your narrow-minded human principles revolving around a book written by men. I have never learned a single thing from any Protestant regarding God, other than how to be self-righteous, violent, arrogant and wholly dishonest - and losing the grace of God in the process. I take the book - not your abridged version of it but the whole thing (including the parts that the Catholic Church has left out) - I read it, I see what is good, what is bad, what is true, what isn't true, and what parts came from God. I also read the logic of it, and see and hear God - My God - in the voice of Jesus in his father in the Gospels, Acts and Revelation. I hear Paul speaking from his inspiration in his letters, but I also hear Paul's Judaism struggling to remain relevant in the face of the real God. Paul's love of God is clear, but what he rights is contradictory nonsense in many parts because HE was conflicted, between the Judaism of his upbringing and education - over which he was responsible for the deaths of many Christians - and what God was telling him directly through the spirit. What Protestants do with Paul is scandalous. Now, we've gone through many iterations about religion on these threads over the years. We never get anywhere and we never CAN get anywhere, because you want to "teach me" about God based on the opinions that other men have taught you, but I know God directly, and talk to Him directly when I need to, and he intervenes and saves my life and other things directly with miracles, so I don't need to be taught by you. You are not teaching me anything, you're just yelling at me the opinions of other men. God never told ME that I was a teacher, to go out and talk about him with some new knowledge. He's the same God who spoke out loud through Jesus' mouth. So when you read Paul saying "He who will not work, shall not eat" - and you take that out of context to boot - and then you assert that the words of this man are equal to the words of God Incarnate, speaking about caring for the poor, turning the other cheek, etc. - you're not teaching me anything. You're showing how hopelessly snared you are in this book, that you actually equate the opinions of Paul with regards to running a soup kitchen with the opinions of God. Your little book is a God-maker, to YOUR mind, but not to mine. I'm not a teacher - you can read what God wants in your book, if you read it right. Reading it right, if you want that, is opening to the Gospels, reading what Jesus said there, in Acts and in Revelation, and making THAT your law, because that actually IS the law. The rest is additional material, but quite a bit of it conflicts with Jesus, or changes the focus, and if you want to know God, you would do well to stop confusing the issue with the opinions of Paul and Ezekiel and whoever wrote Genesis, and focus on what Jesus said. But that's not the way Proddies do religion, so you'll never do that. I get why you don't. You are capable of understanding why I don't allow a book written by men to supplant the way I came to God, which was by him coming to me directly, reaching out of the sky and saving my life and talking to me and doing what he has done for me. You are capable of getting me, but you don't want to, because I didn't come to God at all in the way that your pastors say your book says is the only way. Obviously it's not the only way, which means your book is wrong about that. And you cannot hear those words. So we can't really talk at all about religion, can we? So we should stop, because all that happens is that you start beating on me and piling on the insults because you don't like the way that God went about it with me - and all you can do is deny he did it. All I can do is repeat what I know - and because what I know is not acceptable to your religion, we can't get past the impasse, and we just bicker. Which is pointless, unless the POINT is to be mean to each other because our religions differ. To ME, that's pointless. Your mileage may vary.
You sound kooky when you talk about raising dead animals from the grave. You sound hypocritical when you say God healed your broken neck. Because you made it clear in a thread that God doesn't intervene and people die. Well except in your case because he had to heal you so that you could correct the Bible and tear out the parts that are incorrect. Ok sarcasm is now off. You have your own private intrepretation of the bible, and in your private intrepretation you also have to throw Peter in the trash. 16For we have not followed cunningly devised fables, when we made known unto you the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but were eyewitnesses of his majesty. 17For he received from God the Father honour and glory, when there came such a voice to him from the excellent glory, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased. 18And this voice which came from heaven we heard, when we were with him in the holy mount. 19We have also a more sure word of prophecy; whereunto ye do well that ye take heed, as unto a light that shineth in a dark place, until the day dawn, and the day star arise in your hearts: 20Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation. 21For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost. By the way Vic. How do you know that someone didn't make up the words in red in the Bible?
I never said any such thing. God never made me a teacher. What I say to you is the same thing that God the Father says to you in the Gospels: listen to JESUS. "Listen to Vic" is your words.
The heart of the righteous studieth to answer: but the mouth of the wicked poureth out evil things. 29The LORD is far from the wicked: but he heareth the prayer of the righteous. 30The light of the eyes rejoiceth the heart: and a good report maketh the bones fat. 31The ear that heareth the reproof of life abideth among the wise. 32He that refuseth instruction despiseth his own soul: but he that heareth reproof getteth understanding. 33The fear of the LORD is the instruction of wisdom; and before honour is humility.
You sound hypocritical when you say God healed your broken neck. Because you made it clear in a thread that God doesn't intervene and people die. I am going to die. God isn't going to stop that. He stopped it THEN, at THAT moment. When it's HIS time for me to go, I will go. I won't breathe one breath less than he appointed (which is why I have never bothered to get a gun), and I won't breathe one breath MORE than he has appointed either (which is why I don't worry too much about getting on airplanes). I know I sound kooky. I'm not an evangelist, out there saying "I have experienced miracles, therefore follow me!" No. I refer to my direct encounters with God only in reaction to people presuming to tell me that I don't know God because I don't believe what they believe. I know God better than they do. They get their faith from a book. I get my knowledge of God directly. I don't need to get pushed around by people waving their Jack Chick pamphlets who know less about God than I do. I don't teach - I have never been called to that - but I'm not going to be schooled by bigoted ignoramuses either. I don't CARE about the Bible, A K A Stone. I've read it to see IF God was there - he is - and to see what he has to say in there. God is in there, and so also is a lot of human opinion, myth, tradition, and a welter of contradiction. Anyway, this is going nowhere, so I'm going to walk away from it.
34 You brood of vipers! How can you speak good things, when you are evil? For out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaks.
I know i'm upsetting you and making you mad. But I am only posting the truth. Like Bible verses. Like your own words. But you are a hypocrite. Christ does not treat Chrsitans' diabetes or cancer. He let's them bear that cross, die, and come to him. Similarly for starvation. Christ lets hundreds of millions of Christans starve to death. They bear their cross to the end and have their reward in the next life. Christ never promised health and happiness in this life - in fact, he promised that those things won't be found here. So you're right - I have absolutely no belief at all that Christ will reach down from heaven and protect Christians from any diseases, or marauding enemies, or starvation, or natural disaster - because he DOESN'T protect us from any of things, and never said he would. Our reward for staying true to him is found on the other side, in the afterlife, not HERE. https://libertysflame.com/cgi-bin/readart.cgi?ArtNum=52686&Disp=14#C14
Yes Vic he has more important things to do. Like help you with your magic show of raising lizards and cockroaches from the dead. And healing your neck (not anyone else though because you said so) because you are special and he needs you to get rid of that bad book the Bible that is full of errors.
Well, I guess we can return to it again. The Bible is full of errors. The earth is probably 4-5 billion years old. Man evolved from primates. The Creation myth in Genesis 1 is just that - a myth. It is not literally true. The world was not created in 7 calendar days, and life did not appear "poof". IF you religion hangs on every word of the Bible being literally true, then your religion is itself a myth. POOF! It disappears because Genesis 1 is false. You're no different than a Muslim, believing nonsense BECAUSE it's written in a book that you've been told not to question. IF you believe that the earth is 6000 years old, you are a ridiculous person. That wasn't true in 1400, when we did not have modern scientific technique, but it is now, in 2018, for a Western-educated person who should know better and who has learned the scientific method, to persist in the LITERAL belief, and disbelief, in things that are so. If you're religion can't handle the truth, then it's a waste - and your religion CAN'T handle the truth. Just because Genesis isn't true doesn't make it worthless. Paul wrote something dramatic that isn't true either. ALL have sinned he wrote. That's bullshit. Babies have never sinned, not ever. And babies are 10% of the population. Paul would have been accurate if he had said 90% of people have sinned, but he said "ALL" and that's false. Now, YOU - in your relentless anger and bigotry - would scream at anybody who said "ALL" when the real number is 90%. You would say "You're a LIAR!" So, using YOUR favored discussion techniques, Paul's a LIAR. Both Genesis 1 at the beginning of the Bible, and Paul towards the end, both contain things that are not true - THEREFORE - again using YOUR terminology - the Bible is full of LIES. And because YOU say God wrote the Bible, then God is a liar, and liars are damned, so God is a Goddamned Liar, using YOUR argumentative method. Your method is chaotic and stupid, and leads you there. I am a more reasonable person. Paul was a man, an enthusiastic man. He never claimed equality with God, and he urged people towards Jesus, not towards worshiping Paul himself. He resorted to hyperbole, and wrote a bunch of letters without studying everything he ever wrote before that. Which means that there are lots of contradictions in Paul's letter, as would be expected when any man writes a lot, and passionately. SOME of those contradictions, and SOME of those things that are not literally true (such as "ALL have sinned"), are simply hyperbole. Yes, Paul, a man, is permitted to use hyperbole in his writings. No, the fact that some men decided to include Paul's letters in a book that the men called "The Bible" does not magically convert Paul's hyperbole into infallible truth. YOU'RE the one who believes it does. But given that there are failures and falsehoods and myths all over Scripture, you're pushed further and further into defending the indefensible, until finally you resort to your own hyperbole, which is: "Every word is true because I believe it is, and if you don't then you're wrong and your religion is false!" What a load of hooey. Yet that is precisely what you and your co-religionists believe. You have dug yourself a pit of self-willed ignorance that you can't be talked out of, and consider yourselves holy - the more ridiculous and counterfactual, the more your faith must be true. In this, you are the carbon copy of the Muslims: ignorant fanatics. As far as morality goes, I see a man - you - who hates the poor - and I see your co-religionists arguing for the morality of slavery. Which means you're evil and opposed to God - and you use your little book - your idol, with all of it errors - as proof of that. And you're angry that the world doesn't buy your the bullshit of your false religion. Now, here's the thing, I'm ALSO angry that Catholic priests have molested boys and the Church has covered it up. I'm not happy at the accumulations of wealth in the Church (though the valuable artwork at the Vatican does not trouble me: the Vatican is, for all intents and purposes, a public museum of religious art. The only use of art is display, and the Vatican displays the work of masters for all to see. Should the Vatican sell it all to private owners and thereby deprive the public of the ability to see it? How would that be just? Or perhaps give it to public museums - but why do that when the Vatican already IS a public museum. Certainly the way that the Vatican was BUILT, FIVE HUNDRED YEARS AGO, with the sale of Indulgences, was a scandal that rightly enraged many, including Luther: he was right about that. But this is 2018, and carping endlessly about the "wealth" of the Church is dishonest. Artwork and buildings where worship is held, the patrimony of the past, isn't the sort of "wealth" that can be turned into anything than what it already is: a public museum of museum pieces - that people pay money to see. That money goes into the church coffers, and a great deal of that is used for charity all over the world. Could the Church be more efficient about that? Probably not. Already when one compares the various charitable organizations, the Catholic Church, with an 8% overhead cost, compares favorably to virtually every private charity and all public institutions. If you give $1 to a Church charitable fund, 8 cents of that will be used to keep the lights on and pay the salaries and upkeep of the religious, and 92 cents will be spent on the charity. Find any major charity that operates so efficiently at that scale? You can't. None exists. So despite the endless wailing and carping about the "wealth" of the Catholic Church, it's a BS complaint. But complaints about covering up pedophilia - that is legitimate. The complaint that priests should be allowed to marry is, likewise, legitimate. I don't defend the sins of the Catholic Church, past or present. I'm not angered by the ancient sins: men sin, and that was a long time ago. I am angered by the present, ongoing sin, and I won't defend it. You and your ilk, though, are not honest enough to examine the errors in your own organizations, or the evils in your beliefs - about the poor, for example. You're quick to judge the Catholics, collectively and individually, and you don't even SEE your own sins. It's the classic plank- in-the-eye that Jesus spoke of. Given that no real discussion is ever had with you: you just repeat the same stupid bullshit over and over. You believe in myths that are in the Bible. I don't. And I am able to, nevertheless, maintain my own respect for and use of the Bible EVEN THOUGH I recognize that it isn't all literally true, and EVEN THOUGH I recognize that literary forms such as hyperbole and poetry are used in it which means that parts cannot be taken literally. Other parts can be, and I am well-educated enough to be able to see the differences, which are obvious. Also, I don't believe that the Bible is the "Constitution" of the Church, or the final authority, or anything like what you believe. Nor does the Bible ever say that it is. The Church WROTE the Bible, and the authority of God is expressed primarily through the Church. The Bible is a book written by men. It contains some of the words of God, including those words that impart the authority to the Church that I believe the Church has. My beliefs are consistent with what modern science has taught me, with what the Church traditions are, and also with my own moral authority, which comes from being a creature of God close to God. When it comes down to a conflict, my own moral sense ALWAYS is superior in authority to the Bible and to the Church also, as it must me. Jesus tells people to tear out their eyes and cut off their limbs if they can't resist sins. Origen as unable to resist the sin of masturbation, so he cut off his own penis and testicles. Was he right? He LITERALLY followed Jesus' commandments. Did Jesus mean those things literally? Or was Jesus using hyperbole to make a point? If you're a literalist, then praise Origen and follow his example. I've explained this, and more, to you many times. All you ever do is come back with more sarcastic juvenile crap. Same shit, over and over again. So yeah, I actually DO have more important things to do than to reiterate the same things, over and over again. I made no magic show of two things raised from the dead. I state factually what God did with me. Those things happened. You mock them and mock me. That's certainly your right. I never said get rid of that bad book. For a man who claims to be devoted to God you are such a serial liar, and you mock what God has done. This is another reason that it's a waste of my time. You are an unwitting agent of the Devil, and you are going to rage against the truth whenever and wherever you see it. And then you will die, and you will see the truth. Until then, you're going to do what you do. With regards to me, that means marching right alongside of your buddy VxH, saying exactly the same lies, in the same way, and making the same false accusations about what I have supposedly said and done, over and over again. To converse with you is to be mocked by a liar who mocks God. Your hatred of the poor is mocking God, and you don't even understand the Bible you claim to profess. So why, exactly, do you want to have more conversation with me? What is the point. I recognize that this is a waste of time: you're a poorly educated bigot who lies a lot, and a nasty evil person. This is why I really did mistake you for VxH: you sound like him, you do the same thing he does. I would bet that you're both the same Protestant religion, and you praise your self- deceit as faith. As I said, God never called me to be a teacher. He did remonstrate with me to be a peacemaker, and communicating with you two does not keep the peace. So yeah, actually, I do have more important things than to go over this same dull, tired ground with you again and again. I'm not your teacher. You won't listen to the man you proclaim is your Savior, so what's to be done with you? Just put up with your abuse? I do. But I shouldn't.
You're right, I am special to God. And you're not. Go figure out why.
Why do you insist on slandering me? Did you throw the 10 commandments in the trash too.
No need for Jesus then Huh. No original sin, no need for redemption. Your have revealed your views to be even more sinister than you have ever let on before.
My friends are the poor. I don't live in a McMansion in Connecitut. I'm not an elitest saying I am special according to God and you are not. That is what you say. You really cannot handle criticism very well. Why again aren't you a hypocrite when you say God doesn't heal anyone then you say he healed you?
Comments (41 - 83) not displayed.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#2. To: Deckard (#0)
#3. To: Deckard (#0)
“As far as decision-making, it is a partnership,” he continued, stressing nonetheless that “at the end of the day it is about the protection of Israel – and if there is a question in regards to how we will operate, the last vote will probably go to Zvika [Brig.-Gen. Zvika Haimovitch, head of the IDF’s Aerial Defense Division].”
#4. To: A K A Stone (#1)
#5. To: Vicomte13 (#2)
Example: When US forces deployed into the trenches of the Western Front, in France in 1918, the Supreme Commander of Allied Forces was Field Marshall Ferdinand Foch of the French Army.
#6. To: Deckard (#0)
Go Pound NEOCon Sand!
#7. To: All (#6)
Ukraine expects Israel to recognize Holodomor as act of genocide
#8. To: Vicomte13 (#2)
Similarly, we would assume that in the event of a shooting war in Israel sufficient to require the US Army to actually intervene in the field, that there would be a supreme allied commander. If the fight is in Israel, given Israeli integrated air defense, security forces, etc., relative size of the forces, it is logical that US forces would be integrated into the Israeli forces under Israeli command. That would make logical sense.
#9. To: VxH (#6)
"Lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) rights in Israel are the most tolerant in the Middle East, and among the most tolerant in Asia.
#10. To: Tooconservative (#8)
#11. To: Vicomte13 (#10)
#12. To: Vicomte13 (#10)
But we didn't do that.
#13. To: Vicomte13 (#9)
(Edited)
Some bozos buttfugging has no real impact on my life
#14. To: A K A Stone (#11)
You Catholics never read Ezekiel huh?
#15. To: Vicomte13 (#14)
#16. To: VxH (#13)
Oh. Right. Says the apple who fell from the crazy tree. I guess the moral framework of the HIV infested care taker who you claim stole your all your money had nooooo impact at all.
#17. To: A K A Stone (#15)
Wrong!
#18. To: A K A Stone (#12)
No we didn't did we. Histories course cannot be altered even by Catholics conspiring with Nazis to wipe Jews from the earth.
#19. To: Vicomte13 (#17)
I guess you don't believe Ezekiel.
#20. To: Vicomte13 (#18)
No we didn't did we. Histories course cannot be altered even by Catholics conspiring with Nazis to wipe Jews from the earth. You care more about Jews than you do your own people. This is how Protestantism makes people stupid.
#21. To: Vicomte13 (#17)
I guess you don't believe Ezekiel.
#22. To: Vicomte13 (#21)
#23. To: A K A Stone (#21)
Since revelation relates to Genesis. I guess you can throw Genesis in the trash too.
#24. To: A K A Stone (#22)
How many other books should be removed from the Bible?
#25. To: Vicomte13 (#24)
The only language in the Bible I take as authority are the direct words of Christ given as commandments.
#26. To: A K A Stone (#22)
How many other books should be removed from the Bible?
#27. To: Vicomte13 (#26)
The only parts of the Bible that I consider to be authority from God that apply to ME
#28. To: A K A Stone (#25)
I just don't get people who claim to believe in God but think they are smarter then God and pick and choose which parts they want to.
#29. To: Vicomte13 (#28)
od healed my broken neck, raised two dead animals in my hands, drove away a physical demon, and talks to me out loud.
#30. To: A K A Stone (#27)
Listen to Vic not the Bible. He knows more.
#31. To: Vicomte13 (#28)
#32. To: A K A Stone (#29)
You sound kooky when you talk about raising dead animals from the grave.
#33. To: Vicomte13 (#32)
I don't CARE about the Bible
#34. To: Vicomte13 (#28)
God healed my broken neck, raised two dead animals in my hands, drove away a physical demon, and talks to me out loud.
#35. To: Vicomte13 (#34)
So you're right - I have absolutely no belief at all that Christ will reach down from heaven and protect Christians from any diseases, or marauding enemies, or starvation, or natural disaster
#36. To: A K A Stone (#35)
Yes Vic he has more important things to do. Like help you with your magic show of raising lizards and cockroaches from the dead. And healing your neck (not anyone else though because you said so) because you are special and he needs you to get rid of that bad book the Bible that is full of errors.
#37. To: A K A Stone (#35)
because you are special
#38. To: Vicomte13 (#36)
bigotry
#39. To: Vicomte13 (#36)
The Creation myth in Genesis 1 is just that - a myth.
#40. To: Vicomte13 (#36)
Your hatred of the poor is mocking God
.
.
.
[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]