Posted on 10/18/2003 6:09:36 AM PDT by RJCogburn
Edited on 04/13/2004 2:10:54 AM PDT by Jim Robinson. [history]
An excellent point. I suggest we sent the 9 dwarves to Pakistan. There they can walk about, unarmed, and tell all they meet how much they respect the dominant "religion of peace". They'll end up like that bear-loving wacko in Alaska, who used to go up to wild grizzlies and say, "I love you". His last words, recorded on tape, begged his girlfriend to do something to stop the bear from eating him. Alas, the girlfriend was the second course.
I think the General was wrong - not so much in what he said, as in saying it. I learned at an early age it is sometimes better to remain silent, and punch hard! The General's comments have given terrorists a stick to beat America with. He would have been wiser to let his actions speak for themselves. IMHO.
Somebody should look into this, Senator, maybe a House Committee on Un-American Activities?
In the 1992 election, Bill Clinton got 75% of the secularist vote, while the current President's father received support from traditionalists (church-goers) by 2 to 1. That pattern held in the 2000 election. "In terms of their size and party loyalty," Messrs. Bolce and De Maio argue, "secularists today are as important to the Democratic party as another key constituency, organized labor."Journalists evidently covered the general's speech and published his remark for the purpose of persecuting him for his religious belief. The other Democrats, the ones running for POTUS, have picked up that opportunity to criticize a Christian. That plays to the Democratic base, and may be necessary to win the nomination, but the sentiment is also inherently unconstitutional for a POTUS to act on-- no less so than requiring a general to be a Christian would be. Can the Colonels also be required to not be Christians? The Lieutenants? The Sergents? The Privates? And would it matter that the Christian soldier happened to be black?
Where, precisely, do these nonsense-talkers think to find a reliable American military, if atheistic Democrats (who don't have much tendency to become officers, as Gore implicitly acknowledged by trying to suppress the military absentee vote in Florida) are to constitute the entire pool of qualified officers?
The unspoken conceit that Islamacism is a monster which will eat atheists (or, in Lieberman's case, Jews!) last is laughable. What must happen instead is that the American military model First Amendment freedom of religion for Iraq, making no effort to persecute moslems but exerting influence for religious freedom for Iraq's minorities, not excluding its Christians. Such a polity established in Iraq would represent a defeat for Islamicism and for the atheistic Democratic Party.
Democrats love "The First Amendment" as they pretend it to be (with a "wall of seperation" to suppress religion), and actually loathe the First Amendment in its concrete form. They want to establish atheism or at least agnosticism as the religion of the state, they want to establish journalism as infallible when speaking ex cathedra. In short they think contrary opinions to theirs are to be suppressed as "racist" or some such.
On the other hand, it is known that Jews who behave like other free men and women usually anger the anti-semites!
The enemy of freedom is the anti-semite, not the Jew who might act as if he were as free as anybody!
That is, apart from the fact that he was one of the soldiers chosen by A-G Reno's Justice dept. to plan the assault on the Davidian complex at Waco.
Still, within the context of the discussion none of that matters ~ we were discussing his religious beliefs, not those of Billzo's cousin, David Koresh.
That's probably pretty much what happened in Spain as little kingdoms moved from one side to the other. In the end, the organized Jewish affinity for kowtowing to the Moslems was a mistake. They were expelled along with remaining practicing Moslems!
Over the centuries, this position has been reconsidered and rejected. It was replaced with a forthright Zionist point of view which holds that Jews need not lick Islam's boots.
Lieberman would seem to be out of synch with modern Jewish thought on the matter.
That's a full half a millenium AFTER the Crusades!
Call the White House comment line or e-mail the President - to stand behind his General. Then read this and pass it on.
http://www.townhall.com/columnists/davidlimbaugh/dl20031017.shtml
Good Lord, and this isn't? Kennedy's remarks about war motivations hit a new low... http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1003488/posts
If you do nothing else this morning do this...!http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1002647/posts
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.