Skip to comments.
Bush demands Israel's blood
WorldNetDaily ^
| November 22, 2003
| Mike Evans
Posted on 11/22/2003 2:40:17 PM PST by joesnuffy
Edited on 11/22/2003 2:58:23 PM PST by Admin Moderator.
[history]
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-43 next last
To: cookcounty
Why should Israel dismantle unauthorized outposts? Should Israel dismantle unauthorized building by palestinian Arabs as well? If not, why the double standard?
What are the daily humiliations of the palestinian arabs? This is inflammatory language. Have you ever stopped beating your wife?
21
posted on
11/22/2003 4:19:35 PM PST
by
Piranha
To: joesnuffy
God himself sent an army against Jeruselum and destroyed it, not one stone standing. They are an arrogant stiff necked people who need to listen. A jew without Christ is no different than a muslim without Christ. The choice is theirs.
22
posted on
11/22/2003 4:19:39 PM PST
by
BriarBey
To: LarryM
The truth is that Bush is too weak to defend our country and has his lips surgically attached to the butt of the Saudi despotYour post is understandable after 8 years of steadfast leadership from Bubba, who could possibly be seen as strong when replacing such a patriotic and pro American leader?
23
posted on
11/22/2003 4:22:30 PM PST
by
EGPWS
To: BriarBey
Hey, BriarBey, what do you think about all of the Christians tortured and killed and driven out of Lebanon, Bethlehem, Egypt, Iraq, etc.? I guess their acceptance of Jesus was insincere?
24
posted on
11/22/2003 4:23:54 PM PST
by
Piranha
To: ml/nj
I keep hoping that some of Bush's comments (E.g. "religion of peace") have been made for public consumption, but unfortunately his actions (maybe not in regars to Israel) indicate that he might actually believe some of these things he has been saying.Keep a visionary attitude for "knee jerk reaction" is not a very appealing attitude to see in the President of the most powerful nation in the world.
25
posted on
11/22/2003 4:29:22 PM PST
by
EGPWS
To: Piranha
And your point is? Acceptance of Jesus is the only answer and He told us some of us would be killed for our beliefs.
What is insincere about that? I think he was pretty sincere. The only way to the Father is thru the Son, and without that man's ONLY hope is death eternal. Sorry I don't get your reply.
26
posted on
11/22/2003 4:53:11 PM PST
by
BriarBey
To: BriarBey
My point is that I don't understand what you mean.
As I understand your thinking, if Jews (or Muslims, as in the case of Turkey) are killed, it means that they had this coming because they didn't accept Jesus. If Maronite Christians are killed in Lebanon (there is another string going on right now about jihad against Lebanese Christians), or Coptic Christians are oppressed in Egypt, or palestinian Christians are thrown out of Jesus' birthplace of Bethlehem, or Assyrian Christians are oppressed in Iraq, this is somehow irrelevant.
What's your answer to Islamist terrorism? Ignore it, because those who have accepted Jesus are not going to be harmed?
I think that your religious beliefs, however sincerely you hold them, are not the answer to Islamist murder.
I also don't understand what your religious beliefs have to do with President Bush's policies toward Israel? By the way, he is a practicing Christian, and he seems to have a true love and admiration for Israel (except when he is selling it down the river). How do you explain that, BriarBey?
27
posted on
11/22/2003 5:03:01 PM PST
by
Piranha
To: joesnuffy
Bush demands Israel's blood Four hundred American soldiers have been killed since June
And about 2000 have been injured. Israel is the one the main beneficiaries of the elimination of the Saddam regime. Does this mean that: "Sharon Demands America's Blood"?
To: Piranha
ok..this is what I think, hope I can make it sound right. I believe that Believers (some call them christians) are the sons of Issac. I believe muslims are the sons of Ishmael. BOTH were told they would be great nations. I believe people get lost and deceived and this is just the way it is, you can't wipe wickedness off the face of the earth. I believe we should fight for freedom and to see people free but they should also learn to fight for themselves. The sons of Ishmael have always loved fighting and wars from the start. That is what they do. As for people getting killed, no one has it coming for any reason, this is life, WE DIE, there are bad people who just don't care about the value of life, and they take it or we just keel over from old age....death is death, you can't stop it.
My Faith and my Hope is in God's blood sacrifice for me. I believe what he said, I believe in the gift he gave me, eternal life. Doesn't mean I have more privileges here or I do or don't deserve to die, I am just going to die. But you won't keep me down, I'll just wait. ALL you are seeing is the playing out of HUMAN nature devoid of the spirit of the living God. We are not puppets we have a freedom to do as we please and that is pretty much what we are doing.
Pres. Bush is doing what his denomination has taught him to do and that is defend Israel, according to church doctrine, protecting Israel will bring blessings..........ok.....what if all our protection doesn't make that happen. Did God actually say that the way we thought he did or was it a ploy by religion to protect something God cursed a long time ago. I Don't know....I have lots of questions, and sometimes we just have to watch it play out to know the truth of it. I don't even profess to have all the answers, I just have faith thay my Father will never leave me nor forsake me.......dead or alive. He never has thus far.
29
posted on
11/22/2003 7:37:17 PM PST
by
BriarBey
To: ml/nj
I love Ronald Regan but tell me, what exactly did he do for Israel?
To: TheBattman
Ah, so what you are telling me is that the french and the Israelis have more in common than any of us realized.
To: McGavin999
French + Israelis? Huh?
32
posted on
11/22/2003 9:36:17 PM PST
by
TheBattman
(It's Adam and Eve, not Adam and Steve....)
To: McGavin999
Sometimes it's what one doesn't do. But this line from the "Reagan Plan," kind of sums it up:
When the border is negotiated between Jordan and Israel, our view on the extent to which Israel should be asked to give up territory will be heavily affected by the extent of true peace and normalization and the security arrangements offered in return.
This plan was viewed quite negatively by the Israelis. But look at what he was saying. Israel would keep a portion of the West Bank and what it didn't keep would revert to Jordan. There was no negotiating with Arafat, or any other "Palestinian." Much of the Reagan attitude was summed up in this Feb '82 letter to Began:
His Excellency
Menachem Begin
Prime Minister of the
State of Israel
Jerusalem
Dear Menachem:
Recent press reports have presented incorrect and exaggerated commentary regarding U.S. military assistance policies for the Middle East.
I want you to know that America's policy toward Israel has not changed. Our commitments will be kept. I am determined to see that Israel's qualitative technological edge is maintained and am mindful as well of your concerns with respect to quantitative factors and their impact upon Israel's security.
The policy of this government remains as stated publicly by me. Secretary Haig's and Secretary Weinberger's statements on the public record are also clear. There has been no change regarding our military supply relationship with Jordan, and Secretary Weinberger brought me no new requests. Any decision on future sales to Jordan or any other country in the region will be made in the context of my Administration's firm commitment to Israel's security and the need to bring peace to the region.
Israel remains America's friend and ally. However, I believe it is in the interests of both our countries for the United States to enhance its influence with other states in the region. I recognize the unique bond between the United States and Israel and the serious responsibilities which this bond imposes on us both.
Sincerely
(signed)
Ron
There hasn't been a US administration as supportive of Israel since Reagan. Before he was President, Reagan wrote on the subject of Palestine (3/27/79), "You see the truth is there was no nation called Palestine." (See
Reagan - In His Own Hand p. 215) As with other aspects of his world view, his Administration was what he believed.
ML/NJ
33
posted on
11/23/2003 6:37:14 AM PST
by
ml/nj
To: ml/nj
Ah, I see, so Reagan was better for Israel because he did nothing and Bush is seeks the blood of Israelis because he seeks to do something.
I get it.
To: McGavin999
I get it. I don't think you do.
ML/NJ
35
posted on
11/23/2003 9:57:02 AM PST
by
ml/nj
To: HankReardon
It is all Israel. There is and never was a nation named Palestine. Correct me if I'm wrong, I'd want to know.
You're partly wrong. There was a nation for the arabs living in Palestine, but no, it wasn't called Palestine. It was carved out of what was slated to be Israel. It is called Jordan. They took the land set aside for the Jews (who at the time were called Palestinians) and at the last minute gave the lions share to the arabs living in Palestine.
36
posted on
11/23/2003 10:03:13 AM PST
by
gitmo
(Stability cannot be purchased at the expense of liberty. -GWB)
To: ml/nj
Oh I get it more than you realize. It's you who don't get it. Re-read the first sentence of Reagan's letter, then try to wake up a little so you'll be able to figure out what's going on before you alienate the strongest supporter Israel has ever had.
To: ml/nj
I don't recall the Gipper calling for a Palestinian State.Correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't recall even Clinton calling for a Palestinian State.
IMO, the Palistinians already have a State. It's called Jordan.
38
posted on
11/23/2003 10:21:41 AM PST
by
templar
To: BriarBey
A jew without Christ is no different than a muslim without Christ. Except, maybe, that they have different appointed roles to play in the end times.
39
posted on
11/23/2003 10:29:56 AM PST
by
templar
To: McGavin999
Re-read the first sentence of Reagan's letter Which was:
Recent press reports have presented incorrect and exaggerated commentary regarding U.S. military assistance policies for the Middle East.
Let me know when you find something that Reagan said that wasn't true. Then let me know what you think about Bush's consistent calls for a "Palistinian" state. As poster
templar points out in #38, even Clinton didn't do that.
ML/NJ
40
posted on
11/23/2003 11:39:28 AM PST
by
ml/nj
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-43 next last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson