Posted on 07/08/2005 12:59:23 PM PDT by phoenix_004
It is your opinion, that the IRA were Christian. It is not mine.
Again, if can you provide a URL to a story that describes anyone at any time for any purpose "gunning down a clinic".
"Well Mohammad had a great incentive program, 77 virgins. I would consider joining if he offered some sort of dental or health plan. Some of them really need it."
LOL. What happens though after they are de-flowered :^)
Doesnt seem like a good deal to me...
"It's not an attack against Christianity. They are attacking all people who do not adhere to their fundamentalist beliefs and that includes other muslims. Don't lose sight of the big picture."
I understand that. It's easy to see from the attacks on Riyadh that Christians are not exclusive...
That's the first time I've heard this... where does this come from?
the latest (for now rumor))
U.K.: French Man Missing After Blasts
July 08, 2005 2214 GMT
A French resident of North African origin has been identified as recently missing after going to London three weeks ago, French security sources told Stratfor on July 8. They added the man -- Slimane Ihab, 24, from Lyon, France -- was said to have boarded the underground on the morning of July 7 but has not been heard of since, while his cell phone was confirmed to be out of order. The sources said they are not sure whether he had anything to do with the July 7 blasts in London but that his disappearance is under investigation.
The target is undoubtedly the Salafi, and with them, a group with sufficient employment to pay for the junk they use to kill people.
First off, we've got to make sure no one hires Salafi, nor gives them a bank account. Secondly, they must be clearly identified as being inherently prone to unbidden violence ~ which means we no longer have to treat them as "unlawful combatants", or even criminals, but rather as escaped criminally insane mental patients.
I think they get sent to the wood chipper.
Go figure.
I guess these guys have a tough choice to make, then.
Be hated vs. not telling
Life is full of choices.
If that were true they would cease to be Muslims. Islam has been a scourge on the planet since its inception.
What would it matter if 99% of Muslims were not sympathetic to terrorists? It would simply mean that 99% of them see no evil and are content to let the 1% terrorize the planet. Islam, after all, means "submission".
Wait a second. When you go quoting the Bible please put it in the right context. The Bible does not state to go whack anyone that doesn't believe in our one God, their Koran does and they justify their behavior with the passage of destruction of the infidel.
If I suspected that you knew, or could reasonably have known something about the last IRA bombing, I would ask you about it. And indeed, many Irish Catholics did place the safety and security of the greater populace above their own misguided beliefs and helped to both solve and prevent further acts of terrorism. Not so with the vast majority of the islamofasicists - no outpouring of help, few words (very few) against these acts, no national or international condemnation of these acts by either Muslim governments or clerics. Instead, we are seemingly surrounded by Islamic clerics who still call for jihad to this day...
Islam is the religion of PEACE..........blahhhhhhhhhh! Profile, profile, profile. When will the wacko's on the nutty left get it? Never I would guess!
If one substituted 'Jihadists' for 'IRA' and 'Muslims' for 'Christians' then couldn't Muslims say the same thing?
No, because the Koran doesn't have the equivalent to "Turn the other cheek", love thy neighbor, and forgiveness. However, there does come a point where we have to defend our families, friends, nation and yes, our faiths from the assault by islamisists and leftists.
They don't have to be vigilantes, but *could* at least drop a dime on people they might know to be mass murders. If they really care, then they should do *something*.
Okay, let's examine it in context then. Exodus 22 is a continuation of the oration delivered by Moses to the Israelites after God revealed his commandments to him.
Exodus 20 laid out the 'big ten', and then Exodus 21 and 22 elaborated on the detailed finer points, including the permissiveness of owning Hebrew slaves, by the way.
The specific passage I cited, 'He that sacrificeth unto any god, save unto the LORD only, he shall be utterly destroyed' is but one of many crime and punishment commandments listed. The two prior are 'Thou shalt not suffer a witch to live' and 'Whosoever lieth with a beast shall surely be put to death'.
Please tell me how I am misinterpreting the context of this commandment.
Yeah.
Muhammad wrote a book.
His followers believe him.
I study history.
Look at the founders of the religions.
Jesus could have called down legions of angels to destroy the world when they went to crucify him. But he did not.
Muhammad commanded legions of his followers to destroy the world (well, at least those inhabitants thereof who refused to convert to Islam).
His followers continue to obey his commands.
Unfortunately, I don't think you are correct in this statement.
Unfortunately, it will take at least a dozen 9-11's to make the people in this country WAKE UP and smell the coffee and realize who the enemy really IS!
Oh, Muslims may try to say the same thing, but it doesn't work. Their religion and culture has condoned and encouraged the rise of their brethren terrorists. If it hadn't they would have taken care of the problem a long time ago.
Maybe if a bunch of IRA-types ever fly into one of our buildings and murder 3,000 people, the US will have reason to go after them too. But for now, the Brits should take care of their own turf.
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.
