The Syrian "Revolution": A Farce from Beginning to End

[dumbest man on earth]

I asked you to stop posting off-topic and posting your anti-semitic rubbish. Just because you leave out the words Jews and Israel, does not hide the fact that you are still pushing the same anti-semitic ideology and lies to perpetuate the stereotype you seem to believe in.

I am not going to feed your OCD tendencies to count how many times I asked you to stop. What matters is that you were asked to stop. And instead of doing so, you have kept pushing the exact same rubbish.

So I will ask you one last time. Stop posting your conspiracy theory and anti-semitic theories about who controls the media.

Understand now?

Bells, I am not sure - here is what I, dmoe, understand from your Post so far:

1.) - you, Bells, ask that I,dmoe, stop posting what you, Bells, perceive and believe to be "off-topic rubbish" - check?!

2.) - you, Bells, ask that I,dmoe, stop posting what you, Bells, perceive and believe to be "anti-semitic rubbish" - check?!

3.) - you, Bells, believe that of all of the, literally, thousands of words that I "leave out" of my Posts, that by also leaving out the words "Jews" and "Israel" in some of those Posts - you, Bells, then perceive and believe that I, dmoe, am "hiding" something. - check?!

4.) - you, Bells, perceive and believe that I, dmoe, am "pushing the same anti-semitic ideology and lies to perpetuate the stereotype" - (that I, dmoe) - " seem to believe in." - check?!

5.) - you, Bells, perceive and believe that I, dmoe, have "OCD tendencies to count how many times" you, Bells, "asked", me, dmoe, "to stop". - check?!

6.) - you, Bells, BELIEVE the only thing "that matters is that you were asked to stop. And instead of doing so, you have kept pushing" what you, Bells, perceive and believe to be "the exact same rubbish." - check?!

7.) - you, Bells, are asking me, dmoe, "one last time" to "Stop posting" what you, Bells, perceive and believe to be a "conspiracy theory" and "anti-semitic theories about who controls the media." - check?!

Do you, Bells, perceive and believe that I, dmoe, understand?

............. Response.............

Bells, I, dmoe, KNOW that most of your, Bells, perceptions of me and my Posts are wrong!

1.) - other than my responses to accusations and allegations, my Postings are on the topic of this Thread.

2.) - how or what you, Bells, perceive from reading my Postings is entirely of your manufacture, not mine.

3.) - I am hiding nothing. Your, Bells, focus on the words "Jews" and "Israel" are entirely of your manufacture, not mine.

4.) - your, Bells, perceptions and beliefs of what I do, in actual fact believe in are entirely wrong! And, again, are entirely of your manufacture, not mine.

5.) - your, Bells, armchair diagnosis of any "OCD" is wrong! And, again, is entirely of your manufacture, not mine.

6.) - ??!!?? - How am I to know - prior to Posting anything in a Free, Open and Public Forum - how you, Bells, will perceive it or believe it?

7.) - !!??!! - Again, how am I to know - prior to Posting anything in a Free, Open and Public Forum - how you, Bells, will perceive it or believe it?

Bells, I may be offended by the name-calling and the inane allegations, accusations and drivel that I, dmoe, have been subjected to and endured on this Thread.
I have faced those repeated puerile and obviously biased attacks like an adult should, with what I, dmoe, believe to be reasonable, rational, honest, responsible, and oft times, repeated attempts to clarify and explain my Post(s).

Bells, believe me, I know things can be offensive - but as an individual, it is up to me not to let my personal biases or feelings lead me into perceiving or believing something that is not in reality, actually happening, actually occurring,
actually taking place and most importantly, actually being said or stated.

Are any biases, prejudices, preconceptions or mis-perceptions preventing me from being understood?

 

[Bells]

Stop pretending to be dumb, you are a smart woman. USA is starting this war on its own and before it gets permission from the government branches, it needs to sway public opinion with every possible option possible. If that means to kill innocent people just to start a war, that is the length US is going at.

What a shame USA is able to control its citizens that they blindly believe every lie they are being told. What a shame that other countries are joining this lie to protect their own companies and their subsiduaries in Syria. Bells, in Syria the so called "rebels" are terrorists from Al Quida, the same people that attacked WTC, are capable of using chemical weapons to stage what appears to be a government attack.

I see you are still the mouthpiece for the old motherland.

The reality is that Russia has done everything it can in the UN to make sure nothing can be done about Syria. The UN can't even condemn Assad because Russia vetoes it. Russia has a lot to lose if Assad loses this civil war. So Putin does all that he can to ensure Assad wins, from arming him, providing him with logistical support to protecting him in the UN. When Assad refused to allow access to the UN to the site where chemical weapons were used, Russia said sweet fuck all for days, you know, just to make sure the chemicals degraded before then saying 'yes, allow them in'.

It is easy for you to justify the mass murder of innocent civilians by calling the rebels terrorists. Meanwhile, Assad continues to murder innocent civilians by dropping bombs and napalm on schools. Let me guess, those kids are terrorists too?

You are nothing more than a shill for a mass murderer and the twats who support him.

Yes obviously a person watching CNN and FOX all day long as their "reliable information" source is on "right track" of how world actually is.

Considering I don't even get Fox or CNN in Australia (I refuse to even buy cable) and my TV is usually set solely to kids shows for my kids for the hour they are allowed to watch TV every day, you are clearly clutching at straws.

---

Bells, I am not sure - here is what I, dmoe, understand from your Post so far:

1.) - you, Bells, ask that I,dmoe, stop posting what you, Bells, perceive and believe to be "off-topic rubbish" - check?!

2.) - you, Bells, ask that I,dmoe, stop posting what you, Bells, perceive and believe to be "anti-semitic rubbish" - check?!

3.) - you, Bells, believe that of all of the, literally, thousands of words that I "leave out" of my Posts, that by also leaving out the words "Jews" and "Israel" in some of those Posts - you, Bells, then perceive and believe that I, dmoe, am "hiding" something. - check?!

4.) - you, Bells, perceive and believe that I, dmoe, am "pushing the same anti-semitic ideology and lies to perpetuate the stereotype" - (that I, dmoe) - " seem to believe in." - check?!

5.) - you, Bells, perceive and believe that I, dmoe, have "OCD tendencies to count how many times" you, Bells, "asked", me, dmoe, "to stop". - check?!

6.) - you, Bells, BELIEVE the only thing "that matters is that you were asked to stop. And instead of doing so, you have kept pushing" what you, Bells, perceive and believe to be "the exact same rubbish." - check?!

7.) - you, Bells, are asking me, dmoe, "one last time" to "Stop posting" what you, Bells, perceive and believe to be a "conspiracy theory" and "anti-semitic theories about who controls the media." - check?!

Do you, Bells, perceive and believe that I, dmoe, understand?

............. Response.............

Bells, I, dmoe, KNOW that most of your, Bells, perceptions of me and my Posts are wrong!

1.) - other than my responses to accusations and allegations, my Postings are on the topic of this Thread.

2.) - how or what you, Bells, perceive from reading my Postings is entirely of your manufacture, not mine.

3.) - I am hiding nothing. Your, Bells, focus on the words "Jews" and "Israel" are entirely of your manufacture, not mine.

4.) - your, Bells, perceptions and beliefs of what I do, in actual fact believe in are entirely wrong! And, again, are entirely of your manufacture, not mine.

5.) - your, Bells, armchair diagnosis of any "OCD" is wrong! And, again, is entirely of your manufacture, not mine.

6.) - ??!!?? - How am I to know - prior to Posting anything in a Free, Open and Public Forum - how you, Bells, will perceive it or believe it?

7.) - !!??!! - Again, how am I to know - prior to Posting anything in a Free, Open and Public Forum - how you, Bells, will perceive it or believe it?

Bells, I may be offended by the name-calling and the inane allegations, accusations and drivel that I, dmoe, have been subjected to and endured on this Thread.
I have faced those repeated puerile and obviously biased attacks like an adult should, with what I, dmoe, believe to be reasonable, rational, honest, responsible, and oft times, repeated attempts to clarify and explain my Post(s).

Bells, believe me, I know things can be offensive - but as an individual, it is up to me not to let my personal biases or feelings lead me into perceiving or believing something that is not in reality, actually happening, actually occurring,
actually taking place and most importantly, actually being said or stated.

Are any biases, prejudices, preconceptions or mis-perceptions preventing me from being understood?

The way you post and what you posts makes you look like a bigot on the rare occasions anyone can understand your posts. You rarely ever get to the point, but instead post in a bizarre manner which leads one to believe you have a problem or your computer is severely limited or you don't actually know how to use the quote function, or lastly, you have this inherent need to keep repeating the same thing over and over again. You link and post things from holocaust deniers and then have the temerity to be offended when you are rightly rebuked for posting such rubbish.

When you are warned about what you are posting and the stereotypes you are pushing on this site and in this thread, you then start to post in a way in which you try to hide your true intent, but one only has to read your previous posts in here to know you true leanings. So you can be as dishonest as you choose to be, I can assure you, you are not fooling anyone.

So the choice is yours. You can continue to post about world domination of the media by who you believe is controlling the media (again, you only have to read your previous posts in this thread to know who you blame for this) or you can stop with the moronic stereotypes you are trying to push as fact in this thread and as one pointed out earlier, make your point without referring to holocaust deniers and anti-semitic sites. Have I made myself understood now? Or do you require pictures?

 

[Robittybob1]

I don't watch tv, its all crap anyways. I compare different news websites for information. And conspiracies is a tall misplaced and misused word.

I think Christiane Amanpour interviews are the very best. CNN.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christiane_Amanpour

 

[GeoffP]

Fucking server lost my goddamn reply. I spent thirty minutes on that fisk, and it was a nice one. Fuck it, I'll short-form it.

First, actually all the evidence does not point to Assad. The Chinese 107mm rockets used in the attack are widely available, and used by insurgents in a number of places. The BND doesn't seem to think that the rebels could produce sarin, but sarin is actually easy to make: it was used in the Tokyo subway attack years ago. Moreover, one of CptBork's links has the BND saying that the rebels couldn't have the 107s, but again, they're easy to come by - a wide favourite among insurgents. I have respect for the BND, but that's a bit of a fundamental error to make. And several sources indicate that the rebels have used sarin before. One Hezbollah commander does not a fact make. You can’t run around saying “all evidence” when you’ve seen none of that actual evidence. We’re being asked to take each side’s word for it. Are you a BND agent now?

Second, I asked what the political disposition of the region struck was because I thought it might give some clue as to the attacker: if a government region, more likely a rebel attack, if a rebel region, more likely a government attack. You ran as hard as you could to fill in your own narrative as to my motivations, but only a retard could take such an argument seriously.

Third: I could almost believe French is your first language when I look at the posts in which you say I allege an American conspiracy. In the first, I say that I think Jones has misidentified security types – that is, that he’s calling them suspicious when in fact they’re security. I’m not sure how an English speaker could mistake this for anything else unless they tried really, really hard. In the second, I’m indicating my surprise at actually finding US army-type security guys in a crowd at a marathon. Maybe this is common in Australia, but I’ve never seen it. It does not mean that I think they were involved, or that the whole thing was some kind of false-flag attack. I linked Jones because he had pictures, and had found some interesting suspicious bags lying around and circled them; crazy he may be, but had found a few interesting patterns. I don’t think it was a sekrit American plot, and I never have. I hope that’s clear; or at least I would hope that’s clear. The next time you purportedly don’t understand one of my posts, just ask me about it. I guarantee it will be more efficient for everyone.

Fourth: I asked about the political position of the areas struck because I thought that they might provide more support for one or another side being responsible: if opposition-held, Syrian responsibility; if Syrian-held, opposition. All regions were in fact held by the rebels, which supports Syrian culpability. I appreciate that you ran with that supposition as hard and as long as you could, but it simply isn't so.

Fifth: the report only says that the French writers were disposed to think that the Assad regime struck them. The sentence amounts to that and nothing more. There is no 'smoking gun'. The attack on Damas they consider to be confirmed as being from Assad (and I agree), but Ghota amounts to a likelihood, not a certitude, while you present it as the latter. There's an order of battle, a blurb on the history of CWs in Syria, a report on an earlier helicopter attack using gas - which I agree must be attributed to Assad, simply via the use of helis - and a correlation in time between the attack and activity at military bases in the area for the Ghota attack. They mention a "massive and coordinated attack", which argues in favour of Assad's guilt, but I don't know what the extent of the rebels' abilities really is, and I don't think they do either; what they have is assertion. There is no order of battle given for the SFA and it is exceedingly dubious that they would have no capacity to produce sarin (see above on the Tokyo attack). Some of the sites hit are also too far from Syrian government lines (> 8 km) to have been hit by 107mm rockets. Al-Mezzeh airbase is mentioned in the report, but if the French are alleging the firing took place from there (the nearest of the two airbases, Mezzah and Dummar), only two of the sites are actually within range of the 107mm. It's possible that sarin rounds are lighter, but I have no information on this.

And finally: French is not exactly a hard language to translate, Bells. Why exactly would you think I thought you were unable to produce your own translation? You already posted a translated section in an earlier page! I just don’t believe in doing your work for you. Now, I don’t actually believe French was your first language – I think you just ran Google Translate or one of the other multitude of online tools - but either way, I'm not sure how you could really believe that I thought it was inaccessible to you. I hope you’ll be honest about your replies, if any.

 

[dumbest man on earth]

Bells, you are fast! I posted my Post #701 at 10:00 pm.

You read my Post, then composed and typed your response to youreyes. Then you composed and typed your response to me.
You were able to do all that, and still be able to get your Post #702 Posted by 10:01 pm.

That is fast.
In the event that I didn't get to my point fast enough or state it clearly enough...I will restate my opening statement!

Bells, you are fast! I posted my Post #701 at 10:00 pm.

 

[GeoffP]

Oh, and the "Mother Russia subservience" thing was awesomely funny. That kind of thing you can definitely post more of, please. Thanks.

Da zdravstvuet Matushka Rossiya! :rofl:

 

[milkweed]

I havent paid much attention to syria. I had wondered Why Libya (stepping in to oust Gaddafi) and not Syria. Oil of course, follow the money.

But now the talk has changed and I am not keen on bombing another middle east country. None of this has gone well regardless of our 'involvement'. Egypt just ousted their democratically elected extremist. Iran's civil war against a dictator produced extremist government. We backed the wrong people in afghanistan leading to the taliban. etc.

So I spent some time yesterday watching youtube videos. As I drifted around various youtube vids on syria I kept hearing the familiar allahu akbar chant. I kept wondering whos giving the rebs all this gear. Then I drifted off onto warlords of Liberia videos. And one former warlord talked about being trained by the US and how they were supposed to go to iraq (think gulf one) but that didnt happen.

Now I find out there is a pipeline (follow the money). Interesting vid here:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kji74CZEiXI

Who gives a shit about a pipeline? well saudis I guess. Interesting notes on the same girl appearing in multiple videos. Harsh comparisons with real gas attack victims.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fRrt9gtyAB4

While alex jones isnt my fav source of info, the yahoo link is still live. LOL a hacker gets into Brit defense contractor machine (thinking NSA email Snowden).

http://in.news.yahoo.com/us-backed-plan-launch-chemical-weapon-attack-syria-045648224.html

EDIT: Found this link. Daily Mail recants but yahoo link lives on. Hack isnt denied. Brits have different rules than US. So.. Unknown if allegations true or false.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/home/article-2311199/Britam-Defence-David-Goulding-Philip-Doughty.html

another report discussed in the alex jones part of vid 2:

http://www.mintpressnews.com/witnes...supplied-rebels-with-chemical-weapons/168135/

Assad is a prick but he is a moderate when compared to most of our 'allies' in the mid-east.

I believe we are being used just as Bush used us for Iraq. But then again, maybe the government is worried about bringing home the troops to no jobs, bad wages, etc. Some soviets did predict a civil war in the USA, though the timeline suggestion has passed.

 

[CptBork]

First, actually all the evidence does not point to Assad. The Chinese 107mm rockets used in the attack are widely available, and used by insurgents in a number of places. The BND doesn't seem to think that the rebels could produce sarin, but sarin is actually easy to make: it was used in the Tokyo subway attack years ago. Moreover, one of CptBork's links has the BND saying that the rebels couldn't have the 107s, but again, they're easy to come by - a wide favourite among insurgents. I have respect for the BND, but that's a bit of a fundamental error to make. And several sources indicate that the rebels have used sarin before. One Hezbollah commander does not a fact make. You can’t run around saying “all evidence” when you’ve seen none of that actual evidence. We’re being asked to take each side’s word for it. Are you a BND agent now?

Firstly, I'd like to state that if any professional western intelligence agency has not considered and debated virtually every serious, rational point contained in this entire thread and much, much more, it would not be a mere booboo, it would be an utter disgrace. You're reading into a heavily summarized version of the BND's analysis intended for public consumption and poking holes into the summarized argument, whereas I'm trusting that they've done their homework and a great deal of data and analysis underlies whatever conclusions they're publically announcing, things they'd be willing to take to a court of law if they were accused of fabrication. I don't believe the report said only Assad could have used the 107mm's, I think it specifically said that they were much more frequently used by Assad's forces than by the rebels, as a proportion of total munitions. Furthermore, I assume some form of analysis or estimate has been performed on rebel capabilities in order to rule out the possibility of a Tokyo terrorist scenario as you mention. Some differences of note off the top of my head: the Tokyo attacks occurred inside a closed train, whereas the Damascus attacks were spread over wide open areas and affected thousands in their homes, and there are also issues about being able to produce and store it in the right concentrations and release it in the right places at the right times- this would have been incredibly difficult to stage in conjunction with known activities by Assad's forces.

Second, I asked what the political disposition of the region struck was because I thought it might give some clue as to the attacker: if a government region, more likely a rebel attack, if a rebel region, more likely a government attack. You ran as hard as you could to fill in your own narrative as to my motivations, but only a retard could take such an argument seriously.

The affected regions were all under rebel control at the time of the attack, taking heavy Assad bombardment which quadrupled immediately after the sarin, and presumably pro-rebel in their leanings (which is the main reason rebels have been able to hold them).

Fifth: the report only says that the French writers were disposed to think that the Assad regime struck them. The sentence amounts to that and nothing more. There is no 'smoking gun'. The attack on Damas they consider to be confirmed as being from Assad (and I agree), but Ghota amounts to a likelihood, not a certitude, while you present it as the latter. There's an order of battle, a blurb on the history of CWs in Syria, a report on an earlier helicopter attack using gas - which I agree must be attributed to Assad, simply via the use of helis - and a correlation in time between the attack and activity at military bases in the area for the Ghota attack. They mention a "massive and coordinated attack", which argues in favour of Assad's guilt, but I don't know what the extent of the rebels' abilities really is, and I don't think they do either; what they have is assertion. There is no order of battle given for the SFA and it is exceedingly dubious that they would have no capacity to produce sarin (see above on the Tokyo attack). Some of the sites hit are also too far from Syrian government lines (> 8 km) to have been hit by 107mm rockets. Al-Mezzeh airbase is mentioned in the report, but if the French are alleging the firing took place from there (the nearest of the two airbases, Mezzah and Dummar), only two of the sites are actually within range of the 107mm. It's possible that sarin rounds are lighter, but I have no information on this.

Another thing people forget is that the Syrian army has all sorts of modified and improvised weaponry in its own arsenals, as they've been feeling a pinch despite all the Russian and Iranian support. Helicopter-dropped fuel barrel bombs are an example of such weapons in action, and the Syrian army has also been accused of manufacturing simple, improvised munitions to slowly and quietly release sarin gas without making it obvious, other than making a hissing sound. The amateurness of some of the armaments allegedly used in previous attacks doesn't automatically prove rebel culpability. Seems to me the main factor which has western agencies convinced that this was Assad's work was that they simply don't believe the rebels have the logistical ability to conduct and coordinate an attack of this nature on this scale and time it in conjunction with Assad's bombardments. Furthermore I'm sure there are many more communications intercepts than just the one released by the BND, in fact a week ago I referred to an Israeli claim that the IDF intercepted a Syrian commander giving the actual orders.

 

[CptBork]

I kind of find it ironic how the central argument from Shiite extremists is that Assad would never be crazy enough to gas his own people after killing and torturing hundreds of thousands, yet so many of them still believe Bush would have been crazy enough to try killing 3000 American civilians on 9/11.

 

[Robittybob1]

Lord Jesus,

The people all around the world would like an end to the fighting in Syria. Tell them to stop before it is too late. Tell them to stop. Both sides, tell them to stop Lord.

Amen.

 

[wegs]

Firstly, I'd like to state that if any professional western intelligence agency has not considered and debated virtually every serious, rational point contained in this entire thread and much, much more, it would not be a mere booboo, it would be an utter disgrace. You're reading into a heavily summarized version of the BND's analysis intended for public consumption and poking holes into the summarized argument, whereas I'm trusting that they've done their homework and a great deal of data and analysis underlies whatever conclusions they're publically announcing, things they'd be willing to take to a court of law if they were accused of fabrication. I don't believe the report said only Assad could have used the 107mm's, I think it specifically said that they were much more frequently used by Assad's forces than by the rebels, as a proportion of total munitions. Furthermore, I assume some form of analysis or estimate has been performed on rebel capabilities in order to rule out the possibility of a Tokyo terrorist scenario as you mention. Some differences of note off the top of my head: the Tokyo attacks occurred inside a closed train, whereas the Damascus attacks were spread over wide open areas and affected thousands in their homes, and there are also issues about being able to produce and store it in the right concentrations and release it in the right places at the right times- this would have been incredibly difficult to stage in conjunction with known activities by Assad's forces.



The affected regions were all under rebel control at the time of the attack, taking heavy Assad bombardment which quadrupled immediately after the sarin, and presumably pro-rebel in their leanings (which is the main reason rebels have been able to hold them).



Another thing people forget is that the Syrian army has all sorts of modified and improvised weaponry in its own arsenals, as they've been feeling a pinch despite all the Russian and Iranian support. Helicopter-dropped fuel barrel bombs are an example of such weapons in action, and the Syrian army has also been accused of manufacturing simple, improvised munitions to slowly and quietly release sarin gas without making it obvious, other than making a hissing sound. The amateurness of some of the armaments allegedly used in previous attacks doesn't automatically prove rebel culpability. Seems to me the main factor which has western agencies convinced that this was Assad's work was that they simply don't believe the rebels have the logistical ability to conduct and coordinate an attack of this nature on this scale and time it in conjunction with Assad's bombardments. Furthermore I'm sure there are many more communications intercepts than just the one released by the BND, in fact a week ago I referred to an Israeli claim that the IDF intercepted a Syrian commander giving the actual orders.

I'm against going to war, but if Syria violated humanitarian principles, and international law, and these points you make here are understood by the US government, why is the US hesitating?

I mean, I know the various concerns the US has in considering striking Syria, but isn't violating the use of chemical weapons reason enough to strike? See, if the US doesn't strike, then why should any other country adhere to the laws?

What a mess. :/

Further, this is not the US' sole problem, this affects the global community. Every country involved here should care to bring some type of justice due to these attacks. The media paints this picture that the US should stay out of it, and while I see nothing positive coming from striking, it should be a global effort to at least take an ethical stand against using chemical weapons. This is a global problem and it should be treated as such, and not a problem for only the US to sort out. Syria's heinous acts and violations are an injustice to every nation, and everyone should be personally grieved over what happened in Syria. If it could happen there, it could happen again elsewhere, especially if the world does nothing to react to it.

 

[Robittybob1]

@Wegs, Trooper and Bells

All of you seem pretty good at telling males to "stop!". How about endorsing my prayer, make it a viral prayer , send it out on Twitter , on YouTube, basically everywhere till it is heard.

"Lord Jesus,

The people all around the world would like an end to the fighting in Syria. Tell them to stop before it is too late. Tell them to stop. Both sides Lord, tell them to stop.

Amen."

 

[Tiassa]

Sure, right after I staple my balls to the doorknob ....

How about endorsing my prayer, make it a viral prayer , send it out on Twitter , on YouTube, basically everywhere till it is heard.

Because prayer is even less useful than war at times like these? No, really, war can accidentally do something useful from time to time.

Seriously, why do people think the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost are some kind of democracy?

Besides, it's football season in America. Jesus is busy rooting for Notre Dame and trying to figure out what the NFL never could—what Tim Tebow is actually good for.

Hey ...! Now there is an idea. Send Tebow to te-bow in Damascus, and pray to Jesus to stop the war. Come on, if Tim can't do it, no one can.

 

[Robittybob1]

Because prayer is even less useful than war at times like these? No, really, war can accidentally do something useful from time to time.

Seriously, why do people think the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost are some kind of democracy?

Besides, it's football season in America. Jesus is busy rooting for Notre Dame and trying to figure out what the NFL never could—what Tim Tebow is actually good for.

Hey ...! Now there is an idea. Send Tebow to te-bow in Damascus, and pray to Jesus to stop the war. Come on, if Tim can't do it, no one can.

If prayer is no good sing along with the other 8 billion Earthlings please.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GJwp_JCZ7Co
Mahalia Jackson & Dinah Shore - Study War No More

I know nothing about your NFL but He sure is going to make Team NZ kick the arse out of team Oracle. 2:Nil before it even starts!

 

[wegs]

I do believe in the power of prayer. I've asked myself where is God in this? Does he wish for mankind to sort out the problems its brought on itself? Mankind shouldn't look to God to clean up its messes, however and blame him when he won't. This pending war has been a long time in the making as are all wars. People don't care about faraway lands until something happens and they cant ignore it. But a persistent prayer asking for peace can't hurt.

 

[wegs]

Because prayer is even less useful than war at times like these? No, really, war can accidentally do something useful from time to time.

Seriously, why do people think the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost are some kind of democracy?

Besides, it's football season in America. Jesus is busy rooting for Notre Dame and trying to figure out what the NFL never could—what Tim Tebow is actually good for.

Hey ...! Now there is an idea. Send Tebow to te-bow in Damascus, and pray to Jesus to stop the war. Come on, if Tim can't do it, no one can.

I don't think my faith or God is a democracy.
Why is it ok to insult people who believe in God, here? I just don't get that.

 

[Robittybob1]

I don't think my faith or God is a democracy.
Why is it ok to insult people who believe in God, here? I just don't get that.

Let us all yell at the top of our voices "STOP. For God's sake STOP!"
We've done it here in little Levin.

 

[Robittybob1]

I do believe in the power of prayer. I've asked myself where is God in this? Does he wish for mankind to sort out the problems its brought on itself? Mankind shouldn't look to God to clean up its messes, however and blame him when he won't. This pending war has been a long time in the making as are all wars. People don't care about faraway lands until something happens and they cant ignore it. But a persistent prayer asking for peace can't hurt.

It's a one word prayer wegs it's just "STOP".
Nothing hard about it.
But I mean it!
Stop this stupidity you Syrians!

 

[wegs]

It's a one word prayer wegs it's just "STOP".
Nothing hard about it.
But I mean it!
Stop this stupidity you Syrians!

It's not just a Syrian problem, that's the thing.
Syria caused the attack but they are not alone. They have many who are not Syrian, ready to fight alongside them and who support what they did. That's the problem.

 

[Tiassa]

Fair Questions

I don't think my faith or God is a democracy.

Fair enough. It's true that I don't see you asking people to petition God, as if enough of us speaking out will somehow change His mind and make Him admit He made a mistake, and then actually go so far as to correct it.

(You'll notice, for instance, that when there were only two people in the whole world, and God's experiment went wrong just the way He intended it, He didn't simply wipe them out and try again. Apparently He plotted to rape a woman and then have the Offspring tortured and executed in order to save humanity from sin. Which, of course, only reminds that there really is no point in trying to use numbers to change God's mind. The faithful are already saved, and the rest shall suffer according to His will.)

Why is it ok to insult people who believe in God, here? I just don't get that.

The answer depends on the circumstance.

In some cases, for instance, it's because of religious people.

In others, it's because of religion.

Yes, the site has always generally favored atheistic rhetoric, but, hey, I never figured out what was so objectionable about not being part of the overwhelming majority of the world where you have to hear about this shit and not call people out for being completely full of it. That is to say, you know, people of faith have most of the world. What's wrong with asking them to abide by others' customs from time to time?

Look, if people want to talk theology, history, philosophy, psychology, or other such aspects of God and faith, that's one thing. But moronic evangelism is entirely another.

Why is it okay to insult people who believe in God? Well, I don't know, are all people of faith prone to idiotic statements like our neighbor made? And in asking that question, and allowing for a real answer, please realize that I am excluding from evidence the notion of how familiar our neighbor's moronic call to prayer is. That is to say, I'm ignoring the thousands of times people around me have called for prayer instead of doing something useful. Somebody's sick? Let us pray. The cat is missing? Let us pray. Is my daughter an alcoholic? Let me pray about it. (For the record, apparently that particular gentleman is finally figuring out that he and God had some sort of misunderstanding on the general condition of his daughter's psychological health. You know, only years too late—five? ten? twenty? depends on how you measure it—but, you know, praise Jesus for showing him the light, and now, let us pray.)

Don't take me wrongly, madam; I'm hardly the most effective person on the planet. But I'm not going to hide from that reality by calling people to prayer.

Really, before it's too late? How many dead? How is it not too late?

But, hey, let's pray.

You know what? I got a better idea, and in the long run it might be more effective than prayer.

Let's all get stoned and think happy thoughts.

[video=youtube;galM_kZQNME]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=galM_kZQNME[/video]​