🚀 go-pugleaf

"Luc The Perverse" <sll_noSpamli...@cc.usu.edu> wrote in message 
news:ije7p3xvta.ln2@loki.cmears.id.au...
> "Frans" <phasysn...@yahoo.com> wrote in message 
> news:12c1cabk6kkpic1@corp.supernews.com...
> Oh you're right.   They needed to invent the word president and prime 
> minister in the greek language to allow prophetic utterances to be 
> effective.

A king is a king. A king is king by birthright. A president is not, not even 
when his father was president before him, and when his brother is governor 
of Florida. He was still ELECTED. Now you could debate about the fairness of 
the election in Florida (the plot thickens!) but it still doesn't make him 
KING. You would think that in such an important book as the bible, that they 
would get a simple word like "king" right. They might have said "leader of 
people" which would have put things in a different perspective, but they 
said "king" clearly. Bush is not king. Not yet anyway, har har.

> You know what I think?   I think God (through an Angel) showed John 
> EXACTLY what was going to happen, and mixed with it symbolism, and John 
> wrote down what he could.   How else would a 1st century person record 
> seeing a warplane, than "an iron breasted dragon with the sound of a 
> thousand horses on its wings" or a nuclear bomb than fire, or the cloud 
> from a nuclear bomb as "a locust swarm given the authority to scourge 
> mankind"

Why did god need an angel? Can't god speak for himself? What language does 
god speak in? Or what language did that angel speak in? Which angel was it? 
Was it the same one (Gabriel, i believe) that read the "holy" quran to 
Mohammed? That "Iron breasted dragon" of yours is just an object of fantasy, 
just like people can imagine "real" dragons, gryphons, medusas, unicorns, 
and other mythical creatures that you've probably heard of and seen pictures 
from. I mean, you gotta be seriously on crack if you think that a nuclear 
bomb would be described as fucking locusts. It's just biblical bullshit, and 
you are just seeing things that you want to see. You could compare my ass to 
the parting of the red sea, with enough imagination, but it doesn't make it 
similar.

> And remember, the prophetic utterances were witnessed, the only words came 
> from the angel.   So if John saw a leader, and thought it was a fucking 
> king, you are saying that this somehow invalidated everything?    What 
> kind of a conservative are you?   Is religion a matter of convenience, 
> that you use to comfort yourself, and to rally people against gay 
> marriage, but if anything bad is ever uttered that too is ignored?

Witnessed? OMG yes! That's what those jehova's "witnesses" also tell me 
sometimes, when i take a few moments to listen to their bullshit, and then 
state that I do not believe in talking animals, because that's stuff from 
Disney, and therefore do not even believe the first chapter in the bible, 
and then they point out to me that it's all about "symbolism" and I ask them 
how the hell they know which parts are symbolic and which parts are not and 
they leave blabbering about "not questioning the holy book". A king usually 
wears a crown. Does Bush wear a crown? How the fuck else would this John 
know (or "see" rather) that he was seeing a king? Bush doesn't wear a crown, 
doesn't wear any fancy robes, he works out, he does not live in a castle, 
how the fuck could he be mistaken for a king?

>> You must be completely out of your mind if you think that either China or 
>> Russia will lay a finger on Israel. Why on earth would they? Israel is 
>> just defending itself. A bit overwhelming, maybe, but hey, they're the 
>> largest, best equipped, best trained military force out there. Yes, they 
>> WILL stand against those allied forces, they've done it before, and 
>> they've only gotten stronger since. It took them SIX DAYS to kick all 
>> those asses. The "allied" arab forces are still firing scuds and 
>> kachukas. They might as well be throwing bricks.
>
> Wow you're right.  That is the same reason Rome never fell.

Rome was a city. Israel is a country. Times have changed. Rome never kicked 
the asses of several enemy COUNTRIES in six days. Rome didn't have guns and 
motivated people. Rome was falling apart. Israel isn't anywhere near falling 
apart.

>> Where did Bush use chemical weapons? And, mind you, it took nuclear 
>> weapons to END the second world war.
>
> OMG why am I arguing with you?   Ever heard of Fallujah?   Even if you 
> believed the theories that chemical weapons were not used against the 
> Iraqi people - being completely ignorant of the conspiracy surrounding it 
> tells me a lot about your interest and knowledge about the these things 
> that you are choosing to argue with me.

I think that other posters cleared the whole "chemical weapon" thing up. The 
only country using chemical weapons in that particular area was Iraq itself, 
under Saddam Hussein.

>> I thought you said that Bush was the king. And who's hammer will come 
>> down, anyway?
>
> Arthas' (before he turned bad)

lol

>> I don't think that Bush was a school yard bully.
>
> No you're right - him thinking himself god is a better analogy.   Who else 
> to decide the fate of the entire world.  Condemn North Korea for testing 
> weapons (the like of which we recently tested)   Condemn Sadaam for using 
> chemical weapons (then use WP against the people of Fallujah, ironically 
> in Iraq!)   Defy  the united nations and declare an illegal war, over his 
> daddy's grudge?   Threaten the use of nuclear weapons against Iran over 
> R&D?

He's not deciding anything. As I said, it's all about the country's best 
interest. And what is this bullshit about an "illegal war"? Are there any 
LEGAL wars? And, Bush never threatened to use nuclear weapons. His 
administration just said that they weren't eliminating any possibility. That 
is not a threat. Well, maybe "symbolically" it is.

> Bush LIED to start a war against a helpless country - causing hundreds of 
> thousands of Iraqis to die - something he dismisses as collatoral dammage, 
> and says the war was justified because they "ousted a bad leader" 
> (ignoring lies about a Sadaam funded nuclear weapons program, hundreds of 
> billions of wasted dollars).     But if 10 Americans die from a suicide 
> bomber he has a fucking conniption fit.   I cannot hold in high esteem 
> someone that feels he has the right to judge that one person's life is 
> more valuable than another person's life.

All politics lie. Grow up.

> The right to vote doesn't mean a whole lot when your entire country's 
> infrastructure has gone to shit.  There are looters, rioters, violence. 
> Bagdad and Fallujah are under occupation, and there is still fighting 
> going on everywhere.    It is hard to get gas, people who have electricity 
> at all, don't have it for 24 hours a day.

Do you think that the infrastructure was so much better BEFORE the US 
invaded Iraq? I sure as hell don't.

> I have seen various news sources of independant reporters going around 
> talking to people, and the consensus seems to be that life was better 
> under Sadaam than it is now.

"Independant" huh? Hah! I bet you could find just as many people saying 
completely the opposite.

>> Bla bla bla. Nuclear fire? Fire is not nuclear. A nuclear bomb does not 
>> explode in a huge blast of fire. It's a huge blast of air pressure and a 
>> lot of nasty radiation. Go away with that stupid ancient 
>> changed-over-time-to-fit-the-church's-agenda book.
>
> I am not associated with any church - because I do not believe that any 
> church holds true to the ideals set forth by the first century christians 
> or what Christ taught.    Being christian merely means believing in Jesus 
> as god's son (and the way to salvation)

And bullshit.

> No.   I believe that if Jereseleum begins to fall, bush will blame Tehran 
> and use his 90 day presidential authority to over - ride the senate to 
> launch nuclear weapons against Iran.    The unjustified, and ridiculous 
> use of nuclear weapons against Iran will provoke Iranian allies (or 
> perhaps spark retaliation from nuclear armed terrorists who were otherwise 
> meant to just be sleepers)

First, Jerusalem will have to "begin to fall". How exactly will this happen? 
Surely John wrote something up, with symbology and everything.

> Remember what Osama Bin Laden said - the decision to attack the world 
> trade center buildings is one that made the most sense - they had 
> considered targetting nuclear power plants, but were concerned about the 
> situation getting out of hand.   If nuclear weapons are being used 
> indisciminantly against Arabs - there would be no reason for the 
> terrorists to refrain from using them against us.    There could be a 
> terror cell waiting in every large city with one of those missing 
> "suitcase" bombs from the former soviet union waiting only to hear the 
> report of a nuclear attack by America on an Arab country.

Hahaha, right, Osama didn't think that "things would get out of hand" by 
destroying a landmark building with thousands of civilians in it. Right. And 
you believe all that crap. Oh guys, we just bombed this stupid business 
building and only killed 3000 people, no reason to get all worked up over 
THAT.

And I think that if the 'arabs' actually had a suitcase bomb, they would 
have used it already. But they are dumb ignorant shits, so they fuck up 
their assaults with lame ass equipment. Which is a good thing, ofcourse.

> Iran is rich and powerful - not to mention, Syria will fight alongside 
> Iran - and they are a powerful ally.

Syria got their asses kicked in the six day war, along with Egypt, Jordan, 
and Iraq. In six days. SIX DAYS, and Egypt could have been completely 
annihilated.

> Bush knows this, so not they are trying to simultaniously blame Iran and 
> Syria for the kidnapping of some obscure soldier that I have never heard 
> of before.  It is deja vu.    The administration targets a country, tries 
> to piss people off at them, then goes and attacks.

Do you know every soldier in the Israelian army?

> Iran.   If Iran rallies troops and tries to attack Isreal, or whether 
> Isreal flies into Iran and starts a fight is inconsequential

Israel will need some incentive to attack Iran. Like the surgical strike 
they performed years ago on a nuclear plant. They wont just go all out 
screaming and wielding guns. That's what arabs usually do. That's why arabs 
usually lose too.

>> I fail to see any humor in this post. Besides ofcourse the whole 
>> religional bible-quoting thing and doomsaying, but I don't think you 
>> meant that.
>
> I find you humorous.  So humanity is perfect and humans will live forever 
> right?

No, the planet wont allow it.

> Just like the US which is threatening to use nuclear weapons.

I've already talked about this.

> I think Bush's religious and megalomaniacal agenda is going to cause World 
> War III.   He, as president has the authority to begin a nuclear war - 
> unless the Senate could rapidly come together to oust him as president. 
> War is not in our best interest either.   Occupying Iraq cannot possibly 
> have been in our best interest.   Taking over Afghanistan to try to get 
> one fugitive, who still eluded us was not in our best interest.

Do you remember the video from "land of confusion" by Genesis? Apparently, 
there are people who always think that ANY president will use nukes, just 
because he has them. Except ofcourse pussy Clinton, the big man who let 
Arafat and Rabin shake hands. Look how far it got them.

> So sit back and enjoy thinking that humanity is not in danger when we have 
> a war happy, nuclear ready, idiot president leading the strongest military 
> force on earth.

Humanity is always in danger, and I'm glad to have the US on our side to 
fight for it.