He knows that - I left detailed, adamant posts on the 7 year old boy being hung forum, precisely to that effect. Like I said, everyone with a modest IQ should be able to see the avoidance going on here, and, for that matter, see clearly the bs the article I posted exposes.
Sure wish you had gotten them out of your toolbox for me..... Nimble moves there, boy, but still just dancing. Still answering questions I didn't ask. Still avoiding the ones I did.....
Paid - I think you have something there... Thankfully, one only has to read his comments, especially the last several, to figure out what is really going on, and to draw some conclusions that Alberta in no way wanted them to draw.
Um - I sent two really long posts just recently, that you clearly don't understand. Try reading them again. You are making arguments that have nothing to do with what those posts said. Please stay on topic. I notice, with humour, that you don't address the real issues and points brought up in said posts. I can only assume that is because you have no valid argument to make and are using sidestepping as a distraction. Oh, never mind.......
That's the best you can come up with? You're comparing apples to oranges! You, sir, aren't even logical anymore, must be a little tired or something, eh? Very, very sad.
The official website of the Israeli Foreign Affairs ministry states that 1,750 rockets and 1,528 mortar bombs fired from the Gaza Strip struck southern Israel in 2008. This is understandably shocking for anyone who reads this. The term rocket or mortar or missile induces fear in any ordinary onlooker. Israel uses such statistics and numbers to deflect the attention of the international mainstream media and those who consume it. If we suppose Israel is right about this, then why don’t we see Israel giving more details about these rockets? Why does Israel not show the pictures of the victims of these rockets? Why don’t we see the damaged cities, town, and village?
Clearly these rockets are ineffective and useless. According to the BBC, since 2001, when the rockets were first fired, more than 8,600 have hit southern Israel, nearly 6,000 of them since Israel withdrew from Gaza in August 2005. The rockets have killed 28 people and injured hundreds more.
This is 28 people killed and hundreds injured too many. But note that there is a huge gap between the number of victims and the number of rockets. If this leads us to any conclusion, it must be that these rockets are primitive, inexact and ineffective. The rockets are just another scapegoat that Israel uses to justify its ongoing attacks against Palestinian civilians.
Some Palestinian factions have now stopped firing these rockets as Hamas did, from June to December 2009. What happened? A full- scale war was launched in late 2009 that took the lives of more than 1440 Palestinians, mostly civilians. The arithmetic is like this: 28 Israelis killed by rocket attacks in nine years while 1440 Palestinians were killed in only 3 weeks in the last war on Gaza. There is no way to compare the two sides. The self defense argument deployed by Israel should be renamed its policy of aggression. Self defense empowers victims to use sufficient power to defend themselves. But from the Israeli government we only see excessive force used against civilians.
Israel has been pursuing its cry-wolf policy since its inception. Successive Israeli regimes have followed the same tactic of presenting their own nation as the victim of aggression. All the major news firms and corporations have taken the same line. “Israel as victim’, has filled the headlines. These days there are more examples than ever. Israel has been justifying its attacks and deadly wars against Palestinians and Arabs in terms of their right to self-defense. Here are some of the messages we hear from the Israelis over and over again:
“We are encircled by the Arabs.”
“We are encircled by terrorists.”
“We are living in the tough area of the Middle East.”
“We are fighting for our existence.”
“Our nukes are for the purpose of protection.”
“The Gaza siege is a legal means to stop rocket attack.”
“Settlements are a legal means to protect our Jewish Identity.”
Any audience worldwide hearing only this account might believe what they hear. It is normal for any body and everybody to seek safety and security as a basic need. People worldwide and specifically in America, which is the foremost supporter of Israel, will be convinced. For as long as these fictions are promulgated along media wires and echoed by reputable institutions, Israel will continue to defy international law and humanitarian charters. More human rights will be violated.
In the 1967 war, Israel captured hundreds of Egyptian soldiers. According to international law, Israel should have protected them before taking them to court or banishing them to prison. But Israel massacred them in the desert. We never heard of any subsequent investigation by the international community. Whose rights of self defense were infringed on that occasion?
Massacres, like Sabra and Shatila, have been perpetrated in Lebanon. The Israeli version of this story is that, “we invaded Lebanon to kick out Palestinian fighters. Or to protect our borders. It’s all about self defense.” But disproportionate force was used by Israel: thousands of Palestinians/Lebanese were killed in such massacres. In 1996 and 2006 in its wars on Lebanon, Israel bombarded the UN compounds and killed hundreds of civilians and UN forces. All this was on the grounds of self defense.
The siege of Gaza and the one-sided war was part of Israeli self defense strategy. Very limited attacks have been launched against Israel but the Israeli response has always been deadly. The useless rockets of Hamas have been used as a pretext by Israel to launch its attacks. They are the reason given for imposing the siege. However, the facts on the ground are different.
Israeli self-defense
The legal dictionary of Gerald N. Hill and Kathleen T. Hill (1981-2005 by) defines self-defense as,” self-defense n. the use of reasonable force to protect oneself or members of the family from bodily harm from the attack of an aggressor, if the defender has reason to believe he/she/they is/are in danger. Self-defense is a common defense by a person accused of assault, battery, or homicide. The force used in self-defense may be sufficient for protection from apparent harm (not just an empty verbal threat) or to halt any danger from attack, but cannot be an excuse to continue the attack or use excessive force.”
I am looking for a GOOD man. However, if he is nice to the point where he is too accommodating, has no life of his own, bends his entire being to please me, has no opinions of his own, or doesn't express them, can't be truly himself, it is a turn off. Nice is a very broad term.....
I am looking for a GOOD man. However, if he is nice to the point where he is too accommodating, has no life of his own, bends his entire being to please me, has no opinions of his own, or doesn't express them, can't be truly himself, it is a turn off. Nice is a very broad term.....
Good thing God's grace means- "God's divine power at work in me that enables me to do what I could otherwise not do". I have to respectfully disagree that everything is God's planning. God does no evil. Man makes poor decisions that result in evil. But God works it out for good if we let him. Everyone can work out something bad for good, by taking what they can from it and not letting it defeat them. The Bible says God gave man dominion over the earth. So we can't blame anything on God, (or the "devil", for that matter). We have to accept personal responsibility.
The Muslims are said to say they want all Jews wiped out, so they are considered a threat. My question is, who is doing the shooting, and abusing, and attacking, and brutalizing? Who is ACTUALLY doing it? Not, who MIGHT do it, or who THREATENS to do it? And though I in no way advocate for the Muslims' supposed belief to wipe out the Jews, I am beginning to understand WHY they might be a little mad....
So people from like FORTY TWO different nations take supplies to the people who are kind of well, STARVING and SICK, to relieve them, and they are TERRORISTS? I would say that a large portion of the world agrees there is a need, and that an injustice is being done, despite who did what prior to this situation.
From my other posts on this site, one can see I would rather discuss science and spirituality. So, I can only comment on what I see at face value. It is really hard for me to understand some people's views, given the events that have taken place.
I'm a little confused There are these people called Palestinians living on this piece of land, for a little while, like 2,000 years. Along come some people called Israelis, who are given a piece of this land, by the West. These Israelis, over the years, take houses and more and more land from the Palestinians. The Palestinians take offense at having more and more of their land and houses taken or destroyed, and, well, stick up for themselves. THAT is a terrorist???? So the upset Israelis now open fire with sophisticated weapons, killing many civilians. (Last January, less than 2 dozen Israelis were killed in the "conflict", but about 1300 Palestinians died, almost NINETY PERCENT civilians.) They put the remaining Palestinians in a fenced area, regularly enter and fire on the unarmed people inside, open their sewers into the Palestinians water supply, plow their farms and orchards under, cut off medical supplies, cut off food, etc etc, all in the name of defense. THAT is defending yourself???? Against what? Some outdated rockets fired by people who want out of a blockade, who want their land and homes back?
I could use the same line of thought when considering my homeland, the US. All this running around, declaring war on someone who MIGHT want to, MIGHT be PLANNING to, or has weapons they MIGHT use. Who is doing the attacking? Who is over in other countries wreaking havoc? Who is the only country to ever use a nuclear bomb on another, who actually followed through? I am American-born, and deeply grieved by my government's actions in the world against my fellow humans, all based on a huge MAYBE. I am beginning to question any legitimacy at all to their actions.
Iran, despite complying with Western demands to swap their uranium, despite signing the non-proliferation treaty and abiding by it, in fact, for a while holding themselves to higher standards, is a nuclear threat? When was the last time they attacked another country? Supposedly they THREATENED to wipe Israel off the map (funny, the translation seems to indicate that ZIONISM has to go, not that a country is to be wiped out), but their track record does not show them as an aggressor. Why can the US and Israel, who has not signed the treaty and refuses to let anyone in to monitor their activities, be left alone, despite their record of warfare and aggression, but Iran, who is technologically pretty archaic regarding nuclear matter, and who states they want nuclear power and medical isotopes to treat cancer, (their right, since they signed the treaty) is declared to be hiding something? I'm confused.
I'm not sure what you mean by your comment. I'm not sure if you are agreeing or disagreeing with me. I am curious. I too feel we don't have all the knowledge of the universe, but I respect people's theories that express what they think may be happening. In wonder if, in the end, is just knowing something is the way it is, and saying - "wow!", but not having to define it in a mathematical equation.....
Yes, I watched my brother get healed right before my eyes (no, a preacher didn't smack him in the forehead, and yes, it defied medical explanation) I have experienced more than one miraculous healing myself, have healed animals that were incurable (immediately), have experienced weather miracles. Miracles should be in quotations, as my definition may differ from yours. I expect all the comments telling me I'm nuts, there is a rational explanation, whatever. Have fun, it doesn't bother me. For the record, miracles are events operating with laws,or principles we just haven't defined yet. Nothing is impossible, it seems.... When evidence smacks you in the face, I think it is perfectly logical to at least consider it.
I appreciate all contributions here and am happy that everyone has been respectful on this thread! We must always look at others viewpoints and grow in learning. I sent you an email.
I much enjoyed the writing of Lee Strobel, a formal legal editor for the Chicago Tribune, who set out to examine the evidence for Christ as an historical figure, and prove that he really didn't exist. His journey is quite interesting. Three of the Gospels appear to be written by actual eyewitnesses, which is admissible even in today's legal system. The Book of Luke seems to be a report he made after investigating the stories by interviewing eyewitnesses.
The more I read about this issue, the more impressed I was with the evidence to support Jesus as an historical figure, and more than that, that he wasn't portrayed inaccurately, or was a symbolic legend to reflect earlier religions, and most of all, that it looks like he resurrected just like it was claimed. I feel, after reading about ancient religions, that monotheism was pretty much universal at the start of civilization, and changed and became more polytheistic as time went on - people started worshiping different ASPECTS of one God. Given my view of the timing, "pagan" cultures imitated early ideas of God, namely monotheism, which evolved into Christianity, not the other way around.
This is all tongue-in-cheek, right? Using the loose associations you use in the "similarities", MY GOD, I could be Angelina Jolie!!! You could also just as easily use it the other way around. I love challenges, but this one is just downright silly, really.
Jesus was actually Yeshua (Joshua), meaning Jehovah saves. Political historians of Yeshua's day documented his existence, the fact that he was a miracle-worker, his death, and commented on the fact that, unlike other 'cults' of his day, his followers increased, rather than decreased, after his death.
I respect that it is of a personal nature. If you are afraid of being accused of debunking dogma, as you stated, you are welcome to leave me a message. It is precisely those ideas I am interested in. However, I don't want to violate your wanting to keep it private, so either way is fine.
What I gathered from that was that he seemed to chalk it up to chance. I think, though limitless possibilities exist, specific outcomes, including miraculous ones, are chosen.
murny Forum Posts (159)
RE: Update:The Truth About PM Erdogan and The Mavi Marmara
I repeat:Your responses to the article are arguments against a point that wasn't even made!
Maybe you really CAN'T see the point being made by the article? I suppose that is a possibility....
(Me beating my head against the wall because I sent yet ANOTHER post....)
Time to sleep.