Pat Robertson and Ahmadinejad, foolish scum...

http://www.breitbart.com/news/2006/0....adssezuz.html
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060105/...srael_sharon_1
Both of these so-called "leaders" obviously agree on one thing; Sharon deserves what he got. Mr Sharon, with many faults, has recently moderated his stance, created a new more moderate party in the hopes of peace between the Jews and Palestinians. Sharon has done terrible things in his past, some would say justified while others would say criminal. I try to look at things more linier now. Anyway, peace in the Middle East cannot be created with people such as Robertson and Ahmadinejad making statements such as the one's referenced in these two articles. I have come to the conclusion that Robertson DOES NOT want peace in the Middle East. He is no better than the Crusaders murdering during the Crusades or Islamic Fundamentalists beheading innocent people or causing terrorist acts. Ahmadinejad is in the same boat with him. The very thought that either of these men proclaim themselves as followers of God's law would consider this illness that has struck Mr Sharon as "God's Judgement" flies against the most basic teachings of God's love for His children.

Again, Sharon is no angel, but the man has been trying to make a difference where on the other hand these two jackals only want to see the continuance of violence and hatred amongst those striving for a Faithful and moral existence in God's eyes. They should realise that they shall be judged one day like all of us. May God have mercy on them and I pray they repent for there blasphemy.

They could wait untill he is actually dead.

Responding to your title: Does a person only have a right to free speech if you agree with them? I say this because equally idiotic things are often defended under the guise of "free speech".

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Vladimir

Responding to your title: Does a person only have a right to free speech if you agree with them? I say this because equally idiotic things are often defended under the guise of "free speech".

---

I think nobody denied them the right of free speech or is asking for it.

That does not mean that we cannot harshly criticize the hateful nonsense they utter.

Wow, nice post DevDave.

I was sickened by reading about Robertson's view. He is not only twisted, but has a simple, childish brain. He pictures God as this man that makes decisions and reacts to things emotionally. God is supposed to be omnipotent, yet, the best he can do is give Sharon a brain hemorrage that hasn't even proved fatal? Has he lost his touch since he brought down his vengence on ancient Egypt? Doesn't Robertson believe that God is omnipresent, which would mean he's within Sharon as well as all people?

Yup, good post. It does just go to show that intolerance and zealots can be found on both sides of the divide.

On this occassion, I agree fully with DevDave.

If I'm going to play the devils advocate for one moment, suppose Robertson is right about his own convictions...wouldn't God have given Sharon his stroke before he actually pulled out of Gaza?

At least the Iranian has some political motive for his harsh words. Indeed it comes as no surprise to hear such things from his mouth. Real politick at work, if it matches his personal opinion then that is just coincidence.

Not so sure about the American evangelical. Given that I despise evangelism in any religion my opinion is unlikely to be fair, but it disappoints me to hear such things from someone purporting to be a man of God. When someone seems to believe himself to be the voice of God it is worrying.

disgusting that anyone one would wish this, he was simply trying to give his country a better chance in the little pool of sharks that surrounds them, whether that means a little extremist action or not depends upon the person, this person saw that it was neccesary to do harsh things, cruel things in order top give his people, his persecuted, suicide targeted, hated by all arab people a better chance, and who says he has not. no one can tell other possible futures but i do belive that isreal would'nt be so well off as they are.

"Hopefully, others (criminals like him) will join him too," ISNA quoted Ahmadinejad
maybe many of those criminals have, i mean look at all the suicide bombers who have already died attempting to honorably kill innocent women and children for god(:no:), and i wonder how many were from ahmadinejads country? many of those criminals have died and it looks as if more are toi come if such idiotic religious hate progresses.

good post and thread, Dave.

OK , wheres the real Dave ? ~;)

Fine post Dave , well thought out and balanced :bow:

Agreed. More or less spot-on.

Ahma's playing to the worst elements of his crowd is nauseating, but Robertson's view of God as petulant/vindictive child is a little much. I'm supposed to believe that the God who sent the light of truth to Saul on the road to Damascus (en route to persecute and kill a few gentiles) will bring on a stroke in a modern Jewish politician for seeking a route to peace?

Well said DevDave.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tribesman

OK , wheres the real Dave ? ~;)

---

Aww...com'on. It is very clear DevDave has been like this for months, and nicely so. Meeting too much of the .org questioning his real identity might cause him to raise Navaros' banner again, you know. :sweatdrop:

Otherwise, we all know what Patty's head is capable of; and the Iranian president is playing the usual "madman" guy laughing at the stroke of a Jewish leader.

Sadly the once-bloodthirsty Sharon has to suffer on the road to peace. :no:

As my dad uses to say, 'you could take one and club the the other to death with'.

I'd find it so deeply satisfying if Pat Robinson had a stroke, but retained enough intelligence to realise he'd damned himself.

EDIT: And hopefully the Iranian president too.

Wow, Pat, I mean wow. HE never ceases to amaze me. whether hes fantasizing about blowing up smokey or saying abortion is okay in China because its of population control, I have to wonder what it must be like to work for the same broadcast station as he, to come on the air after he says something idiotic and pretend he didn't say, or better yet, to refrain from ripping him a new one....i guess he is the boss, but still

There are also Jews from the settlements who agree with Pat and Ahmadinejad. That was a bit shocking. But then again at the end of the day the only people extremists like are themselves. :wall:

The people in the settlements should be ashamed of themselves for the way they strain the Isreali police and military who protect their dumb asses when they go drop a trailer park in a Palestenian neighborhood. I'd say let them go and live their lives "free" but the tards take their kids with them, thats the only reason they are being protected.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Major Robert Dump

The people in the settlements should be ashamed of themselves for the way they strain the Isreali police and military who protect their dumb asses when they go drop a trailer park in a Palestenian neighborhood. I'd say let them go and live their lives "free" but the tards take their kids with them, thats the only reason they are being protected.

---

Remember, though, that in other contexts the strategy has worked.

1) US settlers putting themselves in harm's way with a farm and then engendering military protection was a component through which the USA enacted its "manifest destiny."

2) The British East India Company sticking its nose in for trade, then letting the counter-response draw in the military to "protect endangered British interests."

I'd agree that most of the settlers heading West weren't quite so ideologically driven as those in the West Bank and Gaza, and "ideological" was probably not even in the John Company lexicon, but the strategy isn't too far different.

Some ultra-Jewish Rabbi proclaimed the equivalent of a death-sentence fatwa on Sharon some time ago, I understand. Same guy did the same with that one PM who was shot by an extremist...

Which just goes to show that everyone has their mandatory quota of bigots and zealots to fill.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Seamus Fermanagh

Remember, though, that in other contexts the strategy has worked.

1) US settlers putting themselves in harm's way with a farm and then engendering military protection was a component through which the USA enacted its "manifest destiny."

2) The British East India Company sticking its nose in for trade, then letting the counter-response draw in the military to "protect endangered British interests."

I'd agree that most of the settlers heading West weren't quite so ideologically driven as those in the West Bank and Gaza, and "ideological" was probably not even in the John Company lexicon, but the strategy isn't too far different.

---

Similar strategies, entirely different circumstances. Not even comaprable, TBH.