CNN's God's Warriors

[AC]

Originally Posted by FireFly

Has the athiest episode aired? That's one I'd like to watch.

It was this one TheDragon mentioned earlier:

Originally Posted by TheDragon

Maybe those fellers at South Park weren't too far off, eh?

edit: apparently 10 months ago almost

[vicphoenix13]

After watching an episode of God's Warriors, I can see how easy it is for radicals to brainwash believers. The original scriptures of the Bible and the Koran has been twisted by radicals like Pat Robertson and Osama Bin Laden who have their own personal agendas. Religious people need to make sure they read the Bible or Koran for themselves instead of letting preachers and imams dictate the meaning. The way to combat hatred and bigotry is to think independently.

[HOZ]

Originally Posted by vicphoenix13

After watching an episode of God's Warriors, I can see how easy it is for radicals to brainwash believers. The original scriptures of the Bible and the Koran has been twisted by radicals like Pat Robertson and Osama Bin Laden who have their own personal agendas. Religious people need to make sure they read the Bible or Koran for themselves instead of letting preachers and imams dictate the meaning. The way to combat hatred and bigotry is to think independently.

I agree 100% religion has been twisted by many for their own bigotted purposes....but.....
When Pat Robertson send his religious zealots flying through buildings murdering thousands like Bin laden I will accept the comparison.

Here is a Washington Post Ariticle, A very interesting read.

Risks in a Muslim Reformation
In some European countries, the Reformation or the Counter-Reformation produced a rigid orthodoxy that stifled development for generations. In other countries the wars of religion were followed by the Enlightenment. Muslims might not follow a European course.

[vicphoenix13]

Originally Posted by HOZ

I agree 100% religion has been twisted by many for their own bigotted purposes....but.....
When Pat Robertson send his religious zealots flying through buildings murdering thousands like Bin laden I will accept the comparison.

Here is a Washington Post Ariticle, A very interesting read.

Risks in a Muslim Reformation
In some European countries, the Reformation or the Counter-Reformation produced a rigid orthodoxy that stifled development for generations. In other countries the wars of religion were followed by the Enlightenment. Muslims might not follow a European course.

I know for a fact that Pat Robertson has suggested assassinating certain political figures such as Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez. He has also said that God is punishing Muslims when the tsunami hit Southeast Asia in December 2005.

[TheDragon]

Originally Posted by FireFly

Has the athiest episode aired? That's one I'd like to watch.

You should be able to catch a rerun of it come one of these Friday nights on Comedy at 10:30, I think. It's a two-parter, though. I found it quite hilarious.

If not, Season 10 will be out on DvD pretty soon, I'd imagine, and you should be able to rent it.

[Azure]

Originally Posted by vicphoenix13

I know for a fact that Pat Robertson has suggested assassinating certain political figures such as Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez. He has also said that God is punishing Muslims when the tsunami hit Southeast Asia in December 2005.

And you equate that to giving the order to kill 3,000 innocent people?

Please.

[troutman]

Amanpour Q&A:

http://www.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/meast/...ef=mpstoryview

[vicphoenix13]

Originally Posted by Azure

And you equate that to giving the order to kill 3,000 innocent people?

Please.

No, you are trying to put words in my mouth. The point I am making is that hatred and bigotry is a problem in all religions. The most powerful voices in the Muslim and Christian religions are people with disgusting personal agendas.

[Azure]

Originally Posted by vicphoenix13

No, you are trying to put words in my mouth. The point I am making is that hatred and bigotry is a problem in all religions. The most powerful voices in the Muslim and Christian religions are people with disgusting personal agendas.

Well I apologize if I misunderstood.

But it seemed to me you were making a comparison between Bin Laden and Pat Robertson.

[FLAMESRULE]

Not to start a flame war but...

In regards to the comparison of Robertson vs. Bin Laden where do you draw the line between acts of terrorism??

Bin Laden flew planes into the WTC - That is clear terrorism.

Robertson et al spew their vitriole and rile up support of their followers for a joke of a war in Iraq in which thousands of US soldiers die and tens of thousands innocent Iraqi civilians die without cause. Seems to me that this is state sponsored terrorism of the highest magnitude. No WMD were ever found, there is no link to al-Qaeda etc.

Robertson is clearly not alone in this. All you need to see is the increasing power / control of religion in the US government. Would you consider any of the Imams or zealot clerics as being terrorists if they spurred a follower to a suicide attack etc.??

All in the name of religion. Barf.

Edit: I did watch the Muslim God Warrior last night. What a well done "expose". I was fascinated, disgusted, amazed, etc throughout the show. I am hoping that the Christian and Jewish ones are just as good.

[Azure]

If you want to classify military action, deemed legal by Congress....as an act of terrorism, that is your prerogative. IMO, its not.

There are a lot of idiots who spew crap. Was Robertson a mouth piece for starting the war in Iraq? In the bigger picture, not really.

[Flash Walken]

Originally Posted by Azure

If you want to classify military action, deemed legal by Congress....as an act of terrorism, that is your prerogative. IMO, its not.

So congress is now the ultimate authority on what is and isn't terrorism?

You should ask the people who cut down the mutilated corpses of relatives in Nicaragua or Guatemala if they feel the same way...

You put an incredible amount of faith into overwhelmingly corrupt institutions of government.

[Lanny_MacDonald]

Originally Posted by Azure

If you want to classify military action, deemed legal by Congress.....

The problem is that Congress really didn't give the nod to start a war. They said after all other avenues had been exhausted, Bush could take the steps to initaite war. It was very clear that that point had not yet been reached. If it had reached that point, the US would have had much greater support than the coalition of the bribed. Bush also never went back to Congress for a declaration of war, which means they did not have an opportunity to agree with the end result.

[FLAMESRULE]

Originally Posted by Azure

If you want to classify military action, deemed legal by Congress....as an act of terrorism, that is your prerogative. IMO, its not.

There are a lot of idiots who spew crap. Was Robertson a mouth piece for starting the war in Iraq? In the bigger picture, not really.

It was deemed illegal by the UN. It was a completely unilateral decision to invade a country based solely on religion and greed. It was an invasion of a sovereign nation that had nothing to do with 9/11.

An invasion of Afgahnistan on the other hand would actually be considered legitamite due to the actual evidence of supporting terrorists.

IMO the American government has been one of the most violent regimes on the planet. Sure its "legal" in their congress, but it is reprehensible on the world stage. How can the US Govt support the Taliban, The Shah in Iran, Saddam in the Iran-Iraq war, Pol Pot in Cambodia, etc etc etc. That is true terrorism on par, if not worse, than Bin Laden. By in large due to a feeling of religious superiority and greed. IMO

Edit: Dont get me wrong...I am not trying to support Bin Laden or any othe Muslim acts of terror against the USA or Westerners. I think that there are just as many other countries, including the USA, that sponsor terrorism to a great degree.

[MarchHare]

Originally Posted by Azure

If you want to classify military action, deemed legal by Congress....as an act of terrorism, that is your prerogative. IMO, its not.

There are a lot of idiots who spew crap. Was Robertson a mouth piece for starting the war in Iraq? In the bigger picture, not really.

Yeah, I'd really stop short of calling the invasion of Iraq an act of terrorism, no matter how spurious the casus belli may have been.

That being said, Robertson may have encouraged terrorism of a different type. There have been multiple instances of whackos killing or attempting to kill doctors who perform abortions. Is it much of a stretch to state that their acts were motivated by the likes of Robertson and other anti-abortion crusaders?

[Claeren]

It is more 'Reckless Imperialism' than it is 'terrorism'. Terrorism is just the only remaining military tactic for the people who find themselves at the short end of that overwhelmingly powerful imperialist stick. It is the tactic just beyond gorrilla warfare and is literally a manifestation of American might in the tactics of their enemy.

Just because America can legitmize their war and tactics in sympathetic minds with poor/currupt media and government lies makes it no less noble or rightous.

There are good wars but this one is not one of them and i agree that those responsible for it are no better then Bin Laden himself. Pat Robertson's world is just as scary to me as Bin Ladens.



Claeren.

[Azure]

Originally Posted by Flash Walken

So congress is now the ultimate authority on what is and isn't terrorism?

You should ask the people who cut down the mutilated corpses of relatives in Nicaragua or Guatemala if they feel the same way...

You put an incredible amount of faith into overwhelmingly corrupt institutions of government.

I don't get it.

There has to be some sort of legality to declaring war. Bush built his case, presented it to Congress...they agreed and declared war on Iraq. What else should he have done?

The League of nations sat on their arse after WW1 too....does that mean Britain shouldn't have taken pre-emptive measures against Germany?

I get it that the intelligence was faulty...but seriously, just because the UN didn't side with the US...that doesn't mean the war was an 'illegal' war. It probably shouldn't have happened...but it wasn't illegal.

[FireFly]

Originally Posted by Azure

I get it that the intelligence was faulty...but seriously, just because the UN didn't side with the US...that doesn't mean the war was an 'illegal' war. It probably shouldn't have happened...but it wasn't illegal.

According to the only global governing structure we've got, it was illegal. The problem is they can't do anything about it. Do you think the people in Iraq care that the US government said it was okay to invade them?

[Azure]

Originally Posted by Lanny_MacDonald

The problem is that Congress really didn't give the nod to start a war. They said after all other avenues had been exhausted, Bush could take the steps to initaite war. It was very clear that that point had not yet been reached. If it had reached that point, the US would have had much greater support than the coalition of the bribed. Bush also never went back to Congress for a declaration of war, which means they did not have an opportunity to agree with the end result.

Congress gave the approval to go to war. Its not like Bush declared martial law, and then went to war with Iraq.

Washington...for the most part, was in line with what he wanted to do.

[Azure]

Originally Posted by FLAMESRULE

It was deemed illegal by the UN. It was a completely unilateral decision to invade a country based solely on religion and greed. It was an invasion of a sovereign nation that had nothing to do with 9/11.

An invasion of Afgahnistan on the other hand would actually be considered legitamite due to the actual evidence of supporting terrorists.

IMO the American government has been one of the most violent regimes on the planet. Sure its "legal" in their congress, but it is reprehensible on the world stage. How can the US Govt support the Taliban, The Shah in Iran, Saddam in the Iran-Iraq war, Pol Pot in Cambodia, etc etc etc. That is true terrorism on par, if not worse, than Bin Laden. By in large due to a feeling of religious superiority and greed. IMO

Edit: Dont get me wrong...I am not trying to support Bin Laden or any othe Muslim acts of terror against the USA or Westerners. I think that there are just as many other countries, including the USA, that sponsor terrorism to a great degree.

The enemy of my enemy is my friend. That is how governments operate.

Might seem like common sense to you and me...NOT to side with such violent people. Its not so rosy when you're the president of the united states.

Don't get ME wrong...I'm not saying it was right. But you have to understand the political process involved. Its not like the biggest player on the world stage will isolate themselves from situations THEY feel can effect them at home.