# Seabasses "religion of peace" buddies at it again



## Bobm (Aug 26, 2003)

Two female homicide bombers blew themselves up on Moscow's subway system as it was jam-packed with rush-hour passengers Monday, killing at least 35 people and wounding more than 30, the city's mayor and other officials said. Emergency Ministry spokeswoman Svetlana Chumikova said 23 people were killed at the Lubyanka station in central Moscow. The station is underneath the building that houses the main offices of the Federal Security Service, or FSB, the KGB's main successor agency.

&#8230;Moscow Mayor Yuri Luzhkov said both explosions were believed to have been set off by female suicide bombers as the trains entered the stations. In the first case, officials said the explosion was on the train; there was no immediate information on the location of the second blast.

&#8230;Russia's top investigative body also said terrorism was suspected...... DUH!


----------



## seabass (Sep 26, 2002)

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2010/03/2...ng-anti-christ-web-site-says/?test=latestnews

and I quote: ""Jesus wanted us to be ready to defend ourselves using the sword and stay alive using equipment," Hutaree.com reads. "The only thing on earth to save the testimony and those who follow it, are the members of the testimony, til the return of Christ in the clouds. We, the Hutaree, are prepared to defend all those who belong to Christ and save those who aren't. We will still spread the word, and fight to keep it, up to the time of the great coming."

The world is full of lunatics, certainly not tethered to a single religion.


----------



## Longshot (Feb 9, 2004)

seabass said:


> http://www.foxnews.com/us/2010/03/2...ng-anti-christ-web-site-says/?test=latestnews
> 
> and I quote: ""Jesus wanted us to be ready to defend ourselves using the sword and stay alive using equipment," Hutaree.com reads. "The only thing on earth to save the testimony and those who follow it, are the members of the testimony, til the return of Christ in the clouds. We, the Hutaree, are prepared to defend all those who belong to Christ and save those who aren't. We will still spread the word, and fight to keep it, up to the time of the great coming."
> 
> The world is full of lunatics, certainly not tethered to a single religion.


That's amazing seabass, you didn't even acknowledge the violence by these two terrorists. Just like a liberal you don't voice out against the violence, but only try to justify it by any means possible.


----------



## barebackjack (Sep 5, 2006)

I find it interesting that so many countries are so "tolerant" of Islam when Islam is seemingly at war with the world.


----------



## seabass (Sep 26, 2002)

Longshot said:


> seabass said:
> 
> 
> > http://www.foxnews.com/us/2010/03/2...ng-anti-christ-web-site-says/?test=latestnews
> ...


What are you talking about? Bob's point was that the religion of Islam is based on violence (and it certainly has more than its fair share). My point was that violence is not tied to any certain religion. I missed the part where Bob "voiced out against the violence" or was it only me that had to?


----------



## ND Native (Mar 12, 2004)

First let me say that no violence is condoned. And if the "militia" group was planning on bombing cops they should be punished for it.

However, there is a big difference between the two groups. The Koran says to kill the infidel. They are waging a war on America (and other countries) just because we exist. Even if we have no dealings with them good or bad, they want to kill us. The "militia" groups are coming out because they do not like what the government is doing. If the government would leave them alone they would still be in obscurity, living their own life (howbeit with their predjudices). Yes, they may be radical, but usually (this is not always the case, as a nut case is still a nut case) they just want to be left alone. How much different do you think these "militia" groups are from our founding fathers, who did not like Britain telling them what to do? And who fought a war against tyranny to obtain freedom from opression? Our country was founded on liberty and freedom. Their interpretation is that the government is overstepping its constitutional authority. And in their view they are trying to correct it.

Now these "militia" groups are radical, and most of us do not agree with their methods of violence. But there is no comparison between them and radical Islam.


----------



## seabass (Sep 26, 2002)

ND Native said:


> First let me say that no violence is condoned. And if the "militia" group was planning on bombing cops they should be punished for it.
> 
> However, there is a big difference between the two groups. The Koran says to kill the infidel. They are waging a war on America (and other countries) just because we exist. Even if we have no dealings with them good or bad, they want to kill us. The "militia" groups are coming out because they do not like what the government is doing. If the government would leave them alone they would still be in obscurity, living their own life (howbeit with their predjudices). Yes, they may be radical, but usually (this is not always the case, as a nut case is still a nut case) they just want to be left alone. How much different do you think these "militia" groups are from our founding fathers, who did not like Britain telling them what to do? And who fought a war against tyranny to obtain freedom from opression? Our country was founded on liberty and freedom. Their interpretation is that the government is overstepping its constitutional authority. And in their view they are trying to correct it.
> 
> Now these "militia" groups are radical, and most of us do not agree with their methods of violence. But there is no comparison between them and radical Islam.


There is too much BS and half-truths here, I don't know where to begin. The Bible says a lot of things we don't condone or should not take literally. The Koran does too.

I'm surprised you can find so much difference between your purported infidel-killing muslims and a group that says this: Jesus wanted us to be ready to defend ourselves using the sword and stay alive using equipment... We will still spread the word, and fight to keep it, up to the time of the great coming." The former is your basic definition of any muslim, while the latter you put in the same light as our founding fathers? give me a break.


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

Seabass I think the difference people are talking about is that the Koran does say to kill the infidels, and the Bible does not. The Bible tells us to love our enemies. The problem is some misinterpret the Bible. The most misunderstood quote is "judge not lest you be judged". Every pervert loves that quote.


----------



## seabass (Sep 26, 2002)

Plainsman said:


> Seabass I think the difference people are talking about is that the Koran does say to kill the infidels, and the Bible does not. The Bible tells us to love our enemies. The problem is some misinterpret the Bible. The most misunderstood quote is "judge not lest you be judged". Every pervert loves that quote.


bull snort, the Bible says plenty of awful things. Don't make me find the websites that have combed through the Bible to find these things, I'm too busy today! Don't try to paint Christianity as some peaceful religion, that's a joke.

The Muslim fanatics have shaped how you folks feel about the entire religion. That's a shame. Next time you are in the doctor's office and you visit one of the pleothora of muslim doctors in the region, please ask them if its true that the Koran says they are litteraly meant to kill infidels.


----------



## Chuck Smith (Feb 22, 2005)

Sea bass is correct. All religions have a bad side and good side. We now are seeing the very worst of Islam.

Take the crusades......that was the Christians going waging war and murdering people who did not believe to spread the word of god. Sounds like the radical Muslims of today.

But yes if you look through the bible you can take if for any angle....good and bad.


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

Chuck, study the crusades deeper. It's tough to tell who was killing who first. Also, this isn't the fault of the Christian religion it's the fault of the fools interpreting it. The Bible has some bad things in it because it often is relating to history and the stupid things people did. When it turns to what people should do it does not promote violence. If you think so you need a Bible study with a different person. Often people who are Christians talk about the bad things Christians have done. I think it's a psychological thing trying to prove to everyone how fair they are. Sort of self flagellation to gain public acceptance.


----------



## seabass (Sep 26, 2002)

Plainsman said:


> Chuck, study the crusades deeper. It's tough to tell who was killing who first. Also, this isn't the fault of the Christian religion it's the fault of the fools interpreting it. The Bible has some bad things in it because it often is relating to history and the stupid things people did. When it turns to what people should do it does not promote violence. If you think so you need a Bible study with a different person. Often people who are Christians talk about the bad things Christians have done. I think it's a psychological thing trying to prove to everyone how fair they are. Sort of self flagellation to gain public acceptance.


and you can say the exact same thing of the Koran.


----------



## spentwings (Apr 25, 2007)

The Koran and the Bible eh?
If I want to read fiction, I prefer a good murder mystery.


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

> and you can say the exact same thing of the Koran


A fellow said he would send me a copy of the Koran, but I never did get it. I have not read much, but some. It does tell them that when they are outnumbered or overpowered they may remain meek, but when of sufficient power to rise up and put the non Muslims to the sword. No, you can not say the same of the Koran. Why is it so hard for us to admit that. Do we make ourselves more acceptable to the world if we deny the violence of others, and admit violence that doesn't exist within ourselves. What is the liberal psychological need for the self destructive criticism?


----------



## Chuck Smith (Feb 22, 2005)

Plainsman,

In college I took a couple classes studying Islam, Muslim, Christian, and Chinese Philosophy (and this was not from a liberal teacher....very right wing). To be honest all the religions are basicly the same.....all had a higher power, a heaven or final destination (good and bad), all had basic set of beliefs for good (ie ten commandments), all had some language about striking down non believers or enimies, etc.

What this all boils down to is how people follow these teachings. I mean the 10 commandments tells us not to kill....yet the crusades happened. Yes Christians went to Muslim areas and fought. Not that they were attack....they forced the belief onto others. I have stated this before.... Muslims are fine.... Radical Muslims are not. Just like radical Christians who fire bomb abortion clinics. I don't agree with abortion....but to blow up and kill the workers....that is not the Christian way.


----------



## seabass (Sep 26, 2002)

Yes, you can say the same of the Koran Plainsman.

I agree, Chuck. My college classess said essentially the same thing. It's always the fanatics that help shape peoples minds about a religion. The peaceful silent majority go un-noticed.

This is where someone always says "yeah, but why doesn't the silent majority condemn the acts of the fanatics." Answer: they do, you just aren't listening. In addition, I think most Muslims don't identify with the fanatics at all, so why should they have to apologize for them? You don't see Christian groups apologizing to the masses for the una-bomber do you? I think its easy to have blinders on for some things, yet are ultra-sensitive to others.


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

> all had some language about striking down non believers


Do you have a reference for that? I have never seen that anywhere in the Bible. I would be especially surprised to see it in the New Testament.

Seabass, your a very intelligent person who I really do like to visit with. I hope I set the stage right so you do not feel insulted with my question. Why is it liberals have a need to feel guilt?


----------



## seabass (Sep 26, 2002)

well, I hope I set the stage by saying I think the most of you as well. Having said that, I think you don't know the religion as well as I do. I work with people from Iraq, have spent time in Muslim countries and have Muslim friends. All very devout (don't drink of course, wear conservative clothing, pray five times per day, etc). All great people.

So, I don't know if it's guilt or what... but my experiences aren't like yours. That's all I can say.

I'm not ignorant to the fact that Muslim people are the cause of a lot of terroistic activities the world around. But I think it's not that simpe to then say Islam equals violence. It's just like I saw that you or someone posted something like 75% of all inmates are mexican (or non-white). From that, the person was drawing the conclusion that mexicans cause more trouble than whites since in that area whites are the predominant ethnicity. Well, my instinct is to compare the economic background of the people, not their race. My gut feeling is that 95% of the people in jail are below poverty thresholds. That said, if you were to assess the incomes of the mexicans in jail, the ratio of mexicans to whites in jail is on par with income diversity in that area between the two groups. So, the factor isn't their race, but their socio-economic background.

I guess maybe I've gotten off-track, but I think the same types of analyses could be said of Muslims. You don't see Muslims in first world countries doing terroristic activity more than you see whites doing terroristic activity. That says to me that religion isn't the main factor, but socioeconomics and/or education.

Someone is going to reply with the emoticon of the guy playing the violion, I just know it. :wink:


----------



## seabass (Sep 26, 2002)

And maybe I will just add that yeah, maybe there is some inherent guilt that guys like me have. I've had every opportunity in life and, due to those opportunities, I've managed to secure a nice job, raise a family, etc. I'm very aware that I am the product of very fortunate circusmtances. So, yeah, a part of me does feel badly when I see a race or a religious group be mis-characterized when there all sorts of variables out there. I find it highly irritating when I see people who think they got to where they are in life solely on their own, forgetting the major handouts from their parents, etc. they received along the way. I am convinced that I would not be even close to the same position I am today if I grew up on a poor indian reservation in central south dakota. anyway, please someone find me that guy playing the violin!! I know I've got it coming!


----------



## Chuck Smith (Feb 22, 2005)

> "Then Jehu called a meeting of all the people of the city and said to them, "Ahab hardly worshiped Baal at all compared to the way I will worship him! Summon all the prophets and worshipers of Baal, and call together all his priests. See to it that every one of them comes, for I am going to offer a great sacrifice to Baal. Any of Baal's worshipers who fail to come will be put to death." But Jehu's plan was to destroy all the worshipers of Baal. Then Jehu ordered, "Prepare a solemn assembly to worship Baal!" So they did. He sent messengers throughout all Israel summoning those who worshiped Baal. They all came and filled the temple of Baal from one end to the other. And Jehu instructed the keeper of the wardrobe, "Be sure that every worshiper of Baal wears one of these robes." So robes were given to them"
> 
> "Then Jehu went into the temple of Baal with Jehonadab son of Recab. Jehu said to the worshipers of Baal, "Make sure that only those who worship Baal are here. Don't let anyone in who worships the LORD!" So they were all inside the temple to offer sacrifices and burnt offerings. Now Jehu had surrounded the building with eighty of his men and had warned them, "If you let anyone escape, you will pay for it with your own life."
> 
> "As soon as Jehu had finished sacrificing the burnt offering, he commanded his guards and officers, "Go in and kill all of them. Don't let a single one escape!" So they killed them all with their swords, and the guards and officers dragged their bodies outside. Then Jehu's men went into the fortress of the temple of Baal. They dragged out the sacred pillar used in the worship of Baal and destroyed it. They broke down the sacred pillar of Baal and wrecked the temple of Baal, converting it into a public toilet. That is what it is used for to this day." 2 Kings 10:18-27 NLT





> Then the LORD, the God of Israel, said to me, "Take from my hand this cup filled to the brim with my anger, and make all the nations to whom I send you drink from it. When they drink from it, they will stagger, crazed by the warfare I will send against them." (Jeremiah 25:15-16 NLT)


I found this off a website...so take if for what is worth. But the class I took over 10 years ago broke down the bible like this. If you take these passages a certain way....you are doing the work of god by causing destruction and warfare against non-believers.

Most of the stuff was in the old testament. But they are in the bible and can be taken in different contexts. If you have a radical mindset or if you don't you can take a passage to one extreme or the other.


----------



## barebackjack (Sep 5, 2006)

seabass said:


> Yes, you can say the same of the Koran Plainsman.
> 
> I agree, Chuck. My college classess said essentially the same thing. It's always the fanatics that help shape peoples minds about a religion. The peaceful silent majority go un-noticed.


I happen to know quite a few "peaceful" muslims, and have yet to hear any of them decry what the "fanatic" muslims are doing.

Im not saying, im just saying.


----------



## ImpalaSSpeed96 (Aug 25, 2008)

Having some experience w/ middle eastern people, I've come to the conclusion its not necessarily the religion that is the problem causer. I've said before, all muslims aren't bad people... The conclusion I've come to is that this area is still way behind our times. They easily believe and live like we did 200 years ago... They are not nearly as socialized as we are. I'm friends w/ a pakistani guy that works out here. He keeps calling me Mr.Tim. I told him yesterday, look man, I'm not your boss, I'm your friend, call me Tim... We've talked pretty extensively. He believes money is the cure all fix all. He is over here working so that he can support his wife and have good standings in the community. I had asked about arragened marriages and why they do them. Again, money. They share money a lot of times, and if you have money, you are happy. If you don't, you are looked down upon and obviously not happy. So instead of marrying for love, they believe marrying for money will make you happy. He told me, love is secondary. While I couldn't disagree more, its what they are tought. The divorce rate is extremely low too. A lot like America 100 years ago. Now think, if someone came here and started trying to force the things they did upon us, now remember 100 years ago, how would we have responded. We would have looked at them and condemned their satanic acts... Anyone remember Elvis 40 years ago... I know its only about democracy, but they see it as more than that. While I don't justify it, I think i have a better understanding than those who have not been over here and seen it first hand....


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

ImpalaSS, that is good insight, but strictly from a religious standpoint there is also conflict. If you can get a copy read Voice of the Martyrs. Like you I also know a fellow from Pakistan. He was a captain in the Pakistan military, but turned Christian. Now there is a reward for his murder and he can never return to his home country. He first went to South Africa, but they tracked him there and attempted to kill him and his family. He is now in the United States and got here by seeking political asylum.


----------



## seabass (Sep 26, 2002)

barebackjack said:


> seabass said:
> 
> 
> > Yes, you can say the same of the Koran Plainsman.
> ...


Did I call that or what?

My post above:


> I agree, Chuck. My college classess said essentially the same thing. It's always the fanatics that help shape peoples minds about a religion. The peaceful silent majority go un-noticed.
> 
> This is where someone always says "yeah, but why doesn't the silent majority condemn the acts of the fanatics." Answer: they do, you just aren't listening. In addition, I think most Muslims don't identify with the fanatics at all, so why should they have to apologize for them? You don't see Christian groups apologizing to the masses for the una-bomber do you? I think its easy to have blinders on for some things, yet are ultra-sensitive to others.


----------



## seabass (Sep 26, 2002)

Plainsman said:


> ImpalaSS, that is good insight, but strictly from a religious standpoint there is also conflict. If you can get a copy read Voice of the Martyrs. Like you I also know a fellow from Pakistan. He was a captain in the Pakistan military, but turned Christian. Now there is a reward for his murder and he can never return to his home country. He first went to South Africa, but they tracked him there and attempted to kill him and his family. He is now in the United States and got here by seeking political asylum.


Isn't that the same guy who wrote the book that he is trying to sell you? The guy that talked at your church?


----------



## barebackjack (Sep 5, 2006)

seabass said:


> barebackjack said:
> 
> 
> > seabass said:
> ...


Im not listening huh? I listen to them every day. I hear a lot of Bush hate, I even hear comments like "US soldiers are like Nazis" (no BS there, I absolutely came unglued), but I don't hear anything of the sort to criticize or condemn the actions of their "fanatic" factions. Maybe they don't want to bring it up at all, maybe their embarrassed or what have you? I wouldn't blame them.

I for one try to take the stance Impala mentioned. Treat them as an individual, not as their religion. But with comments like the ones ive heard, comments about our country, our military, our way of life, that have been spoken TO ME, and the actions we hear about day after day in the news, it just gets damn hard.

But, its just not US muslims or against the US. Its everywhere. Islam is quite literally waging war on all non-muslims globally. Where do you suppose they get the cannon fodder for their suicide missions? Could it be they continually convert the non-fanatic to the fanatic? Between suicide missions and KIA's from military actions, one would think the ranks of the "fanatics" would somewhat be depleted. Yet it isnt. They are seemingly endless.

Tolerance tolerance tolerance. Thats all that gets preached. Well, we could literally "tolerate" ourselves into oblivion or exile over the next century or two.

Somebody needs to take a hard stance. Perhaps the peaceful followers of Islam need to put some serious pressure on the "fanatics". I for one do not see that happening.

How many muslims do you know?
Have you even read the Qur'an?

Or, are you just regurgitating what you've "heard"?


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

> Isn't that the same guy who wrote the book that he is trying to sell you? The guy that talked at your church?


Yes he spole at church, but he isn't trying to sell me anything. He has been sending me publications, but has not asked for contributions.



> Tolerance tolerance tolerance. Thats all that gets preached. Well, we could literally "tolerate" ourselves into oblivion or exile over the next century or two


BBK, I have found those that preach tolerance are often very intolerant. I have also found that every pervert out there loves the tolerant. My view is that tolerance is not a virtue, but rather a lack of principles that one feels strongly enough about to speak up. Today people often fall over each other trying to prove who is the most tolerant. The winner should understand they have a total lack of principles.


----------



## seabass (Sep 26, 2002)

Bareback, you hear a lot of hate _daily_ about Bush _from Muslims_? Really? What do you do that you hear so much of this? or where are you going? What websites? I'm so curious. I've gone to specific websites looking for official condemnation of muslim terroristic activities and found it. Do some searhcing on your own. And like I said, what do you really expect? Do Christians apologize for the unabomber? Of course not, he isn't a Christian. What do you expect or what do you want to hear? You're right in the sense that no Marin Luther King-like figure has surfaced for the Muslims. Is that what you want? What would make you feel better, barebackjack? You know, back in the 30s I'm convinced that Americans knew what was going on with the jews in Germany. But did we act? Did we speak out against such obvious injustice by our fellow German Christians? No, we didn't. Not until the attack on pearl harbor. I think it's easy to point fingers at the lack of action of others, but let's not forget about own history.



> Islam is quite literally waging war on all non-muslims globally.


Bull snort. Period.



> How many muslims do you know?
> Have you even read the Qur'an?


I've got an Iraqi (Muslim) working for me now. One of my best friends in college was a Pakistani (once removed, but a devout Muslin nonetheless). Do you want me to go on? Best friend in grad school was here from Pakistan, brought his wife and kids with him. I interact daily with Muslims. Do you want me to count them? What's your point? I've spent time in Turkey and two east African countries where Islam is common and prayer chants are heard 5 times a day through the town speakers.

And no, I haven't read the Koran.



> My view is that tolerance is not a virtue, but rather a lack of principles that one feels strongly enough about to speak up.


I think that is sad. So, if you're "tolerant" of gays (as an example of a common 'tolerance' that is preached lately), then we're really speaking about my own lack of prinples? My oh my.


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

> I think that is sad. So, if you're "tolerant" of gays (as an example of a common 'tolerance' that is preached lately), then we're really speaking about my own lack of prinples? My oh my.


What's the old country song, "if you don't stand for something you will fall for anything" or something like that? Anyway, I am speaking of those people who think we need to tolerate everything, but then they will not tolerate someone who will not tolerate everything. It's silly the way these people talk because none of us tolerate murder or rape etc. In reality we all set standards where our tolerance ends. Those who tolerate everything and stand for nothing are the very people who have caused this nation to deteriorate morally. I'm sure you will agree we can't just drop all of our laws and "tolerate". How long until we tolerate NAMBLA (North American Man Boy Love Association)? Oh, that's right one of our new czars is most impressed with the man who started that association. His mentor so to speak.


----------



## seabass (Sep 26, 2002)

I see what you are saying plainsman...



> How long until we tolerate NAMBLA (North American Man Boy Love Association)?


I'm surprised you have so much knowledge of such an organization? 8)


----------



## barebackjack (Sep 5, 2006)

seabass said:


> Bareback, you hear a lot of hate _daily_ about Bush _from Muslims_? Really? What do you do that you hear so much of this? or where are you going? What websites? I'm so curious.


I work with many many foreigners from many countries and nationalities. So no, my experience is NOT from websites. Like your appears to be. As you admit right here.



> I've gone to specific websites looking for official condemnation of muslim terroristic activities and found it.


I can also find websites that claim the moonlanding actually occured in Arizona, that the world is in fact flat, and that Elvis is still alive.



> back in the 30s I'm convinced that Americans knew what was going on with the jews in Germany. But did we act?


Did you get that from a website too?



> > Islam is quite literally waging war on all non-muslims globally.
> 
> 
> Bull snort. Period.


Really? What else do you call almost weekly suicide bombings all over the world?



> And no, I haven't read the Koran.


Maybe you should.


----------



## barebackjack (Sep 5, 2006)

seabass said:


> Do Christians apologize for the unabomber?


So because Christians didnt apologize for the unabomber that means its ok for the muslims to not take a more public stance against Islamic based terrorism? So I guess two wrongs now make a right?

I guess to democrats they do. Its ok for Obama to spend spend spend because Bush did it too. We can do this because you did this, we dont have to do that because you didnt do that. Democrats have a mind set of a four year old apparently.


----------



## seabass (Sep 26, 2002)

Bareback, i'd be happy to go tit for tat with you.  This conversation has almost denegrated to the point where you tell me your dad can beat my dad up. If you take a step back and read my posts, you'll see that I am basically just repeating myself below.

I'll be brief - I said I went to websites for "official condemnation" of the actions. You know, ones where Muslim elders/figureheads make a policy statement, etc. You clearly aren't reading my posts if you think my sole source of information is derived from websites. Of course my peers that I work with have no respect for this behavior.

It's so interesting to me that you work with all these Muslims and that you hear them daily berate Bush. I can't imagine what kind of job you have, or what you do for fun to be around this type of talk all the time. Must be depressing!

I might have gotten that information from a website regarding Americans in the 30s. I also got it from my history class when I saw that we didn't do anything until Pearl harbor. I'm pretty sure the U.S. wasn't in a vacuum at the time, so I think it's safe to say there was some knowledge of what was going on. Yet, again, as I mentioned, we did nothing until spurred into action.



> So because Christians didnt apologize for the unabomber that means its ok for the muslims to not take a more public stance against Islamic based terrorism? So I guess two wrongs now make a right?
> 
> 
> > You really don't get the point here? Two wrongs don't make a right but the point is you evidently expect an apology from one culture, but not another? You don't see a double standard?


----------



## barebackjack (Sep 5, 2006)

seabass said:


> You really don't get the point here?


Likewise.


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

I doubt these are Seabass's buddies, but here is my complaint: Whenever we talk about radical violent Muslims it is without doubt someone will bring up Christians and call them violent. Sure Christians have done many wrong things. That's foolish people misinterpreting the Bible, but that's not even the point. The point is Christians doing something wrong is not an excuse for anyone else to do things wrong, but liberals just can't pass up the self flagellation.
Sure there are other violent religions, but they are not the subject, nor does it have any bearing on my opinion of the radical Muslims, or the Koran. Every time you bring up the subject of Muslims and violence you will have someone go off subject and talk about violent Christians as if somehow that excuses the Muslims. That is not logical thinking. It reminds me of Stockholm syndrome where hostages protect those who have taken them hostage. That's what the liberals will allow, the Muslims to hold the country hostage.


----------



## Chuck Smith (Feb 22, 2005)

> I doubt these are Seabass's buddies, but here is my complaint: Whenever we talk about radical violent Muslims it is without doubt someone will bring up Christians and call them violent. Sure Christians have done many wrong things. That's foolish people misinterpreting the Bible, but that's not even the point. The point is Christians doing something wrong is not an excuse for anyone else to do things wrong, but liberals just can't pass up the self flagellation.
> Sure there are other violent religions, but they are not the subject, nor does it have any bearing on my opinion of the radical Muslims, or the Koran. Every time you bring up the subject of Muslims and violence you will have someone go off subject and talk about violent Christians as if somehow that excuses the Muslims. That is not logical thinking. It reminds me of Stockholm syndrome where hostages protect those who have taken them hostage. That's what the liberals will allow, the Muslims to hold the country hostage.


Plainsman.... I agree 100% just because one group was violent or is violent does not excuse another group for its actions. :beer:


----------

