All Comments (47)

victoria-

while the program was listed on the schedule (incorrectly i might add, as muslims against jihad- it was called islam vs. islamists)
not only did they never air the program at all,
there was no reference ever made to the fact that it wasnt aired.

instead all of the time was spent interviewing the friends family of that pregnant woman who was killed by that married cop FOB.

what a waste after all the hype here

Not a problem.
We live in a nation of many different people, religions, or lack of religion. In essence--free people. If you believe in Christ, he still heard it.
Jeff

Dear God,
I am to You forever grateful for Your Creation. You placed Your eternal Hand upon the Earth and created Man. You have created him of every tongue and race, and gave him the capacity to grasp at least some of the vast multiplicity which You precisely engineered.
Thank You, Lord, for bringing us together tonight to celebrate both our achievements and those individuals who have helped lead us to this level of accomplishment.
Also, lest we forget about You in the midst of our individual successes, I ask You impart in us an understanding and remembrance of Your omnipresent power and might.
Lord, I pray that You guide, protect and bless us.
I give You all praise and honor for Your Creation, for Your love, for Your mercy, and for the life that You proffer to us daily. In Jesus Christ's Name, Amen.

Prayer in Jeremy Jerschina's Valedictory Address he was NOT ALLOWED to give.

http://www.hudsonreporter.com/site/news.cfm?newsid=18519215&BRD=1291&PAG=461&dept_id=532622&rfi=6

I cannot honestly say that I will be able to watch it, however, as with any documentary or television project from anyone, I would watch it with an open mind, and take it with a grain of salt, for their are always two sides to every story. In fact, I believe they used to call the television the "idiot box". Sometimes it may be appropriate.
Jeff

Here Jeff -just for you and full of facial nuances. Hope you will watch;

Where on Earth are the moderate Muslims? Thanks to PBS, they’re not on public television.

http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=ZjYxYzlmOTk5MTdmZGZlYmRiZWQ1MTUzZjJmZjVkMTE=

WATCH TONITE AT 9:00 ET ON FOX:

"Tune in this weekend, as FOX News Channel presents the documentary the Public Broadcasting System didn’t want you to see.

It’s a film about the difference between moderate Muslims and the radicals who want to kill us. It asks where are the moderate Muslims and why aren’t they speaking out against the jihadists? And it was financed with $675,000 of taxpayers’ money.

It was commissioned as part of the PBS series “America at the Crossroads” about the post 9/11 world, but PBS executives rejected it.

PBS claims the filmmakers were “alarmist, overreaching and unfair.”

The filmmakers say they were censored because of liberal bias at PBS.

On a topic this important, we think you have the right to decide for yourself

One post prints harsh words of another's faith laws that can be just as easily found in the Bible, and another posts words that contradict themselves and reason. That is why it is difficult to make a point when you cannot use the deception caused by the speed or volume of speech, and the nuance of facial expression.
Jeff

There are a good many people in Iraq fighting. The only ones fighting for freedom are on our side. The remainder are fighting to install a new set of masters of one kind or the other. We don't wish to be the master of Iraq we wish to get out and the only reason we haven't is because they won't stop killing each other.

amviennava.

"soon you will have the complaints that our troops are being killed with our weapons."

I didn't realize you were a prophet. If you are wrong (an apostate) -are you put to death like in Islamic countries?

"Violent and nonviolent crimes are punishable by death under Islamic and Sharia laws: murder, drug trafficking, armed robbery, apostasy, adultery, homosexuality, blasphemy, sorcery, prostitution, conjugation between partners not married to each other, converting to Christianity or Judaism, plotting to overthrow the Islamic regime and conspiring against the government."

Let me make myself clear. The reasons for the newest invasion of Iraq were not just. We need to leave as soon as possible. But we must enlist the help of All the nations of the Middle East for this to happen. No more finger pointing while America's children die for an unjust cause. Part of the responsibility of our legislator's in supporting our troops is to place them in combat only for reasons that are sane and true. That cannot be said of this Iraqi war. It is time to ask for help from others in the Middle East and it needs to begin now.
Jeff

tim: "US military is arming local Sunni Arab tribes that have agreed to fight alongside US forces against the Al-Qaeda-led insurgency."

Yes, and soon you will have the complaints that our troops are being killed with our weapons.

We invaded, and the locals are fighting us and the collaborators. In the process, they are fighting each other as well. Confusing isn't it?

Actually it has precedents: check the history of the occupied Balkans during WW2. You had the Germans, the British, and at least 2 local factions (communists and royalists) each in Serbia & Greece.

It does not really matter who is arming whom.

amviennava,

"The irony is that the Iraqis ARE fighting for their freedom."

US military is arming local Sunni Arab tribes that have agreed to fight alongside US forces against the Al-Qaeda-led insurgency.

Please explain who you consider Iraqis fighting for their freedom.

Jeff Reed: "Freedom can be offered but not forced. It is hard to demand respect when we refuse to give it." The irony is that the Iraqis ARE fighting for their freedom. They have been invaded, and are fighting the invader.

I suspect that OUR objection is that we have not yet realized that WE are the invader.

Jeff I respect the Iraqi people. Far more so than most of those on the left here and not a few on the right. I think eventually they will see the way clear to secure the freedom we offer and make it there own. I think it will take time and I'm no longer sure we will be able to proivide them sufficient time because of the vapidness of the worlds leftists and their inability to see the world as it is rther than as they wish it to be.

I have always been proud of what this country has stood for, and I will always do so as it stands for the beliefs that created it. Freedom can be offered but not forced. It is hard to demand respect when we refuse to give it.
Jeff

We can't give freedom to people that aren't willing to seizee it and make it there own all we can do is provide them the best possible opportunity to do so.

You on the other hand aren't interested in even givint them a chance which is either racist, cowardly or worse apathetic.

Anonymous @June 21, 2007 7:56 PM: Nice, but unsuccessful, attempt at misdirection. The arrogance and bigotry is in the concept that he west hands out freedom and democracy to those subhuman and ignorant savages.

I know that you did not use these terms, but they have been in many 'western' minds ever since they decided on the "white man's burden" to justify slavery.

To Anviennava (as anonymous June 21, 2007 2:32 PM)

Is the belief that Middle Easterners might be happier having a say in how they are governed really “arrogant and bigoted”? Are kingdoms and dictatorships the only types of governments suited to that region and “those people”? I have heard other people spout this racist belief that the Arabs just aren’t up to making a democracy work in the Middle East and hoped that I would not read it here. Perhaps you are the arrogant, bigoted one.

It is a sad thing when some write with disrespect and disdain. Even more sadly to see such a lack of reason or fact. When you put words to print it becomes difficult to skewer facts and to make a point when you cannot out shout the one you are arguing against.
Jeff

Pastor Taylor,

Question is..

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=52f36eJdCKE

Apologies. I am the 'anonymous' @ June 21, 2007 2:32 PM

anonymous @June 21, 2007 12:04 PM: This is a response, good job. But do reference your post of Posted June 20, 2007 7:39 PM.

The result is the YES we did break it (in Colin Powell's words, and right now we are the problem in Iraq. Unfortunately, peace will not rein there after we leave (now that it is unleashed, the mayhem must run its course), and we do have a responsibility to the 20+% of the population we made refugees. And that process is not yet over. Sadly, our military presence will not correct that.

Lastly, the very concept about "our opportunity to create a new democracy in the Middle East" is extremely arrogant and bigoted. One would expect an educated and thinking population would have outgrown such nonsense. Even our favorite Middle Eastern democracy is so for a religious group, not everyone who lived in the Holy Lands, as even the Christians who lived there will attest.

Anonymous @June 21, 2007 10:23 AM: I believe that this is about as eloquent and responsive as you can be. I now understand why you want to remain anonymous.

To Jeff Reed

Oil is obvious so we blame if for everything. I’m not saying oil didn’t weigh into the decision to intervene in Iraq, but there are a lot of other differences that our politicians probably considered as well.

For the past 10-years, Iraq has not produced enough oil to be a major supplier to anybody. The United Nations Food-for-Oil program limited the amount of oil that Iraq, under Saddam Hussein, was allowed to export. On several occasions, our European allies tried to get these limitations removed so that more oil could make its way onto the world market. The United States government vetoed any such efforts every time they came up. If oil is all we wanted we could have gotten it much easier than by Invading.

Iraq and the Sudan/Dufar issues are different:

1 - Iraq under Saddam Hussein started 2-international wars – That is not the case in the Sudan/Dufar tragedy, nor in Ruanda before it. The troubles in Africa, while serious and terrible, remained contained within their boarders.

2 - The ocean ports necessary to supply a major relief effort in Dufar lie on the far side of Sudan and Sudan is unwilling to let us use them. Ruanda lies in the jungles at the heart of the African continent. There is no ocean access and airfields are few. Jungles mean lots of places for insurgents to hide.

Iraq has ocean access, American military forces were already stationed in neighboring Kuwait, Turkey, and Saudi Arabia, and the supply likes between the coast and major population centers is relatively short and connected by good roads and bridges.

3 – The humanitarian effort in Somalia went so well, didn’t it? Remember Black Hawk Down? I think this experience has dampened any enthusiasm for armed humanitarianism where there is no vital national interest to the United States or its security.

And what is a vital national interest? The Carter Doctrine states that America has a vital national interest in the oil producing regions of the Middle East. The Carter Doctrine authorizes the use of force to maintain American access to these oil producing regions. Even though Iraq is not a major oil producer, its aggression against its neighbors has threatened American access to the oil fields of both Kuwait and Saudi Arabia.

If George Bush had a personal stake in the decision to oust Saddam, and I’m not saying he did, the fact that Saddam tried to have his father assassinated probably played a larger role in his thinking than any notion he held about American pride or power. Family has always been a big thing for W.

As for someone or some agency misleading the American public, the only Congressional Investigation concerning the intelligence that Bush said he used to make his decision, found that there was no evidence that the intelligence the President was given was either faked or doctored. It was just bad intelligence. It’s amazing how the Democrats running for President can ignore the findings of a Congressional Investigation whenever it suits the needs of their campaign – isn’t it?

To Amviennava

What I rant about is the perception that America is the problem in Iraq and that most if not all of the problems in that country will just disappear once we are gone. I think if we cut-and-run, the problems will only get worse.

What I rant about is the perception that there is some form of Christian morality in the idea of cut-and-run. What I rant about are people who think Absolute Pacifism is holy when in fact it is just another form of apathy. Just stick you head in the sand and all the problems go away.

Iraq is a mess, but unlike what Reverend Taylor said, we did not break it. I do not say that as an excuse so that we can cut-and-run. I think we can still make some contribution to the stability and welfare of Iraq and its people.

What I think is sad, it that our opportunity to create a new democracy in the Middle East has been squandered and perhaps lost.

AM vienna:

As posted elsewhere:

"Go back under your rock you clueless hippy."

GAryd @ June 20, 2007 11:20 PM: Excuse my previous post. Considering you posted "Yes and I beleive GW Bush did the best he could with the information in front of him. I also believe he was ill served by Rumsfeld who grossly underestimated the troops that would be needed for the occupation or the necessity for it since there seems to have been some miscommunication between he and Bremer regarding how the Baathist would be handled post Saddam.

NOw we must hang in there inorder t give the Iraqis the time to seize hold of the freedom we offer them."

THE FREEDOM WE OFFER THEM??!!??

It is obvious that you are as arrogant as I thought you are.

Garyd & 'anonymous': So much concern about how 'broken' Iraq was before we invaded! You are correct; your logic is infallible: we have certainly improved things! We are certainly showing those uncivilized brutes what civilization is!

You cannot be this arrogant, can you? Please assure me that you were being sarcastic.

i wonder what the right rev's savior would REALLY say about the invasion of Iraq? i wonder what he would say about the indifference to suffering displayed by his "flock." Torture, death, pain on an almost unimaginable scale. Thank goodness we're the good guys. Jesus knows what we're about.

Christians for War - how Christlike.

Christians for War - how Christlike.

I sometimes find it a sad thing when I stare at the precious thing that I have broken and realize that nothing that I can do will help me put it back again without the scars of being broken.

Close your eyes and imagine someone listening to God and God not giving you the complete picture of the past, present, and the future. Some really do have a deep searching to do. This is not works of God but a regretful works of men.

If you think that we can pay a price, read this link about consequences near to us.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/19293485/

Once we break things, we can't stop breaking things. I find it odd that we can ask someone to fix something that they have broken unknowingly for they did not have the plan to fix it.

Undoubtedly, it will be someone else that will garner the admiration of the Nations and the Middle East.

Yes and I beleive GW Bush did the best he could with the information in front of him. I also believe he was ill served by Rumsfeld who grossly underestimated the troops that would be needed for the occupation or the necessity for it since there seems to have been some miscommunication between he and Bremer regarding how the Baathist would be handled post Saddam.

NOw we must hang in there inorder t give the Iraqis the time to seize hold of the freedom we offer them.

As for oil, that is nonsense. If oil entered into the situation at all then the method we chose was illogical in the extreme.

I believe you may be correct on the first point. This war was a continuation of when Saddam invaded Kuwait. George W. thought is father should have finished Saddam in the Gulf War, and he sought to do it himself, with an added push from those of oil. On your second comment—gradual assimilation or outright obliteration can also be an end. On your third, I do not care. I do not choose sides on politics. If someone leaves us bad, then they leave us bad--we need to make our own way from the point it becomes our responsibility.
Jeff

Uh no it began when Iraq invaded Kuwait You do know we never signed a peace treaty with Saddam don't You?

You do know enough history to know that wars don't end without peace treaties, don't you?

And further that the war had essentially been renewed in a rather desultory fashion under Bill Clinton?

One last thing. Those other countries that are caught in the throes of chaos--don't have oil.
Jeff

Before I get hammered. please insert "other countries in Africa and others...."
Jeff

Forgive me--the current war in Iraq started primarily from the causes of pride and power. To answer Anonymous’s questions with another question. Why are we not currently in Sudan, or countries in Africa and others across the globe where terrible crimes against humanity are taking place at this very moment on an even greater scale? Why have we not invaded those countries? The answer is because they did not pose such a perceived threat against the world as a Saddam with WMD. However, we now know that the pretense for the current invasion of Iraq was false. Do not try to justify an action based on untruths. Rather admit that we were misled and do what we can to make it right.
Jeff

“We broke it”?????
What is it you think we broke?

Saddam Hussein used poison gas to exterminate an entire village of Kurdish women and children.

Saddam Hussein ordered an attack on the Iraqi town of Dujail in reprisal for an attempt that was made on his life in that same town. 148 people were killed and 1500 people jailed and tortured. After that he had the town leveled. There is no evidence that any of the people responsible for the attempted assassination were among those killed, jailed, or tortured in the reprisal.

Saddam Hussein’s Mukhabarat, or Department of General Intelligence, is believed responsible for the deaths or disappearances of between 2 and 5 thousand people each year. Among the people it tried to assassinate were President George H. W. Bush and the Emir of Kuwait.

Saddam Hussein offered his son-in-law, Hussein Kamel al-Majid, a pardon and safe passage after al-Majid defected to Jordan, and then had him and his brother killed.

Saddam Hussein ordered the invasion of Iran, beginning an 8-year long war that killed hundreds of thousands (some estimates go as high as 1-million people).

Saddam Hussein then attacked Kuwait, beginning another war that killed tens of thousands more of his fellow countrymen.

Saddam Hussein used the U.N. Oil for Food program to rebuild his 5 palaces while his people scrounged for food.

Saddam Hussein ordered the Iraqi military to fire upon United States aircraft enforcing the United Nations no-fly zone.

The United States removed a murderous dictator from power. Yes, the Occupation has been horribly mismanaged by the Bush Administration and the democratic nation we hoped Iraq would become may never materialize. But by my body-count, things are not as broke today as they once were.

Reverend Taylor, what is the moral answer to a madman who sees "turn the other cheek" as an invitation to do more harm?

Jeff um no. The War with Saddam was started to kick Saddam out of Kuwait.

This war was started primarily from the causes of pride and power. Christianity versus Islam, and for others--the rights to future oil. So it indeed was not even closely begun over moral reasons. We need to leave and focus on Afghanistan as soon as possible, yet we cannot leave it in shambles. The only way we can leave with good conscience is by including all the nations of the Middle East in dialogue on how to make this situation work, what we need to do, and how to get there--ALL of the Middle East. These divisions run so very deep, yet I would have to believe that even the puppeteers would like to see this end, By mistake we may be in a position to be a healer if we simply would allow ourselves to be so, and not conquerors of flesh and culture.
Jeff

REv. Taylor-

Arguably it was broke before we ever got there or a thug like Saddam would never have been in power to begin with. Yes you could argue that the US and Britain were complicit in that disaster for the Iraqi people but then if that's the case don't we bear some responsibility for cleaning up the mess we made?

Let's just admit that we "broke it" in the first Gulf War. Unless of course, you liberals believe that leaving Iraqis under a permanent sanctions regime that only hurt the innocent Iraqis was not a "broken" situation.

Reverend Taylor,
you are proposing an ideology not Christianity, for you're making "morality" conform to behavior, whilst the Christian makes his behavior conform to morality.
Your claim that the moral imperative is that because we "broke Iran" we must stay there to "fix it" is nonsense, for we have no right to be there to begin with - we invaded Iraq on the basis of lies to grab the oil, remember? The moral imperative is to fix that first, by withdrawing and paying due reparations and, as Christians, begging forgiveness on our knees, both of God and the Iraqis.
Your position is similar to that of the rapist who, caught in the act, argues that he be allowed to continue with the horrid, forceful penetration of his victim, for, now that he has raped her, he is bound by a moral imperative to "stay in" so as to fix her hair.
Frankly, I despair of you: you ought to be preaching Christ Crucified, not Republican propaganda.

BTW great answer from Rev. Taylor. Short, simple and to the point as usual.

Kyra, I think Yo-Yo was being ironic. Unfortunately there are people (high in our government) who do seem to feel that way.....

YO-YO
I believe you missed the point of the question. The fact that "morality" was mentioned, does not mean the work of god. Iraq is not a christian nation, nor is it meant to be. They citizens of Iraq have there own religion and cultural beliefs. They do not need your christian god to succeed.

Rev. Taylor offers a simple answer to a complex situation and question. Sometimes this is the best answer. Reverend, will you come preach at my church so we can leave early.

God spoke to GWBush to go attack Iraq.
When God tells you to do something,you just do it.
You don't ask questions.You don't need a plan.
With God on your side success is inevitable.
Don't be misled by what appears to be a total catastrophe in Iraq. God knows what he is about.
Be patient; haven't you heard?The Lord works in mysterious ways his wonders to perform.
Lord knows that in order to create something new,you first have to destroy the old.
The destruction of old Iraq is near completion.
Soon we will see a new Christian Iraq rise from the ashes of the old.And there will be celebrations of great joy and love across the land
for ever and ever amen.
We live in magical times.