God Closest in Times of Suffering

This is my first, and most probably last/only post to this continual, and seemingly senseless, rhetoric.

I have just finished reading through these posts (May 30 - June 2). At this point all I can say is, "Wow! Is this all you people have time for? To sit around and bash each other over things you have absolutely no control over?" And then when someone disagrees with your point of view you tend to resort to belittling and name calling. How childish can you get?

The worst of it is when you choose to besmirch and villify Chuck Colson himself, the very one that is offering you this opportunity to share your thoughts and opinions. Whoever this person is that is hiding behind the name ANONYMOUS needs to lighten up and get a grip on reality (See: ANONYMOUS June 2, 2007 4:51 am - 5:38 am). It doesn't matter 'Why?' Mr. Colson did what he did. What matters is, did he pay for his crime(s) and do his time or not?

Let me close by saying 'Thank You' Mr. Colson for allowing freedom loving people of ALL opinions the opportunity to share through this open forum. I agree whole heartedly with FRANCO when he says, "God bless you Mr. Colson."

God bless you Mr. Colson!

GB, one last thing; when I talk about Bush's Iraqi misadventure making us less safe I was not concerned about terror attacks as much as this sort of thing:

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20070602.wputin01/BNStory/Front

"In a threat not uttered since the Cold War, Vladimir Putin said that Russia intends to aim its missile systems - potentially nuclear weapons - at targets in Europe in retaliation for the U.S. decision to establish antimissile bases there."

Bush's over-reaction hasn't just killed a lot of people needlessly; by going against established international standards and ignoring the UN and America's friends and allies he has damaged the international system that has kept relative peace for the last 50 years. That scares me a lot more than any bomb throwing anarchist.

Regards

A Hermit

Why are Muslim's so concerned about population and why do they quote Ivan Illich?

"If the west's population is top-heavy, (i.e., the ratio of youth to elderly is low) that of Muslim populations is the opposite. For example, today more than half the population of Algeria is under the age of twenty and this situation is similar elsewhere. These young populations will reproduce and perpetuate the increase of Muslims on a percentage basis well into the next millennium.

North America and Europe have increasingly aging populations and one of the most disturbing social issues of the new millennium will concern a more efficient means of disposing of the elderly. (For example, witness the new euthanasia laws in the Netherlands, and the ongoing debate in many countries about this issue.) Medical advances can assure an average life span in the high seventies, although active life spans have not grown as fast. In the early 1900s, a westerner could expect to spend an average of the last two years of life as an invalid. Today, that figure is seven years. As Ivan Illich has shown, medicine prolongs life, but can not prolong mobility nearly as well. Aging populations with their increased healthcare costs are considered a more extensive socio-economic burden to society. For example, the UK Department of Health recently announced that a new prescription drug for Alzheimer's Disease was available on the National Health Service - but its cost meant that it was only available to a small minority of patients.

An aging population tends to be introspective and sluggish, whereas a young population is more likely to be vibrant and energetic. This may or may not bode well for many countries and that will depend on whether their political structure is fragile or not."

GB
Thanks for acknowledging the clarity of my initial point. I think we should pause and you should acknowledge that I'm right about everything, but I'll settle for baby steps...;-)

It's been a pleasure.

A Hermit

Sorry if I misread your comment Abe; I've been dealing with another commenter elsewhere and may have projected some of that conversation onto your comment. I apologize.

Regards

A Hermit

Hey A. Hermit,

Despite your clarity on point 1, I wrote up another retort about the transatlantic flights. But I deleted it. It seems that I've made my main points, you've made yours. Maybe we should pause to acknowledge the little bit of progress I think we've made here between them.

Regards,
GB

Hermit, I am just agreeing with you that Muslims are living peacefully in Canada. The Canadian Society of Muslims puts the population at 650,000 and growing at a healthy 2.9% a year. I see no problem.

http://muslim-canada.org/muslimstats.html

9/11 was "one of a kind" because of the scale and success of the attack, as well as the manner in which it was carried out. Bombs (like the first WTC attack) are nothing new or unique, and, while awful enough, are never as destructive as the "planes as missiles" attack. One of a kind doesn't mean it was the only terrorist attack ever, just that it was the only terrorist attack using that method, and also unique in the scale of destruction.

I hope that's clear enough now.
And even that most successful, most destructive terror attack of all time was not something that could destroy America. Unless America over-reacted...

--------

As for the liquid explosives plot, read this:

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2006/08/17/flying_toilet_terror_labs/

"Making a quantity of TATP sufficient to bring down an airplane is not quite as simple as ducking into the toilet and mixing two harmless liquids together.

First, you've got to get adequately concentrated hydrogen peroxide. This is hard to come by, so a large quantity of the three per cent solution sold in pharmacies might have to be concentrated by boiling off the water. Only this is risky, and can lead to mission failure by means of burning down your makeshift lab before a single infidel has been harmed.

But let's assume that you can obtain it in the required concentration, or cook it from a dilute solution without ruining your operation. Fine. The remaining ingredients, acetone and sulfuric acid, are far easier to obtain, and we can assume that you've got them on hand.

Now for the fun part. Take your hydrogen peroxide, acetone, and sulfuric acid, measure them very carefully, and put them into drinks bottles for convenient smuggling onto a plane. It's all right to mix the peroxide and acetone in one container, so long as it remains cool. Don't forget to bring several frozen gel-packs (preferably in a Styrofoam chiller deceptively marked "perishable foods"), a thermometer, a large beaker, a stirring rod, and a medicine dropper. You're going to need them.

It's best to fly first class and order Champagne. The bucket full of ice water, which the airline ought to supply, might possibly be adequate - especially if you have those cold gel-packs handy to supplement the ice, and the Styrofoam chiller handy for insulation - to get you through the cookery without starting a fire in the lavvie.
Easy does it

Once the plane is over the ocean, very discreetly bring all of your gear into the toilet. You might need to make several trips to avoid drawing attention. Once your kit is in place, put a beaker containing the peroxide / acetone mixture into the ice water bath (Champagne bucket), and start adding the acid, drop by drop, while stirring constantly. Watch the reaction temperature carefully. The mixture will heat, and if it gets too hot, you'll end up with a weak explosive. In fact, if it gets really hot, you'll get a premature explosion possibly sufficient to kill you, but probably no one else.

After a few hours - assuming, by some miracle, that the fumes haven't overcome you or alerted passengers or the flight crew to your activities - you'll have a quantity of TATP with which to carry out your mission. Now all you need to do is dry it for an hour or two..."

-------------

Does that really sound like a feasible plan to you?

Regards

A Hermit

This is more fun than chess.

“I stand by everything I've said here; including the "one of a kind" comment. Terror attacks are nothing new, but we have never seen one on the scale of 9/11 before or since, and I doubt we ever will.”

If you stand by those comments, you must explain away BOTH the first attack on the WTC and offer more evidence in regards to the transatlantic plot than it was “completely unworkable, ask a chemist about the process involved”. Plus, I am keeping all the collaborating evidence on the table (minus any govt./media hyperbole) including the quotes, videos and writings from the bad guys themselves. While you are at it, please explain why the terrorists would not try to hit us HARDER after our campaigns in Iraq, Afghanistan and around the world which you have stated make us more prone to an attack. That should be an easy one for you to explain, but at the same time it hurts your overall argument above.

I find it interesting that you are trying so hard to defend the “one of a kind” comment. I would have given you every other point by default.

"...and continuing to occupy it[Iraq] in the midst of a civil war makes terrorism against the US more, not less, likely." - A Hermit

"Terror attacks are nothing new, but we have never seen one on the scale of 9/11 before or since, and I doubt we ever will." - A Hermit

So, which is it? Is the US more likely to get attacked, or will there be no next big attack?

I can see some room between these statements, but not much.

Terrorists will proliferate, because of the advances in communications in recent history. They can be "heard" easily. The US is not unique in history for it's policies or actions. The latest communication mediums are however unique. The top dog will always be nipped to death by the little yappy ones until the empire of the day eventually implodes (usually more to do with it's own internal debauched decay rather than from an external enemy).

No question the US is the most benevolent empire throughout all history, but it will follow it's predecessors (Britain, Rome, Greece, Assyria, Babylon,and Egypt) to the graveyard or the "old folks" home in the case of the UK.

The purpose of going into Iraq is to "draw fire" and open a permanent front in a new part of the world for future defensive interests of the US. The US is in Germany, Japan, Korea, Italy, and other places to ensure that it has a base of operations in every region, so that it might quell the next crazy who threatens the world. I for one am very happy to be in a world policed by such a benevolent empire. We could be in a world policed by Hilter, Mao, Stalin, Saddam, or the crazy-come-lately Islmo-fascists nutjobs. We will never be policed by a liberal idealists scenario though, because it is contrary to human nature. Humans must dominate. If you ignore this obvious fact long enough, you will be selected for extinction. The only reason you have lasted this long is the kindness of the US.

By the way, Abe, as I pointed out earlier Canadian forces are in Afghanistan fighting the Taliban, who actually gave aid to Al Qaeda who actually attacked us all in 2001. I supported military action against them at the time, though given the failure of your President to carry through and fully support that mission while haring off on an ill-advised, unwarrated and incompetently managed war in Iraq has undermined the efforts of my countrymen and made us all less safe as a result.

If you're going to comment on my opinions here please take the time to actually read my posts and know what you're talking about before you start with the pointless sarcasm

Regards

A Hermit

Actually Abe, I never said anything of the kind. In fact we're in the middle of hearings into what went wrong in the Air India case twenty years ago. Police and intelligence services dropped the ball, big time, and 300+ people died. It's coming much too late but the powers that be are finally looking for ways to improve the system.

Invading the Punjab is not one of the proposed solutions, however.

Regards

A hermit

I believe Hermit is truthful: there has never been a terrorist attack in Canada and there never will be. There aren't any terrorists in Canada.

Thanks Ghostbuster. I'm sorry if you find my characterization of your opinions as the product of fear offensive, but frankly I can think of no other explanation. When one looks past the fearmongering headlines and reads the details of these plots one usually finds they were vague, poorly thought out and in most cases unworkable (like last summer's mixing-liquid-explosives-on-planes plot. Is that the one you were thinking of? Completely unworkable. Ask a chemist about the process involved in mixing such an explosive; it's not something you can do in a couple of minutes in an airplane toilet.)

Outside of Iraq (since Bush's invasion) more people are killed by dog bites than terrorists every year. You need to put the scale of the threat in perspective here. Again, that's not to say the threat should be ignored or that appropriate precautions shouldn't be taken, but let's be honest; invading Iraq was never about preventing terrorism, and continuing to occupy it in the midst of a civil war makes terrorism against the US more, not less, likely.

I stand by everything I've said here; including the "one of a kind" comment. Terror attacks are nothing new, but we have never seen one on the scale of 9/11 before or since, and I doubt we ever will.

And my point from the beginning was that such attacks don't in any case present an existential threat; ie the kind of threat that would justify the kind of powers your current President is trying to concentrate in his office. If the Soviet Union wasn't enough of a threat to make Americans abandon their commitment to a tripartite republicanism, individual liberty, the rule of law and diplomacy surely the terrorists (who are pipsqueaks compared to the soviets) don't rise to that level.

Regards

A Hermit

This has been fun A. Hermit, thanks.

I was hoping you wouldn't fall for that article. I agree with you and place this story in the old "over-inflated hyperbole we get from our government and the media" category I mentioned earlier. At best, I would use it as corroborating evidence to advance my case.

"justify America's continuing occupation of Iraq... which, after all is the whole point of this conversation we're having"

That is not the conversation I am having :) Perhaps that is our disconnect? You'll find that I tend to keep my points pretty specific.

I suppose I ought to finish off your "one of a kind attack" notion as I was planning to do on Saturday by posting details from 50 different sources on the very real transatlantic terrorist plot last summer which INDEED would have rivaled 9/11. I don’t think the WP would appreciate that though so I won’t. So I’ll just let the transatlantic plot and the 1994 attempt to blow up the WTC sit on the table. Anyone reading this thread can research the plots for him/herself and come to their own obvious conclusion.

As for the "EXISTENTIAL THREAT" to the USA, I think Radical Islamic terrorism unfortunately meets the criteria, you don’t. You do acknowledge that such people shouldn’t be ignored and can do damage. We can agree to disagree.

One more thing, the “scared” accusations directed towards me in two of your replies are frankly beneath the level of conversation we’ve been having. But, if you need to paint me as a chickenbuster in order to advance your premise, go for it. I’m secure. Other than that, I am enjoying the chat. It is nice to talk about something different on here.

Regards,
GB

"Catch the news today A. Hermit?"

Yup, and as always I followed it a little more closely than just reading the sensational headlines.

Another pack of incompetent wannabes with no connection to AlQaeda hatch a lunatic plot with no chance of success.

--------------

http://www.theage.com.au/news/world/jfk-airport-plot-foiled-151-and-flawed/2007/06/03/1180809336934.html

"experts cast severe doubt on the practicalities of the plot. JFK airport, like other airports around the world, is fed by a series of pipelines that supply jet fuel and heating oil. In many cases the pipes are beneath the tarmac and are laid directly to the gates where planes park.

But sabotaging part of the system would be highly unlikely to lead to a chain explosion. Also, jet fuel does not produce an explosive force unless it is under pressure or vapourised; and pipelines and tanks have safety valves to contain any mishap."

--------------

I'm not saying such people should be ignored or couldn't do damage, but they are not, I repeat, an EXISTENTIAL THREAT to the United States. And even if they were, how do a couple of dangerous nuts from Guyana justify America's continuing occupation of Iraq (which, after all is the whole point of this conversation we're having.)

Sorry, you're still over-reacting. In fact, you sound a bit like this guy:

-------------

http://www.nwanews.com/adg/News/191942/

"“At the end of the day, I believe fully the president is doing the right thing, and I think all we need is some attacks on American soil like we had on [Sept. 11, 2001 ], and the naysayers will come around very quickly to appreciate not only the commitment for President Bush, but the sacrifice that has been made by men and women to protect this country,”"

-------------

It's like he's actually hoping for another attack! I find that disturbing...some people actually seem to enjoy living in fear. I hope you don't become one of them.

Regards

A Hermit

"terrorism is a *law enforcement* matter], rather than a religious or military one"

Wow, Jacob, *ya think?* It's called 'Asymmetrical warfare' for a reason. Don't suppose anyone in command of, say, the armed forces could get the idea that *sending the army somewhere ain't the solution?*

Shut up. Buy. Pray. Yadda yadda. :)

Just a random wild idea here, but wouldn't you think that the experience of countries that know terrorism well, and which says terrorism is a *law enforcement* matter, rather than a religious or military one, just might have some idea what they're talking about?

Just throwing that out there.

One thing about this 'War on Terror' is, it's costing big bucks to make matters worse while the budgets for what actually might *protect* us are being *cut.*

Even the firefighters so lionized after 9/11.

Have a look how *they're* doing.

"Catch the news today?"

Speaking of todays news:

OMG! WTFIT?

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/06/03/AR2007060300338.html

Catch the news today A. Hermit? I wish my two specific points were wrong. I really do.

"Four men have been charged in an alleged plot to blow up New York's John F. Kennedy International Airport, a law enforcement official told CNN. In a recorded conversation with alleged conspirators, one suspect said, "Even the Twin Towers can't touch it. This can destroy the economy of America for some time," according to Justice officials."

-CNN

You know there is nothing wrong with conceding one or both of my two specific points. It takes someone who is secure in their beliefs to admit that they may be wrong. It doesn't mean you have to change your pacifist views, become pro-war, or support the decisions of the President. At least you could maybe consider the evidence?

What do you say? :)

"Mumbo Jumbo will hoodoo you!"

I don't think Vachel Lindsay had it right. Lets try Blind Willie:

Oh, trouble’ll soon be over, sorrow will have an end

Well, Christ is my foot and fellow, He’s my only friend
Till the end of my sorrow He tells me to lean on Him

God is my strong protection, He’s my bosom friend
Trouble rose around me, I know Who will take me in

Well, though my burden may be heavy, my enemies crush me down
Someday I’ll rest with Jesus and wear a starry crown

I’ll take this yoke upon me and live a Christian life
Take Jesus for my Savior, my burden will be light

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kbU24afG_rs

UPDATE ON -The French hate us:

"There is scant evidence to suggest that exploiting anti-American attitudes wins elections. During the French campaign, Sarkozy was often derided by his Socialist opponents as "an American neoconservative carrying a French passport." Some critics claimed he would dismantle France's welfare state and replace it with an American-style "law of the jungle." But most voters ignored such rhetoric. If anything, Sarkozy's public endorsement of the United States helped convince voters that he would shake France out of its torpor and put the country back to work."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/05/11/AR2007051102069.html

FROM READING THESE POSTS I NOW UNDERSTAND WHY THE FRENCH HATE AMERICANS SO MUCH. YIKES, YOU ALL NEED TO GET A LIFE!

September 11, 2001

Exodus 20:13

If you get religion from a small-tim e political felon, you are getting exactly what you deserve!

The Homer Simpson School of Journalism?

Hey, boys and girls! A career idea! Just follow old uncle Chuck! Break into an apartment in the dead of night, with burglar tools, and before you know it, the Washington Post will sign you on to do a column for the Big Bucks! Works every time! Best way to break into big-time journalism!

There seem to be no other requirements, other than a non-inquisitive mind.

Nothing succeeds like excess! Be a two-bit burglar in a famous case, and get hired as a guru! What a fraud!

If I get sent to prison, will the Washington Post give me a column? Always looking for career opportunities!

Hey, Chuckles: why did you break into the Watergate, anyway? You, personally, that is! Was it principle? Fun? Or just the drugs?

And just why is the Washington Post dignifying the maudlin rantings of a former felon and right-wing political espionage agent by allowing him to have a column?

Michael: Did you have to work to get so dumb, or did it just come to you all at once?

Mumbo Jumbo will hoodoo you!

Hey, anonymous poster: YOU ARE ALMOST AS FULL AS CRAP AS CHUCK COLSON IS, though that is inconceivable!

God especially likes burglars and political espionage agents like you, Chuckles! What a fraud you are, you piece of crap! Why did they ever let y ou out of prison to spew your venom upon the earth? Jolly old saint chuckie-poo!

"so was that God guiding the hand of the torturers of Abu Ghraib"

Do you mean at the prison outside Baghdad making detainees wear women's underwear on their heads, ...

I suppose you think Allah inspired what was uncovered over Memorial Day weekend:

U.S. Army troops in Iraq killed seven members of al Qaeda, captured 30 more -- rescued 41 kidnapped Iraqis, many of whom had broken bones and had been extensively tortured. Among the kidnap victims was a 13 year-old boy who had been tortured during his four months in captivity for having committed the un-Islamic act of smoking. The 41 hostages rescued were all Sunni, as is al Qaeda. There had been Shia hostages as well, but al Qaeda had murdered them all. No U.S. troops were killed in the rescue.

Paise the Lord Holy Eclati and ALL known & the unknown Miracle Phenomona etc...

I n T E r E s T i N g ! Ya Ya Mommas Poppas Monsa Monso rino's et seq! And Et Al .... Ya!

What biting jests the case of Colson would inspire from Mark Twain or Will Rogers were they still with us. Colson's comments remind us of the Good Book's Matthew 25 wherein Jesus opines that that hypocrisy is a serious sin, that hypocrites are like the whited sepulchre, pure without, foul within. Isn't this the felon Colson who said he would trample his own grandmother to advance Republican political fortunes then turned to Bible-thumping to resurrect his career? His nationalist version of God seems to guide only the American Army in Iraq -- so was that God guiding the hand of the torturers of Abu Ghraib, the massacre-minded Marines at Haditha, the rape and killing, the incompetents, the Strangeloves, the careerist generals who tolerate prolonging the agony of a failed imperialist occupation, the full-of-it pundits who spin endless rationale for insane policies? Is Colson's God so indifferent to her Iraqi children and the hundreds of thousands of Iraqi civilians snuffed out as a result of Bush's war? There is no honor, no distinction, no noble cause, no service in the role of being wretched cannonfodder for this smirking twit. Those who die, those who are mutilated, those families who are ruined aren't "serving freedom's cause" or "keeping America free". They are mere sheep to be shorn, pawns in a cynical game, caught up in the worst strategic and military fiasco in the nation's history. God, if one there be, help us all.

"how many time have leaders fooled their young
into dying in war
for God and Country
when there is no God

and if there were, they would never recognize her."

*laugh* Never say never. ;)

What did you do to end the war in Iraq today, you two-bit charlatan ex-con huckster?

Thank you!

Bob

anonymous

at least i have a surname.

deal with the substance
not your self=affirmed stylistic superiority.

how many time have leaders fooled their young
into dying in war
for God and Country
when there is no God

and if there were, they would never recognize her.

henry jim -you dishonor your adopted screename

pplace: ok i took the time to dig this up and it is really worth viewing.. now, everyone sing along..

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cLe9pJSRas0

p p & m and a bonus of pete seeger

(i guess mary has solved the mystery of -where have all the krispy kreme donuts gone)

anonymous
you haven't even learned your own name
so your predictions don't have much credibility.

many trite phrases have much truth to them, if one has the perspicacity to examine them afresh.

we have been told we are fighting for god a billion times

and we HAVE NEVER learned that we have been had
over and over again.

what have YOU learned.

start with a name.

Think so, Anonymous?

Personally, I think there's too much quoting and not enough singing in general.

What would you like to do now?

They'll learn alot sooner if you will quit quoting from old Peter, Paul, and Mary songs..

"When will they ever learn"?
When will they EVER learn?"

When we teach them that won't fly,

And they get to be humans, anyway.

We ALL KNOW that Colson is Not Telling the Truth

what is he REALLY saying.

We are doing God's Work in Iran (and Korea and Vietnam).
just as Bush implied when he told us he asked his "higher father" for guidance. Ironic, since B is clearly a Son of a B.

Since time immemorial the powerful have invoked God's justification to go to war and have young men give up their lives for God and Country.

It tryly is the MOST obscene use of God's name in human history.

and it happens OVER and OVER and OVER again.

When will they ever learn"?
When will they EVER learn?

Personally, from my experience and the miracles (and utterly dumb luck,) I've seen, I can only conclude that karma draws my attention to the 'worst' of all possible worlds in which I'm not dead.

Happens to be this one.

I mean, hey, not only do a lot of people think I 'need killing', it's *actually been tried a certain number of times.*

People decided, and decided to teach, in fact, that I needed *raping* cause being queer was just that much worse than some abstract fear.

Cause someone abstracted it that way for them.

What am I to think of 'righteous wars?'

No such animal.

Not till we are willing to *be* the animals involved.

And if that won't make you think twice about napalm, I dunno what will.

Period.

"we are so self destructive that without God's constant presence we would have destroyed ourselves a long time ago."

Such childish drivel.

It's really quite astounding that adults can think this way.

And this one has kids...

So, Mr Colson, let me ask you a question:

If you're in an OR with two "doctors" - one a highly schooled professional surgeon and the other a kid just out of high school about to enter pre-med - and both are having their hands guided "by god," which surgeon would you pick?

Did I mention your kids are screaming?

I think, Hermit, that one thing America's become confused about is the real meaning of the "We the People" part of our contract with ourselves.

For the record I'm opposed to separate Sharia laws. But then I'm also opposed to separate Catholic school systems, separate Jewish family courts and separate Native legal systems...and for the same reasons. We're all Canadians and therefore subject to Canadian law.

As for your example, I don't think letting people borrow money in some form of nominally interest free system is exactly an existential threat to anyone's freedom. More over-reaction I'm afraid.

"Where is God when my kid screams like a little devil in the grocery store and everybody thinks I am a jerk of a parent. "

I think I'd be asking if your kid screams in the grocery store because you think of such things as 'deviltry.' I think certain ideas of the universe kind of *model* children (and properties of 'perfect' fathers) in a certain way,

Maybe 'growing up' means simply stifling it,

but one thing's for sure about some of these religions:

Your kids are screaming.

I happen to think it's for the same reason there's suicide bombers, certain wars no one can seem to put down, ...not to mention a huge prison population, but hey.

Why do people think that God pays any attention at all to the human race? We have proven over and over again that we are not worthy of God's love or attention. God abandoned the human race long ago after watching us kill each other in war and in peace. Humans are doomed to destroy themselves and God doesn't care, because he's elsewhere, starting his experiment in intelligence again on another planet in another galaxy. Religion IS the greatest cause of pain and suffering in the world.

Hi A Hermit:

Thanks for your Canadian concern and critique of America's faith during wartime.

Before you settle into watching another episode of the hilarious sitcom "Little Mosque on the Prairie" please consider the following:

Islamists in Canada are trying to introduce Sharia laws into the country through the Islamic banking route, which boasts of an 'interest free' regime.

"They (Islamists) seem to be taking a different route. They claim they are introducing the seemingly innocuous 'Islamic banking' by claiming such banking to be 'interest-free' and 'Sharia-compliant'

This is one more ploy to prey on the fears and insecurities of Muslim Canadians. Invoking Islam to make a fortune is only one part of the agenda. The other is to try one more time to make 'Sharia' part of the Canadian lexicon,'

Since 2003, Islamists have been trying to bring Sharia law to Canada, but it has not met with any success. But this time, Islamic banking has witnessed the backing of corporate lawyers and senior bankers in Canada.

'It's a complete fraud because what you are doing is you are adding interest upfront and building it into your investments and dishonestly calling it interest-free.'

Yes, Ghostbuster, there have been other terror attacks, but nothing on the scale of 9/11. That was a unique, and I suspect never to be repeated, form of attack.

As for terrorism being an existential threat to the USA, let's be realistic. If the destruction of the WTC is the most the terrorists can ever do (and I see no reason to believe they could ever do more) than they clearly are not a threat to the existence of America. Certainly they don't represent a threat anything like that offered by the Soviet Union, or Nazism.

The biggest threat to America here is that unreasoning fear will lead her people to abandon their principles; to embrace practices like torture, indefinite and arbitrary detention, unfettered government surveillance of its own citizens and (worst of all) aggressive, unnecessary "preventive:" wars. The terrorists cannot destroy what America's founders built; but Americans themselves might if they are not careful.

Regards

A Hermit

Hey A. Hermit,
Thanks for the discussion. I admire your pacifist beliefs.

I am not addressing our proportionate/ disproportionate war response. I am challenging this statement you made:

"Horrible as the 9/11 attack was it was a one of a kind attack. The idea that Islamic terrorists represent an existential threat to America is just wrong"

In my rebuttal I was specifically addressing 1) 9/11 was and is NOT one of a one of a kind attack and 2) the Islamic terrorists that you said do not represent an existential threat to the United States are indeed an existential threat, and much more. The evidence I offered so far stands unchallenged. I have not yet taken this discussion to the next level, that being the United States justified/unjustified response to the attacks, because I think you are wrong on the premise.

There is one more thing you addressed that I would like to touch on. I am well aware of homegrown terrorism. I find any such terrorist acts equally repugnant (if not more so) to international terrorism committed against our/your/anybody's citizens. I see the supporters of terrorism such as the "good" folk in NC who put bumper stickers on their pick up trucks that said "Run Eric Run" the same as those in the Middle East who celebrated in the streets when we were attacked on 9/11.

One last thing, rest assured that I do not "live in fear" despite the real terrorist threats we face and the over-inflated hyperbole we get from our government and the media. Quite the contrary my friend. Also, I don’t think you “live with your head in the sand” just because you disagree with me. If I can convince you of anything, so be it. If you can convince me I’m fine with that too.

Regards

Where is God when the police chase a motorcycles at high speeds on the Beltway and it results in 2 dead and 15 injured? Where was God when my boss fired me? Where is God when my kid screams like a little devil in the grocery store and everybody thinks I am a jerk of a parent. Where was God on my sixth birthday when my brother destroyed one of my gifts and I still remember this? He was there when Christ was crucified, he was there when the Israelites crossed the Red Sea, and He is here today. How do I know he is here today? First, I see his work in my own life. Second, we are so self destructive that without God's constant presence we would have destroyed ourselves a long time ago. Let God decide when his direct intervention is required. We do not know what is best because we do not have all the facts, He does. We do not know that something is or is not His will, including war. He is there, but to ask Him to show Himself is say Christ was a fraud. For God has already been there and done that. He does not like to repeat Himself and what could He do, anyway, that would top the crucification and the resurrection?

"So your just saying we should overlook 9/11 and the murder of more than 3,000 of our friends, relatives and fellow countrymen and women while the ideology that bred those attacks is alive and well?"

No, I'm saying we should respond (and I say "we" because some of the victims were my countrymen as well) in an appropriate and proportionate manner; by hunting down those responsible, shutting down their finances, and improving intelligence and international police co-operation.

Yes, terrorism is a threat (but it is not confined to Islamists; there have been more home grown all-American threats than foreign foreign in recent years; look up William Krar, Eric Rudolph, the Alabama militia, the Portland propane plot, etc. etc.) They are dangerous, but they are not an EXISTENTIAL threat, ie they don't have the power to defeat or destroy America. What they can do, what they seek to do and what they have clearly succeeded in doing is to create enough fear to provoke an irrational, violent and disproportionate response from the West; one which draw us into protracted, unsustainable assymetrical wars.

I, unlike you my friends, refuse to live in fear, or to allow fear to lead me into supporting the evil of an unnecessary war.

-----------

As for your comment about Canadians "Showing me your back as you run..", Michael tell it to the family of Captain Nicola Goddard, or any of the other courageous Canadians fighting the real enemy in Afghanistan. Canada sent the third largest force to Afghanistan after 9/11; only Britain and the US did more. Sadly, because of your government's blunders, we're still there, and some of our best are still dying there.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/background/afghanistan/casualties/total.html

The whole point of Twain's piece, and my message here, is that war, while it may sometimes be necessary, is necessarily evil; it should not be entered into lightly; it should not be seen as the solution to any problem, even terrorism, but as a failure, an admission that everything else has been tried and failed. That wasn't the case with Iraq, and the price being paid now is the one described by Twain's mysterious stranger; a price paid not only by the Iraqis but by America; a price not only in lives and treasure but in moral and spiritual terms.

Regards

A Hermit

This conversation looks interesting...

"Horrible as the 9/11 attack was it was a one of a kind attack. The idea that Islamic terrorists represent an existential threat to America is just wrong."

So your just saying we should overlook 9/11 and the murder of more than 3,000 of our friends, relatives and fellow countrymen and women while the ideology that bred those attacks is alive and well? Forget about our civilian neighbors jumping out of a 1,000 foot tall building because that fate was better than the other option? Forget the look in my friend's eye as we talked after a memorial service for her missing relative? Forget about unfair portrayals of everyone who practices Islam as a terrorist or terrorist sympathizer? I don't think we should walk around in fear either A Hermit, that is no way to live. At the same time, we can't pretend that nothing happened and that we have nothing to worry about.

Was the recent terrorist plot to blow up 10 airplanes headed for the US another one of a kind attack? Is the prospect of a group of terrorists attacking an installation like Fort Dix so far fetched? Does the name Richard Reid ring a bell? How about the terrorist attacks overseas on Americans before 9/11 including the USS Cole, Khobar Towers, and the embassies in Kenya and Tanzania. ALL the resources we are putting into security can be used for other more pressing issues if there is no threat. The problem is, there is a very real threat from terrorism.

And finally, to prove that the 9/11 attack on the WTC was not a one trick pony, on December 14, 1994 a car bomb was detonated in the underground parking garage below Tower One of the World Trade Center. "The 1,500-lb urea nitrate-fuel oil device killed six and injured 1,042 people. It was intended to devastate the foundation of the North Tower, causing it to collapse onto its twin".

Regards

A. Hermit:

"Lucky I'm in Canada then..."

Showing me your back as you run.. : )

"there is nothing in my post to "denigrate and vilify" the individual American soldier"

You did not read my sentence. Try again:

..You are standing in the shade of freedom provided by others while you denigrate and vilify THEIR ACTIONS.

"If the American people had considered Twain's warning"

Twain wrote SATIRE. Look it up.

"The idea that Islamic terrorists represent an existential threat to America is just wrong."

Some might disagree:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=peFQWuk4nuo

If you love the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, go home from us in peace.

Best wishes.

"I won't remind you of the evidence that America has an enemy seeking to destroy us."

Lucky I'm in Canada then...

Seriously, this is fear mongering of the worst kind. Horrible as the 9/11 attack was it was a one of a kind attack. The idea that Islamic terrorists represent an existential threat to America is just wrong. Outside of Iraq (since America attacked it) more people are killed by dog bites than by terrorism. And as we now know (and as most of us not dependent on the supine corporate American media knew at the time) Iraq was never a threat to the USA; they had no WMD and no links to Al Qaeda.

Secondly, there is nothing in my post to "denigrate and vilify" the individual American soldier; most of them are men and women of honour who sincerely believe they serve their country in pursuit of a better world. Sadly they have been betrayed by their leaders and their countrymen who sent them to fight the wrong enemy in the wrong place at the wrong time.

Finally, while war may indeed at times be necessary it is never a good thing, it is always destructive, and its consequences always include great evil, usually in much greater measure than any good that might result.

If the American people had considered Twain's warning in 2002/2003 they may not have been so easily led into folly.

Regards

A Hermit

A Hermit:

You say:

"The truth of war; it is a failure, a disaster, destructive and evil."

You are fond of Clemons. Do you know Mill?

"War is an ugly thing, but not the ugliest of things. The decayed and degraded state of moral and patriotic feeling which thinks that nothing is worth war is much worse. The person who has nothing for which he is willing to fight, nothing which is more important than his own personal safety, is a miserable creature and has no chance of being free unless made and kept so by the exertions of better men than himself."

You say:

"Even while we remember those who serve we must not forget the truth."

I won't remind you of the evidence that America has an enemy seeking to destroy us.

You are standing in the shade of freedom provided by others while you denigrate and vilify their actions.

You are sadly confused.

Yes Michael; I'm aware that Twain was a freethinking satirist. That's what I admire about him. Did you miss the point of his story? War is indeed Hell, and when one prays for victory in war one is, whether intentionally or not, praying for "the other poor bastard to die for his country" as Patton put it.

We are fed the glorious, honorable images of war and too often ignore the ugly realities. My heart goes out to those who choose to serve their country; most do so out of the best of intentions. But they have been too often betrayed by leaders who ignore the unintended, ugly side of war. All the pretty prayers in the world can't change the truth of war; it is a failure, a disaster, destructive and evil. Even while we remember those who serve we must not forget the truth.

"Michael; I appreciate your sentiment"

A Hermit are you unaware of America's recent history and A Liar too?

Mark Twain: "If there is a God, he is a malign thug."

He was an atheist who wrote satire:

"The Battle Hymn of the Republic Brought Down to
Date"

"Reflections on Being the Delight of God"

"The Mysterious Stranger"

"Comments on the Killing of 600 Moros"

"A Humane Word from Satan"

"Concerning the Jews"

A Hermit -you don't get out much?

Michael; I appreciate your sentiment. But consider Mark Twain's lesson:

http://www.midwinter.com/lurk/making/warprayer.html

When you have prayed for victory you have prayed for many unmentioned results which follow victory--*must* follow it, cannot help but follow it. Upon the listening spirit of God fell also the unspoken part of the prayer. He commandeth me to put it into words. Listen!

"O Lord our Father, our young patriots, idols of our hearts, go forth to battle -- be Thou near them! With them -- in spirit -- we also go forth from the sweet peace of our beloved firesides to smite the foe. O Lord our God, help us to tear their soldiers to bloody shreds with our shells; help us to cover their smiling fields with the pale forms of their patriot dead; help us to drown the thunder of the guns with the shrieks of their wounded, writhing in pain; help us to lay waste their humble homes with a hurricane of fire; help us to wring the hearts of their unoffending widows with unavailing grief; help us to turn them out roofless with little children to wander unfriended the wastes of their desolated land in rags and hunger and thirst, sports of the sun flames of summer and the icy winds of winter, broken in spirit, worn with travail, imploring Thee for the refuge of the grave and denied it -- for our sakes who adore Thee, Lord, blast their hopes, blight their lives, protract their bitter pilgrimage, make heavy their steps, water their way with their tears, stain the white snow with the blood of their wounded feet! We ask it, in the spirit of love, of Him Who is the Source of Love, and Who is the ever-faithful refuge and friend of all that are sore beset and seek His aid with humble and contrite hearts. Amen.

Heartfelt thanks to Chuck Colson for remembering our veterans and the day our nation has set aside to honor them.

Lord, Keep our troops forever in Your loving care. Give them wisdom in battle and victory over the enemy... Grant them a safe and swift return. Bless and comfort those who mourn lost. And be with those who carry the scars of war.

I don't know who wrote:

"This smarmy bit of non-reasoning is nothing short of nauseating."

but I am certain he can thank a veteran for his freedom to speak openly.

Americans owe their veterans the gratitude of a free nation. (At least those Americans who value their freedom.)

I'm sure the surgeons wish they'd have known that god was guiding them before they spent over a decade of extremely hard work studying and practicing.

I thought Chuck's article was very non-smarmy.

This smarmy bit of non-reasoning is nothing short of nauseating.

If your god is guiding the hands of the O.R. surgeons, then how do you explain what is going on when a surgeon makes a fatal mistake? Is your god unwilling to prevent this? Is your god willing, but unable? Please advise. This god sounds like it is not guiding anything, but that humans are acting like humans. Years and years of education and practice seem to be what are guiding the hands of the O.R. surgeon; simple, wonderful, human kindness seems to be involved in the blood drive example.

It seems awfully convenient for you to attribute all the good things that humans do to your god, but the bad stuff is all too human. Too bad you don't talk about satan any more, but I guess you have to sugar coat your religion these days or you won't get the donations you need to store up your treasures on earth.

Simply stated, you are justifying the the mass murder of innocent civilians and it is sickening. This is exactly what people are referring to when they claim that religion is used to justify atrocities.

Where is your god when those same soldiers are inflicting "shock and awe" on the populace with all the machinery of modern warfare while they are sitting comfortably in the cockpit? Is this god guiding their hands? Guiding the missles? Or just standing by? Don't you still attribute the moral pronouncement, "Thou shalt not kill" to this god of yours? Did it get a footnote in the latest edition? "P.S. it's ok to kill if you feel threatened or if somebody tells you that they are 'bad guys'".