Antenora
Detriment Deleter
Fiendish Philologist
Put down that harpoon gun, in the name of these wonderful birds!
Posts: 15,891
Likes: 113
|
Post by Antenora on Oct 24, 2004 8:16:33 GMT -5
A while ago, I heard the strangest thing about President Bush's religious beliefs. Allegedly, he thinks that he's on a special mission from God to wipe out the Muslims.(Bush also thinks that God talks to him personally, and he said this during the third debate). Is this true? I'm not sure where to look for answers, so I'm asking anyone who knows.
|
|
|
Post by Dante on Oct 24, 2004 8:27:22 GMT -5
A while ago, I heard the strangest thing about President Bush's religious beliefs. Allegedly, he thinks that he's on a special mission from God to wipe out the Muslims.(Bush also thinks that God talks to him personally, and he said this during the third debate). Is this true? I'm not sure where to look for answers, so I'm asking anyone who knows. If that is true (which would be very hard to confirm) then the man should not be president. I mean, "wiping out all Muslims" is awfully similar to "wiping out all Jews" and who do we know who tried to do that?
|
|
|
Post by Amber on Oct 24, 2004 9:39:31 GMT -5
If that is true (which would be very hard to confirm) then the man should not be president. I mean, "wiping out all Muslims" is awfully similar to "wiping out all Jews" and who do we know who tried to do that? Do I bother to answer the question...No, if you dont know then well... If that is true then it is extreemly (sp) disturbing. *goes off to do research*
|
|
|
Post by Snicket on Oct 24, 2004 10:20:06 GMT -5
I have heard him say this. He is very religious, but I think he could have mis-inturpeted the message. Another thing on this subject, Bush is very religious and he has read the bible. The bible states that there will never be peace in the middle east. So why are we over there messing around with forces unknown??? The bible also states that we will be in a Holy War. While over there, we are interfearing with religion, thus leading to the Apocolyps.
|
|
|
Post by Dante on Oct 24, 2004 10:50:08 GMT -5
thus leading to the Apocolypse. Sometimes I wonder whether that would be such a bad thing.
|
|
|
Post by Alice Wilde on Oct 24, 2004 10:51:51 GMT -5
Der Führer Bush.
|
|
|
Post by Dante on Oct 24, 2004 10:56:24 GMT -5
Reminds me of J.'s former screen-name. At least, I think it was J.
|
|
Antenora
Detriment Deleter
Fiendish Philologist
Put down that harpoon gun, in the name of these wonderful birds!
Posts: 15,891
Likes: 113
|
Post by Antenora on Oct 24, 2004 11:42:51 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by DrSeuss the 1st white rapper on Oct 24, 2004 13:59:50 GMT -5
Oh, I am the only one who makes stupid threads....
|
|
Luigi
Bewildered Beginner
Posts: 0
Likes: 2
|
Post by Luigi on Oct 24, 2004 14:05:35 GMT -5
No, I don't think George Bush really means that God talks TO him, I think he was saying that to get religious votes...I daresay he has enough of them.
However, there is a guy who's name slips my mind (Pat Robertson? Or something?) who said God talked to him and God said bush was going win...
|
|
|
Post by Alice Wilde on Oct 24, 2004 14:11:47 GMT -5
However, there is a guy who's name slips my mind (Pat Robertson? Or something?) who said God talked to him and God said bush was going win... Robertson, yes. He also said that God told him that going to Iraq was a bad idea. Meanwhile... GOD: Yo, George! Go to Iraq! I support you, ^&$#$%. BUSH: SEE? EVEN GOD SAYS WE SHOULD GO!!! AVENGEANCE!! I mean...LIBERATION! WMD! YEAH!
|
|
|
Post by Celinra on Oct 24, 2004 21:44:49 GMT -5
Another thing on this subject, Bush is very religious and he has read the bible. The bible states that there will never be peace in the middle east. So why are we over there messing around with forces unknown??? The bible also states that we will be in a Holy War. While over there, we are interfearing with religion, thus leading to the Apocolyps. ...did you ever consider that Bush is the one to put the prophecy into action? It's always in the realm of possibility.
|
|
|
Post by BMatt on Oct 25, 2004 7:54:32 GMT -5
I would like you all to go back to September 11th a moment...Hundreds of millions of people instinctively reached out to those they loved, grateful to be alive. Death had shown itself in a new way. But if a vast throng experienced the terrible events of 9/11 as one, only one man, the President of the United States, bore a unique responsibility for finding a way to respond to them.
George W. Bush plumbed the deepest place in himself, looking for a simple expression of what the assaults of September 11 required. It was his role to lead the nation, and the very world. The President, at a moment of crisis, defines the communal response. A few days after the assault, George W. Bush did this. Speaking spontaneously, without the aid of advisers or speechwriters, he put a word on the new American purpose that both shaped it and gave it meaning. "This crusade," he said, "this war on terrorism."
Crusade. Contrary to schoolboy romances, Hollywood fantasies and the nostalgia of royalty, the Crusades were a set of world-historic crimes. In Iraq "insurgents" have lately shocked the world by decapitating hostages, turning the most taboo of acts into a military tactic. But a thousand years ago, Latin crusaders used the severed heads of Muslim fighters as missiles, catapulting them over the fortified walls of cities under siege. Taboos fall in total war, whether crusade or jihad.
For George W. Bush, crusade was an offhand reference. But all the more powerfully for that, it was an accidental probing of unintended but nevertheless real meaning. That the President used the word inadvertently suggests how it expressed his exact truth, an unmasking of his most deeply felt purpose. Crusade, he said. Later, his embarrassed aides suggested that he had meant to use the word only as a synonym for struggle, but Bush's own syntax belied that. He defined crusade as war. Even offhandedly, he had said exactly what he meant.
Osama bin Laden was already understood to be trying to spark a "clash of civilizations" that would set the West against the whole House of Islam. After 9/11, agitated voices on all sides insisted that no such clash was inevitable. But crusade was a match for jihad, and such words threatened nothing less than apocalyptic conflict between irreconcilable cultures. Indeed, the President's reference flashed through the Arab news media. Its resonance went deeper, even, than the embarrassed aides expected-and not only among Muslims. After all, the word refers to a long series of military campaigns, which, taken together, were the defining event in the shaping of what we call Western civilization. A coherent set of political, economic, social and even mythological traditions of the Eurasian continent, from the British Isles to the far side of Arabia, grew out of the transformations wrought by the Crusades. And it is far from incidental still, both that those campaigns were conducted by Christians against Muslims, and that they, too, were attached to the irrationalities of millennial fever.
If the American President was the person carrying the main burden of shaping a response to the catastrophe of September 11, his predecessor in such a grave role, nearly a thousand years earlier, was the Catholic pope. Seeking to overcome the century-long dislocations of a postmillennial Christendom, he rallied both its leaders and commoners with a rousing call to holy war. Muslims were the infidel people who had taken the Holy Land hundreds of years before. Now, that occupation was defined as an intolerable blasphemy. The Holy Land must be redeemed. Within months of the pope's call, 100,000 people had "taken the cross" to reclaim the Holy Land for Christ. As a proportion of the population of Europe, a comparable movement today would involve more than a million people, dropping everything to go to war.
In the name of Jesus, and certain of God's blessing, crusaders launched what might be called "shock and awe" attacks everywhere they went. In Jerusalem they savagely slaughtered Muslims and Jews alike-practically the whole city. Eventually, Latin crusaders would turn on Eastern Christians, and then on Christian heretics, as blood lust outran the initial "holy" impulse. That trail of violence scars the earth and human memory even to this day-especially in the places where the crusaders wreaked their havoc. And the mental map of the Crusades, with Jerusalem at the center of the earth, still defines world politics. But the main point, in relation to Bush's instinctive response to 9/11, is that those religious invasions and wars of long ago established a cohesive Western identity precisely in opposition to Islam, an opposition that survives to this day.
With the Crusades, the violent theology of the killer God came into its own. To save the world, in this understanding, God willed the violent death of God's only beloved son. Here is the relevance of that mental map, for the crusaders were going to war to rescue the site of the salvific death of Jesus, and they displayed their devotion to the cross on which Jesus died by wearing it on their breasts. When Bush's remark was translated into Arabic for broadcast throughout the Middle East, the word "crusade" was rendered as "war of the cross."
Here is the deeper significance of Bush's inadvertent reference to the Crusades: Instead of being a last recourse or a necessary evil, violence was established then as the perfectly appropriate, even chivalrous, first response to what is wrong in the world. George W. Bush is a Christian for whom this particular theology lives. While he identified Jesus as his favorite "political philosopher" when running for President in 2000, the Jesus of this evangelical President is not the "turn the other cheek" one. Bush's savior is the Jesus whose cross is wielded as a sword. George W. Bush, having cheerfully accepted responsibility for the executions of 152 death-row inmates in Texas, had already shown himself to be entirely at home with divinely sanctioned violence. After 9/11, no wonder it defined his deepest urge.
|
|
|
Post by Dante on Oct 25, 2004 10:20:51 GMT -5
Here is the deeper significance of Bush's inadvertent reference to the Crusades: Instead of being a last recourse or a necessary evil, violence was established then as the perfectly appropriate, even chivalrous, first response to what is wrong in the world. George W. Bush is a Christian for whom this particular theology lives. While he identified Jesus as his favorite "political philosopher" when running for President in 2000, the Jesus of this evangelical President is not the "turn the other cheek" one. Bush's savior is the Jesus whose cross is wielded as a sword. George W. Bush, having cheerfully accepted responsibility for the executions of 152 death-row inmates in Texas, had already shown himself to be entirely at home with divinely sanctioned violence. After 9/11, no wonder it defined his deepest urge. That is rather terrifying. Violence usually only makes problems worse. I think that one thing we all need to accept is that some problems don't have solutions. On the other hand, it reminds me of a news story I saw. Two students watching the presidential debate got into a fight over "who Jesus would vote for". Apparently the idea of "turning the other cheek" came up, and the non-cheek-turner hit a little too hard.
|
|
no-one
Reptile Researcher
Posts: 28
Likes: 1
|
Post by no-one on Oct 25, 2004 12:36:46 GMT -5
Oh, I am the only one who makes stupid threads.... yes
|
|