I look forward to post-ideology... - Page 2 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind > Free Your Mind Archive
Click Here to Login
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 09-25-2002, 09:29 PM   #21
ONE
love, blood, life
 
melon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Toronto, Ontario
Posts: 11,782
Local Time: 09:54 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by STING2
While some of the blame for not preventing 9/11 belongs with the Bush Administration, the vast majority of it belongs to the previous Clinton administration that had 8 years to deal with all these problems and is partly responsible for the capabilities of the CIA and FBI when Bush first took office only 7 months before the attacks. Bush may of had 7 months, all be it, its difficult to change anything in the first 6 months of a new administration. But Clinton had 8 years!
Yes, yes. Everything is Clinton's fault, and every problem that Bush has had should be placed on him, right? And, lo and behold, where was our Republican Congress during this time? But THAT'S right...we had a moral crusade to launch! Let's get that "liberal" Clinton and his cock sucking whore and send them off to impeachment hell. I think you probably know enough about our government to know that Congress has about more power than the President by design. In fact, digging back into history, Clinton *did* make some attempts to dive into terrorism and even the corporate scandals...but our Republican Congress was against it, riding high on its fake internet economic wealth.

And where was Bush? Giving $40 million to the Taliban in April 2001 to encourage their battle against the heroin trade in Afghanistan...which they had already won a long time ago. Such vigilance on Dubya's part! If only he had read the Clinton-era intelligence reports...which he discarded, because they were "Clinton" documents, whom every good Republican knows that he's the antichrist incarnate.

My point is that Dubya was just as blindsided as anyone, and to use 9/11 as a political blame game against the Democratic Party is complete folly. Let's just face it...the U.S., both Democratic and Republican, blew it.

Melon
__________________

melon is offline  
Old 09-25-2002, 09:51 PM   #22
ONE
love, blood, life
 
melon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Toronto, Ontario
Posts: 11,782
Local Time: 09:54 AM
In the end, I think what is bothering me is that I'm upset with the extremism. We have:

1) Extremist Islamic terrorists who, taking upon example of such fantastic nations like Iran, have decided that the U.S. is, indeed, Satan incarnate, coupled with contorted Crusades-era ideology that made war martyrs instantly go to Heaven. See the problems with that picture...

2) Extremist American Christians who really do see this as a Holy War against those heathen "A-rabs," with a President who seems to actually believe this. Hence, his comprehensive "war against terror," full of such cute terms as "Axis of Evil." Note the omission of the word, "terrorism." Since Bush sees God on his side and bin Laden sees Allah on his side, we have certainly seen the meeting of the fanatics.

3) Extreme leftists, who wish to take this as an opportunity to rail against everything American, just for the sake of it being American.

4) Extreme conservatives, who wish to repaint history in that everything America has done is right, except those periods with those "communist" Democratic presidents.

And completely forgotten in all of this is "the truth," which no one is concerned with, and all I see is everyone repeating the same exact mistakes of our ancestors, with a President who can't communicate his way out of anything. "There's black people in Brazil?"

I think, perhaps, this is a great time to just turn off my brain and just sit back over the next few decades, just chuckling at the idiosyncrasies of life. The one lesson I did learn from 9/11 was that the truth is irrelevant to modern society.

Melon
__________________

melon is offline  
Old 09-25-2002, 09:56 PM   #23
Rock n' Roll Doggie
FOB
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 8,876
Local Time: 02:54 PM
By nature, the Presidency of the United States is really more of a foreign Policy position. The President can invade and take over another country without the consent of congress as long as it is done quickly, ie. Panama. The Presidents powers are constrained comparitivily on domestic issues but not on Political Military issues. The President has his finger on the button, not Congress. The President is the commander in chief, and could have ordered a Special forces operation in 1998 to sieze and kill Bin Laden rather than depending on Cruise Missiles to hit tents out in the desert. Clinton as commander and chief had 8 years to get Bin Ladin, so I find blaming Bush for what he did in only 7 months to be a joke in light of that. I only brought up these points because Bush was unfairly criticized. Many of the actions taken by Clinton during his two terms were things that the Commander and chief has the sole authority to do, so bringing up the Republican Congress is a moot point usually except in regards to domestic issues. But I'm not pleased at all how the Republicans in congress often behaved themselves. But their not the commander and chief and don't make the decisions on covert CIA operations or special forces operations, those decisions are for the President to make. The decision by Clinton to pull back 3/4 of our troops from Somalia while doubling the military role there was his decision alone, not congress. The decision not to send tanks to Somalia, against the recommendation of the military to aid in the hunt for warlords, was his decision not Congress. This had terrible results for the mission in Somalia. Attempting to conduct a military operation without required equipment and force was foolish.

Congress does play a larger role when it comes to the military budget, but the President can defeat a party that has the majority in congress by uniting his own and dividing the opposition. The Rupublicans majority in the house was tiny. But when comes to military actions abroad, it is the President, Commander in Chief that has by far the most power.
STING2 is offline  
Old 09-25-2002, 09:57 PM   #24
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 10,885
Local Time: 09:54 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by Anthony

With all due respect, that is NOT my logic and I do believe you are being pendantic. In return, all I can offer is an equally facetious answer.
Ant.
Awwwwww...mannnnnnnnnnn

Where is my friggin dictionary??????







Dang, working with 4th graders all week long has wrecked my vocabulary.
Dreadsox is offline  
Old 09-25-2002, 10:08 PM   #25
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Tempe, Az USA
Posts: 12,856
Local Time: 07:54 AM

I dunno Melon.
Maybe if Clinton coulda kept his penis "in-check" and his "personal affairs" in order..he would of been more available and attentive to the affairs of our country's saftey and the world's security..while acting as President..what do u think?

Just a thought.
I could b way off base..

DB9
diamond is offline  
Old 09-25-2002, 10:09 PM   #26
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 10,885
Local Time: 09:54 AM
Right on Melon

Quote:
Originally posted by melon
In the end, I think what is bothering me is that I'm upset with the extremism.
Melon
I think I said something along these lines in the thread about 9/11 being overrated.

Quoting myself

Quote:
Originally posted by Dreadsox

To me, one of the more sickening thing about the events of September 11 is that it was an attrocity committed by human beings against human beings in the name of God and religion. I know this is nothing new in the history of the world. But it seems that as I look through the lens of hindsight of world history there is a lesson that mankind continues to miss.

Fanaticism is dangerous no matter what the form. It twists, warps and distorts judgment. This can be political fanaticism or religious fanaticism. I think one of the messages I get from the story of Christ, is that fanaticism gets in the way of the will of God. I think the story Ghandi and maybe even MLK relates the same message.
Peace to all.
Dreadsox is offline  
Old 09-25-2002, 10:14 PM   #27
Rock n' Roll Doggie
FOB
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 8,876
Local Time: 02:54 PM
Melon,

I'm not trying to blow up Clinton or anything. I was really just defending Bush. There were several military actions by Clinton that I did agree with and supported despite my party's objections, Bosnia and Kosovo. Clinton hit the nail on the head with these interventions, and most republicans were on another planet in regards to their logic on that one. Those were some of the pluses of the Clinton foreign Policy years.
STING2 is offline  
Old 09-25-2002, 11:14 PM   #28
Rock n' Roll Doggie
 
U2Bama's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Gulf Coast State of Mine
Posts: 3,405
Local Time: 09:54 AM

1. I agree with Melon almost 100% in this thread.

2. I am tired of partisan Republicans blaming Clinton and I am tired of partisan Democrats blaming Bush for 9/11. NEITHER of them caused it. 19 terrorists and unkown backers caused it. 19 fundamentalist Islamic terrorists and their backers carried out the attacks. As Senator Bob Graham (Democrat from Florida) and Senator Richard Shelby (Republican from Alabama) have indicated, there was an overall intelligence failure, not wholly attributable to any administration or domestic political party or reproductive organ. This failure is currently being investigated as to what degree the attacks could have been detected and prevented.

3. Don't think that the 19 terrorists and their backers have some goal of making the world a better place, solving the Third World debt crisis, ending the African AIDS crisis, liberating the space monkeys, or globally restoring human rights. Their beef is with the presence of Jews (Israel), westerners (U.S. & European military and businesses), moderate Muslims, Hindus and other "infidels" in the Arabian peninsula, Palestine, the Middle East, Northern Africa and Central Asia. Their goal is to drive these groups from a large geographical region so that they can rule the area with a theocratic empire.

4. Have a nice day.

~U2Alabama
U2Bama is offline  
Old 09-26-2002, 04:02 AM   #29
War Child
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 940
Local Time: 02:54 PM
Excellent thread.

I think the next 12 months will be extremely interesting, to put it mildly.
TylerDurden is offline  
Old 09-26-2002, 11:37 AM   #30
ONE
love, blood, life
 
melon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Toronto, Ontario
Posts: 11,782
Local Time: 09:54 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by diamond
I dunno Melon.
Maybe if Clinton coulda kept his penis "in-check" and his "personal affairs" in order..he would of been more available and attentive to the affairs of our country's saftey and the world's security..while acting as President..what do u think?
The Republican Party was *never* interested in anything, except ensuring that Clinton would be a failure. In 1993, I already saw hundreds of bumper stickers to "Impeach Clinton." Some vast right-wing conspiracy? In this case, I think it is probably true, as the Republican Congress was looking for *any* excuse to impeach Clinton. Since they couldn't nail him for Whitewater or "Travelgate" (which was silly from the beginning), they just decided to make a moral crusade.

Quite honestly, I think a lot of this hostility came from the fact that the Reagan/Bush era wished to permanently mold America in their image: an uber-capitalist nation with no labor unions, corporate taxes, etc., that would continue to establish American cultural dominance over the world. I mean, they still had "Star Wars" to build, and Clinton came in and stopped it. Overall, they had an agenda to fulfill, whether the American people wanted it or not or whether America could afford it or not, and I feel that this same contingent is taking full advantage of the current Bush Administration, hiding under the guise of increased security of 9/11. No, I don't believe they caused 9/11, but I do believe they are exploiting it for every last advantage to create their view of an American supply-side utopia, not caring who or what they destroy in their path, because "God is on their side."

Melon
melon is offline  
Old 09-26-2002, 01:53 PM   #31
Rock n' Roll Doggie
ALL ACCESS
 
hiphop's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: in the jungle
Posts: 7,410
Local Time: 04:54 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by U2Bama
3. Don't think that the 19 terrorists and their backers have some goal of making the world a better place, solving the Third World debt crisis, ending the African AIDS crisis, liberating the space monkeys, or globally restoring human rights. Their goal is to drive these groups from a large geographical region so that they can rule the area with a theocratic empire.

4. Have a nice day.

~U2Alabama
Did I ever think so? No. True what you say.

I agree with 99 percent Anthony said in this thread

(Don´t make me research the one percent)

Great discussion.

Oh, and I have looked at the website of the Christian Coalition. I think I will join them because they have the true answers to end evil on this world. I like it especially that with every new site that poops up, there is no picture of Jesus or a cross or a church, but the picture of Mount Rushmore or the Liberty Statue. Those symbols define Christianity from the very start, don´t they?
hiphop is offline  
Old 09-26-2002, 02:08 PM   #32
pax
ONE
love, blood, life
 
pax's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Ewen's new American home
Posts: 11,412
Local Time: 10:54 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by melon


Quite honestly, I think a lot of this hostility came from the fact that the Reagan/Bush era wished to permanently mold America in their image: an uber-capitalist nation with no labor unions, corporate taxes, etc., that would continue to establish American cultural dominance over the world. I mean, they still had "Star Wars" to build, and Clinton came in and stopped it. Overall, they had an agenda to fulfill, whether the American people wanted it or not or whether America could afford it or not, and I feel that this same contingent is taking full advantage of the current Bush Administration, hiding under the guise of increased security of 9/11. No, I don't believe they caused 9/11, but I do believe they are exploiting it for every last advantage to create their view of an American supply-side utopia, not caring who or what they destroy in their path, because "God is on their side."

Melon
I have long felt this way, that one unfortunate facet of American conservatism is one that wishes to promote *sameness*--not solidarity or unity or mutual support. Some conservatives--and it seems to be those who shout most loudly--make it no secret that they believe everyone ought to be a Christian, Republican, heterosexual gun owner. And we all know that's never going to happen.

I certainly know that many conservatives do not feel this way, and have other reasons for believing and acting as they do. But unfortunately for more fair-minded conservatives, the ultra-right faction is the loudest, and plenty of people--even myself at one time, though I hope not anymore--still think of *all* conservatives in this manner.

EDITED:
One good example is a conservative law firm and activism group calling itself The American Center for Law and Justice. Well, that's a title that could also apply to the ACLU, for example. I'm all for American law and justice in that I believe in trial by jury, free speech, freedom of religion, an open market, and universal suffrage. But I would never join that group. Know what I mean?
__________________
and you hunger for the time
time to heal, desire, time


Join Amnesty.
pax is offline  
Old 09-26-2002, 02:55 PM   #33
Rock n' Roll Doggie
 
U2Bama's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Gulf Coast State of Mine
Posts: 3,405
Local Time: 09:54 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by paxetaurora
One good example is a conservative group calling itself People for the American Way. Well, that's a title that could also apply to the ACLU, for example. I'm "for the American way" in that I believe in trial by jury, free speech, freedom of religion, an open market, and universal suffrage. But I would never join People for the American Way. Know what I mean?
Actually, People for the American Way is a rather liberal general interest group founded by Norman Lear and supported by Michael Stipe and other liberal celebrities and activists. In principle, I agree with their goal of ensuring "the American Way," but I do not always agree with their approach (such as condemning every single judicial candidate that a Republican official dares to nominate, regardless of the judicial candidates experience and views).

~U2Alabama
U2Bama is offline  
Old 09-26-2002, 04:57 PM   #34
pax
ONE
love, blood, life
 
pax's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Ewen's new American home
Posts: 11,412
Local Time: 10:54 AM
Oopsy--thanks for my pointing out my snafu, Bama.

I meant The American Center for Law and Justice, and I'm editing my post to reflect that.
__________________
and you hunger for the time
time to heal, desire, time


Join Amnesty.
pax is offline  
Old 09-30-2002, 12:18 PM   #35
ONE
love, blood, life
 
melon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Toronto, Ontario
Posts: 11,782
Local Time: 09:54 AM
  • "Truth," as we wish it were, has always been mutable and irrelevant. The issue of "balanced representation" is a fallacy in itself, because what we really want is something that appeals to our ideological lenses, whether that be liberal or conservative--again, putting "truth" at the last priority.
  • Karl Marx believed that the working classes would someday rise up, overthrow capitalist society, and be satisfied with equality. This, being perhaps one of the cornerstones of Marxist philosophy, is a fallacy. In contrast, humanity is inherently greedy, and, as long as there is some deluded promise that they themselves could be as wealthy and fat as Bill Gates, humanity will accept the accompanying abuse. This is why capitalism works, because, truly, we enjoy being elitist, and, at the other end, we enjoy seeing others worse off than us.
  • Capitalism, in theory, claimed that supply-and-demand forces would regulate it. In practice, this is a fallacy as well. The institution of forms of "credit" ended any semblance of self-regulation. Health care is bloated beyond all capacity, and, as you can tell, no one can remotely afford it on its own, as insurance is the only thing that props it up. However, eliminate insurance and the health care industry would collapse, as scientists and pharmaceutical companies are used to a certain level of bloated entitlement--i.e., $10,000 for AIDS drugs that cost about $1 to actually make. In nearly every circumstance, business would rather ensure its own destruction through bankruptcy, rather than ever lower its prices significantly.
  • Religion, in theory, is supposedly about "love," when, in fact, religion is about as corrupt--if not more corrupt--than the worst of human regimes. What other device is prone to wars, cults, terrorists, self-hatred, mind control, greed, and power? The nature of religion angers and upsets me so much that, for all the good it claims to bring, I fear that humanity would be in far better shape with its destruction. God was cast out of religion from its inception, and in God's place came worldly power and greed--what we crave the most--and nothing has ever changed.

More to come...

Melon
melon is offline  
Old 09-30-2002, 05:32 PM   #36
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 10,885
Local Time: 09:54 AM
Religion

Quote:
Originally posted by melon
  • Religion, in theory, is supposedly about "love," when, in fact, religion is about as corrupt--if not more corrupt--than the worst of human regimes. What other device is prone to wars, cults, terrorists, self-hatred, mind control, greed, and power? The nature of religion angers and upsets me so much that, for all the good it claims to bring, I fear that humanity would be in far better shape with its destruction. God was cast out of religion from its inception, and in God's place came worldly power and greed--what we crave the most--and nothing has ever changed.


Melon
One of my theories from reading the bible is that Christ came to take religion away from the "church" and give it back to the people. He had to have been a threat to the church leaders at the time. The beauty of Christ is that he preached and performed miracles in violation of "Church Law" and adheared to God's Law.

He was not a threat to Rome and there is no way the Romans wanted to execute him. However, the church leaders feared for their power and greed. Ultimately, this lead to his downfall. Rome could control the Pharisees, and the Pharisees helped to control the Jewish population, however, because they were threatened, there was no choice.

Think about how on Palm Sunday Jesus was on the cusp of revolution with the masses behind him. He gets grabbed in the night, when no one is around to guard and protect him, and he is put to death.

Today I look at the "church" and I wait for it to be rescued again. Man-made rules and dogma have once again put shackles on God. And most "churches" are more concerned with the $$$ than the soul. I eagerly await the next U2 Tour so I can get back into a church.
Dreadsox is offline  
Old 09-30-2002, 05:57 PM   #37
Blue Crack Addict
 
nbcrusader's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Southern California
Posts: 22,071
Local Time: 06:54 AM
Re: Religion

Quote:
Originally posted by Dreadsox
And most "churches" are more concerned with the $$$ than the soul.
While this might be very easy for you to say, or you to believe, it is far from the truth. The vast majority of churches are modest affairs, whether you find them in the wealthiest of places in the world, or in the most impoverished nations. I’ve prayed in well-appointed sanctuaries, and I’ve preached in one-room mud brick churches. In both extremes, the focus was on Jesus Christ and the power of His Grace.

The Great Deceiver wants you to focus on all that is wrong in “religion” so you will skip over God’s truth.

Go in His Peace...
nbcrusader is offline  
Old 09-30-2002, 10:24 PM   #38
Rock n' Roll Doggie
 
U2Bama's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Gulf Coast State of Mine
Posts: 3,405
Local Time: 09:54 AM

Very good point, nbcrusader. A few misguided churches tend to give the rest a bad name, yet there are many congregations that are indeed doing good works and living their faith and, in my opinion, are truly a part of the Body of Christ. You can find such churches within the Catholic, Orthodox and Protestant denominations if you seek them with an open mind. I can understand if going to church or joining a church is not for every Christian, but I don't think that means that the majority of churches are capitalist ventures concerned with profit margins and net worth.

~U2Alabama
U2Bama is offline  
Old 09-30-2002, 10:45 PM   #39
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 10,885
Local Time: 09:54 AM
Re: Re: Religion

Quote:
Originally posted by nbcrusader


While this might be very easy for you to say, or you to believe, it is far from the truth.
We can agree to disagree here. I said "most" not all. I still see most church communities as what Christ stood against. You can choose to think I have been decieved if you want to. I can only speak what is in my heart when I read the story of Christ.


Quote:
Originally posted by nbcrusader

The Great Deceiver wants you to focus on all that is wrong in “religion” so you will skip over God’s truth.

Go in His Peace...

The Great Deceiver has put the shakles of Dogma and man-made rules to keep the focus off of God. The message of Christ is a simple one, yet it has been twisted and turned into something complex by church organizations. God gets lost when that happens. As I said, my continuous prayer to our Father in heaven is that Christ will someday come and straighten this whole mess out. God will be rescued when he does.



Peace to All.
Dreadsox is offline  
Old 09-30-2002, 10:53 PM   #40
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 10,885
Local Time: 09:54 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by U2Bama
I can understand if going to church or joining a church is not for every Christian, but I don't think that means that the majority of churches are capitalist ventures concerned with profit margins and net worth.
~U2Alabama
I agree with you that church may not be the place for every Christian. I wish we knew for sure where the bulk of Christ's ministry took place, in the Temple or with the sinners. I know where I believe it took place.

As for $$$ I do believe that many churches do do good with what they receive. But there have been very few churches that I have been in where the $$$ is not consistently sought out. I am still seaking a single story in the good book where Jesus sought out $$$.


Peace to all.
__________________

Dreadsox is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:54 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com
×