1. Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

Is the 9/11 attack found in the Bible?

Discussion in 'General Baptist Discussions' started by webdog, Dec 30, 2008.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. NaasPreacher (C4K)

    NaasPreacher (C4K) Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2003
    Messages:
    26,806
    Likes Received:
    80
    You really oughta take the 3 minutes to watch it - it'll give you a nice chuckle.
     
  2. rbell

    rbell Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2006
    Messages:
    11,103
    Likes Received:
    0
    I saved myself 2 minutes and 58 seconds. I read JustChristian's "9-11 is Bush's fault" and still got a chuckle.

    Just as vapid, and less bandwidth used.
     
  3. NaasPreacher (C4K)

    NaasPreacher (C4K) Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2003
    Messages:
    26,806
    Likes Received:
    80
    Yeah, but I didn't want to be dragged off topic :)
     
  4. JustChristian

    JustChristian New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2007
    Messages:
    3,833
    Likes Received:
    0
    The policy paper became the administration's blueprint when its author, Paul Wolfowitz, became a principal in the Bush administration.
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    ttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Wolfowitz


    Paul Dundes Wolfowitz (born December 22, 1943) is a former United States Ambassador to Indonesia, U.S. Deputy Secretary of Defense, and President of the World Bank. He is currently a visiting scholar at the American Enterprise Institute, working on issues of international economic development, Africa and public-private partnerships,[2] and chairman of the US-Taiwan Business Council.[3]

    As Deputy Secretary of Defense, he was "a major architect of President Bush's Iraq policy and ... its most fanatical and hawkish advocate." [4][5][6][7] After serving two years, he resigned as president of the World Bank Group "ending a protracted and tumultuous battle over his stewardship, sparked by a promotion he arranged for his companion."[8][9]

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wolfowitz_Doctrine


    Wolfowitz Doctrine is an unofficial name given to the initial version of the Defense Planning Guidance for the 1994-99 fiscal years (dated February 18, 1992) authored by U.S. Undersecretary of Defense for Policy Paul Wolfowitz and his deputy Scooter Libby.

    Not intended for public release, it was leaked to The New York Times on March 7, 1992, and sparked a public controversy about U.S. foreign and defense policy. The document was widely criticized as imperialist as the document outlined a policy of unilateralism and pre-emptive military action to suppress potential threats from other nations and prevent any other nation from rising to superpower status.

    Such was the outcry that the document was hastily re-written under the close supervision of U.S. Secretary of Defense Dick Cheney and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Colin Powell before being officially released on April 16, 1992. Although the initial release was denounced at the time it was leaked, many of its tenets have since re-emerged in the Bush Doctrine.

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

    The bill you cited did have the objective of regime change in Iraq but did not authorize an invasion and military takeover of that country. We would be far better off if we had taken this approach.

    SUMMARY:
    (REVISED AS OF 10/05/98 -- Passed House, amended)
    Iraq Liberation Act of 1998 - Declares that it should be the policy of the United States to seek to remove the Saddam Hussein regime from power in Iraq and to replace it with a democratic government.

    Authorizes the President, after notifying specified congressional committees, to provide to the Iraqi democratic opposition organizations: (1) grant assistance for radio and television broadcasting to Iraq; (2) Department of Defense (DOD) defense articles and services and military education and training (IMET); and (3) humanitarian assistance, with emphasis on addressing the needs of individuals who have fled from areas under the control of the Hussein regime. Prohibits assistance to any group or organization that is engaged in military cooperation with the Hussein regime. Authorizes appropriations.

    Directs the President to designate: (1) one or more Iraqi democratic opposition organizations that meet specified criteria as eligible to receive assistance under this Act; and (2) additional such organizations which satisfy the President's criteria.

    Urges the President to call upon the United Nations to establish an international criminal tribunal for the purpose of indicting, prosecuting, and imprisoning Saddam Hussein and other Iraqi officials who are responsible for crimes against humanity, genocide, and other criminal violations of international law.

    Expresses the sense of the Congress that once the Saddam Hussein regime is removed from power in Iraq, the United States should support Iraq's transition to democracy by providing humanitarian assistance to the Iraqi people and democracy transition assistance to Iraqi parties and movements with democratic goals, including convening Iraq's foreign creditors to develop a multilateral response to the foreign debt incurred by the Hussein regime.

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

    Most Americans including most people on this board did not realize that world supremacy was the objective of the Bush administration.
     
  5. OldRegular

    OldRegular Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2004
    Messages:
    22,678
    Likes Received:
    64
    Isn’t it strange how leftist news media such as the New York Times [“the worlds greatest newspaper” don-chu-no] are always able to get their hands on classified documents?

    As for regime change in Iraq, President Clinton signed into law a bill authorizing the expenditure of 8 million dollars to facilitate such a change in 1998. As for regime change in China only a committed leftist would oppose such an idea. However, the leftists are still smarting over the defeat and breakup of the father of Communist dictatorships, the Soviet Union, by Preaident Ronald Reagan.

    CLINTON SIGNS IRAQ LIBERATION ACT
    October 31, 1998
    The White House
    Office of the Press Secretary
    For Immediate Release
    October 31, 1998
    Statement by thePpresident

    Today I am signing into law H.R. 4655, the "Iraq Liberation Act of 1998." This Act makes clear that it is the sense of the Congress that the United States should support those elements of the Iraqi opposition that advocate a very different future for Iraq than the bitter reality of internal repression and external aggression that the current regime in Baghdad now offers.

    Let me be clear on what the U.S. objectives are:

    The United States wants Iraq to rejoin the family of nations as a freedom-loving and law-abiding member. This is in our interest and that of our allies within the region.

    The United States favors an Iraq that offers its people freedom at home. I categorically reject arguments that this is unattainable due to Iraq's history or its ethnic or sectarian make-up. Iraqis deserve and desire freedom like everyone else.

    The United States looks forward to a democratically supported regime that would permit us to enter into a dialogue leading to the reintegration of Iraq into normal international life.


    My Administration has pursued, and will continue to pursue, these objectives through active application of all relevant United Nations Security Council resolutions. The evidence is overwhelming that such changes will not happen under the current Iraq leadership.

    In the meantime, while the United States continues to look to the Security Council's efforts to keep the current regime's behavior in check, we look forward to new leadership in Iraq that has the support of the Iraqi people. The United States is providing support to opposition groups from all sectors of the Iraqi community that could lead to a popularly supported government.

    On October 21, 1998, I signed into law the Omnibus Consolidated and Emergency Supplemental Appropriations Act, 1999, which made $8 million available for assistance to the Iraqi democratic opposition. This assistance is intended to help the democratic opposition unify, work together more effectively, and articulate the aspirations of the Iraqi people for a pluralistic, participatory political system that will include all of Iraq's diverse ethnic and religious groups. As required by the Emergency Supplemental Appropriations Act for FY 1998 (Public Law 105-174), the Department of State submitted a report to the Congress on plans to establish a program to support the democratic opposition. My Administration, as required by that statute, has also begun to implement a program to compile information regarding allegations of genocide, crimes against humanity, and war crimes by Iraq's current leaders as astep towards bringing to justice those directly responsible for such acts.

    The Iraq Liberation Act of 1998 provides additional, discretionary authorities under which my Administration can act to further the objectives I outlined above. There are, of course, other important elements of U.S. policy. These include the maintenance of U.N. Security Council support [for] efforts to eliminate Iraq's prohibited weapons and missile programs and economic sanctions that continue to deny the regime the means to reconstitute those threats to international peace and security. United States support for the Iraqi opposition will be carried out consistent with those policy objectives as well.

    Similarly, U.S. support must be attuned to what the opposition can effectively make use of as it develops over time. With those observations, I sign H.R. 4655 into law.


    WILLIAM J. CLINTON
    THE WHITE HOUSE,
    October 31, 1998

    The Sunday Herald
    Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sunday_Herald

    The Sunday Herald was launched as a six section newspaper with the slogan "No ordinary Sunday" on 7 February 1999. The use of the "f" word in the first edition of the magazine alienated older and more conservative readers, but the paper quickly won a following among more liberal-minded Scots. It also won a raft of awards for its journalism, design and photography, in the UK and internationally, and secured the former archbishop Richard Holloway and On the Waterfront scriptwriter Budd Schulberg as regular contributors. Its web version gained a large readership in the United States because of its consistent anti-George W. Bush and anti-Iraq War line.

    Tam Dalyell
    Source: http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2004/jan/13/houseofcommons.uk1
    The campaigning MP was suspended more than once from the House of Commons for "unparliamentary language" which he refused to withdraw. He was twice expelled from the Commons for calling Margaret Thatcher a liar and refusing to withdraw the epithet.

    He served as shadow science minister but was forced to quit in 1982 over his criticism of the Falklands conflict.

    He was equally opposed to the first Gulf war and once went to Baghdad to negotiate with Tariq Aziz, the Iraqi foreign minister.

    And he went to enormous lengths to try to exculpate Muammar Gadafy, the Libyan leader, from any involvement in the Lockerbie atrocity.


    I stand by my original statement JC but you will never understand:

    Hundreds of thousands of American men and women, my brother among them, have given their lives over the years to secure the freedom of others and the only land we got was enough to bury our dead. And that is true even under President Bush!:thumbs: :thumbs:
     
  6. gb93433

    gb93433 Active Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Jun 26, 2003
    Messages:
    15,549
    Likes Received:
    15
    What do you think of the video at http://www.persecution.tv/media/tfc/player.html

    I remember the day in 1975 I heard the speaker talk in person.
     
  7. OldRegular

    OldRegular Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2004
    Messages:
    22,678
    Likes Received:
    64
    We have heard the testimony of this pastor and of Senator John McCain and countless others of the horrors of the Communist prisons, yet no condemnation of Communists from the leftists in this country or any other country. Yet President Bush is damned for the treatment of prisoners in Guantanamo who, other than their confinement, live better than they ever have.

    As I listened to this pastor a passage of Scripture came to mind: Examine yourselves, whether ye be in the faith. [2 Corinthians 13:5] and I wondered how I would have responded given the treatment this man, McCain, and countless others have endured.

    I have posted elsewhere on this forum the statement that there have been more Christian martyrs in the 20th century than in the previous 19 centuries, most at the hands of Communists. Sadly there are professing Christians who view Communism much as they view abortion. How many Jane Fondas do we have in America?
     
  8. JustChristian

    JustChristian New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2007
    Messages:
    3,833
    Likes Received:
    0
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Isn’t it strange how leftist news media such as the New York Times [“the worlds greatest newspaper” don-chu-no] are always able to get their hands on classified documents?

    As for regime change in Iraq, President Clinton signed into law a bill authorizing the expenditure of 8 million dollars to facilitate such a change in 1998. As for regime change in China only a committed leftist would oppose such an idea. However, the leftists are still smarting over the defeat and breakup of the father of Communist dictatorships, the Soviet Union, by Preaident Ronald Reagan.
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    What classified document are you talking about? Can you substantiate your statement about leftists smarting over the downfall of the Soviet Union? I doubt you'd find anyone here who wasn't glad when the cold war ended. I certainly was. As for downgrading the Herald no problem. I can find lots of other references for Wolfowitz's document. It was common knowledge.
     
  9. Marcia

    Marcia Active Member

    Joined:
    May 12, 2004
    Messages:
    11,139
    Likes Received:
    1
    Just can't bring myself to do it. I tried. Time is too precious to me and I don't want to fill my head with junk. :wavey:
     
  10. Amy.G

    Amy.G New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2006
    Messages:
    13,103
    Likes Received:
    4
    What are ya doin' on the BB then? :laugh:

    JK. There's some good stuff here to fill your head with......sometimes. :tongue3:
     
  11. OldRegular

    OldRegular Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2004
    Messages:
    22,678
    Likes Received:
    64
    I stand by my original statement JC but you will never understand:

    Hundreds of thousands of American men and women, my brother among them, have given their lives over the years to secure the freedom of others and the only land we got was enough to bury our dead. And that is true even under President Bush!
     
  12. JustChristian

    JustChristian New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2007
    Messages:
    3,833
    Likes Received:
    0
    Sorry but you're wrong. Securing our freedom does not mean taking away the freedom of others and that's what maintaining world supremacy is all about. Hitler demonstrated the truth of this perspective as did the Roman empire, Alexander the Great, the Soviet Union, Genghis Khan, Napoleon, etc.

    Yes, we should fight for freedom. No, we should not fight for world domination.
     
  13. NiteShift

    NiteShift New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2005
    Messages:
    2,034
    Likes Received:
    0
    Well, Hillary Clinton called for regime change in Iraq. She approved the invasion, and now she is Barak Obama's Sec of State. That must mean that their objective is...you got it...world supremecy!
     
  14. Palatka51

    Palatka51 New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2007
    Messages:
    3,724
    Likes Received:
    0
    And the collected gasp of the left can be heard all the way to Tinbucktoo.

    Good post NightShift. :thumbs:
     
  15. JustChristian

    JustChristian New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2007
    Messages:
    3,833
    Likes Received:
    0
    Iraq wasn't the only place where Wolfowitz wanted supremacy. He literally wanted the U.S. to have world supremacy over Russia, China, UK, France, etc. Yours is not a logical conclusion.
     
  16. OldRegular

    OldRegular Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2004
    Messages:
    22,678
    Likes Received:
    64
    Just whose freedom have we taken away? The terrorists for one. Now you name just one. You made the charge now back it up or remain silent about those things you cannot understand.
     
  17. Thinkingstuff

    Thinkingstuff Active Member

    Joined:
    May 14, 2008
    Messages:
    8,248
    Likes Received:
    9
    Faith:
    Non Baptist Christian
    My reply to the title is no.
     
  18. OldRegular

    OldRegular Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2004
    Messages:
    22,678
    Likes Received:
    64
    Can you substantiate your statement: the collected gasp of the left can be heard all the way to Tinbucktoo. :smilewinkgrin:
     
  19. webdog

    webdog Active Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2005
    Messages:
    24,696
    Likes Received:
    2
    That would be mine, too, but I wanted to give the Van Impe fans something to debate.

    Somehow it ended up about George Bush. Go figure.

    Moderators can now move it to the politics forum if they would like to.
     
  20. JustChristian

    JustChristian New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2007
    Messages:
    3,833
    Likes Received:
    0
    August 19, 1953: Iranian Government Overthrown by Rebels and CIA

    CIA coup planner Kermit Roosevelt. [Source: Find a Grave (,com)]The government of Iran is overthrown by Iranian rebels and the CIA in a coup codenamed Operation Ajax. The coup was planned by CIA operative Kermit Roosevelt after receiving the blessings of the US and British governments. Muhammad Mosaddeq is deposed and the CIA promptly reinstates Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi on the throne.

    The Shah’s secret police, SAVAK, trained by the CIA and Israel’s Mossad, are widely perceived as being as brutal and terrifying as the Nazi Gestapo in World War II.
    British oil interests in Iran, partially nationalized under previous governments, are returned to British control. American oil interests are retained by 8 private oil companies, who are awarded 40% of the Iranian oil industry. US General Norman Schwarzkopf, Sr. (father of the general with the same name in the 1991 Gulf War) helps the Shah develop the fearsome SAVAK secret police. [ZNet, 12/12/2001; Global Policy Forum, 2/28/2002]

    Author Stephen Kinzer will say in 2003, "The result of that coup was that the Shah was placed back on his throne. He ruled for 25 years in an increasingly brutal and repressive fashion. His tyranny resulted in an explosion of revolution in 1979 the event that we call the Islamic revolution. That brought to power a group of fanatically anti-Western clerics who turned Iran into a center for anti-Americanism and, in particular, anti-American terrorism. The Islamic regime in Iran also inspired religious fanatics in many other countries, including those who went on to form the Taliban in Afghanistan and give refuge to terrorists who went on to attack the United States. The anger against the United States that flooded out of Iran following the 1979 revolution has its roots in the American role in crushing Iranian democracy in 1953. Therefore, I think it’s not an exaggeration to say that you can draw a line from the American sponsorship of the 1953 coup in Iran, through the Shah’s repressive regime, to the Islamic revolution of 1979 and the spread of militant religious fundamentalism that produced waves of anti-Western terrorism." [Stephen Kinzer, 7/29/2003]

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

    Do you deny that the U.S. supported the Shah of Iran, a dictator on the same level as Hitler?
     
    #40 JustChristian, Jan 6, 2009
    Last edited by a moderator: Jan 6, 2009
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
Loading...