I agree with you Big Bad, there is a lot of cross-over (sm)
Posted By: MeMT on 2008-11-06
In Reply to: Hey, that's me you're talking about....LOL (sm) - Just the big bad
And we should all have tolerance for each other. That means tolerance for Christians too. While I agree that having a completely religious discussion may be inappropriate for this board, the times that it is related to the political topic it is appropriate. I try not to shove my religious beliefs down anyone's throat because I feel like if anything that is going to accomplish the opposite (lol). But when asked a question I do want to answer with my honest opinion, and when I see another Christian posting something that I don't believe, I want to give my point of view, so that everyone knows that all Christians don't believe the same thing.
Complete Discussion Below:  marks the location of current message within thread
The messages you are viewing
are archived/old.
To view latest messages and participate in discussions, select
the boards given in left menu
Other related messages found in our database
Red Cross CEO
After a very quick Google search, I found this, which indicates a salary of "roughly $149,000." (I personally thought the number would be much higher, but not as high as multi-million bonuses, etc. that we're paying for Wall Street to have.) And as far as Pelosi, she should ride commercial, just like everyone else, IMHO.
Even though some our users have clearly expressed their discontent with the compensation CEOs of their favorite charities receive, Charity Navigator’s 2008 CEO study indicates that the average CEO compensation is roughly $149,000, and represents on average 3.32% of an organization’s overall expenses. While some donors disagree that a nonprofit CEO deserves to earn a six figure salary, we ask that you keep in mind that the charities included in this study are multi-million dollar operations. Leading one of them requires an individual that possesses both an understanding of the issues that are unique to the charity's mission as well as business and management expertise similar to that required of for-profit CEOs.
http://blog.charitynavigator.org/2008/08/charity-navigators-2008-ceo.html
Also known as the Cross of Nero sm
We think of it as a peace sign, but its origins are satanic. Nero thought there would be peace only without Christianity and thousands of Christians were killed under his rule. It is funny you posted this. I am reading up on this stuff after watching a religious video by a guy named Dave Hunt. I am trying to research some of the things these Christians are saying about the Society of Jesus and the Vatican.
climb off your cross
this politically correct horsesh*t is a joke - get all self-righteous
I think McCain's goose egg is brown and probably still resides in his flaccid diaper - go cry about that
International Red Cross
Red Cross Described 'Torture' at CIA Jails
Secret Report Implies That U.S. Violated International Law
Washington Post Staff Writers
Monday, March 16, 2009; Page A01
The International Committee of the Red Cross concluded in a secret report that the Bush administration's treatment of al-Qaeda captives "constituted torture," a finding that strongly implied that CIA interrogation methods violated international law, according to newly published excerpts from the long-concealed 2007 document.
The report, an account alleging physical and psychological brutality inside CIA "black site" prisons, also states that some U.S. practices amounted to "cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment." Such maltreatment of detainees is expressly prohibited by the Geneva Conventions.
The findings were based on an investigation by ICRC officials, who were granted exclusive access to the CIA's "high-value" detainees after they were transferred in 2006 to the U.S. detention camp at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. The 14 detainees, who had been kept in isolation in CIA prisons overseas, gave remarkably uniform accounts of abuse that included beatings, sleep deprivation, extreme temperatures and, in some cases, waterboarding, or simulating drowning.
At least five copies of the report were shared with the CIA and top White House officials in 2007 but barred from public release by ICRC guidelines intended to preserve the humanitarian group's strict policy of neutrality in conflicts. A copy of the report was obtained by Mark Danner, a journalism professor and author who published extensive excerpts in the April 9 edition of the New York Review of Books, released yesterday. He did not say how he obtained the report.
"The ill-treatment to which they were subjected while held in the CIA program, either singly or in combination, constituted torture," Danner quoted the report as saying.
Many of the details of alleged mistreatment at CIA prisons had been reported previously, but the ICRC report is the most authoritative account and the first to use the word "torture" in a legal context.
The CIA declined to comment. A U.S. official familiar with the report said, "It is important to bear in mind that the report lays out claims made by the terrorists themselves."
Often using the detainee's own words, the report offers a harrowing view of conditions at the secret prisons, where prisoners were told they were being taken "to the verge of death and back," according to one excerpt. During interrogations, the captives were routinely beaten, doused with cold water and slammed head-first into walls. Between sessions, they were stripped of clothing, bombarded with loud music, exposed to cold temperatures, and deprived of sleep and solid food for days on end. Some detainees described being forced to stand for days, with their arms shackled above them, wearing only diapers.
"On a daily basis . . . a collar was looped around my neck and then used to slam me against the walls of the interrogation room," the report quotes detainee Tawfiq bin Attash, also known as Walid Muhammad bin Attash, as saying. Later, he said, he was wrapped in a plastic sheet while cold water was "poured onto my body with buckets." He added: "I would be wrapped inside the sheet with cold water for several minutes. Then I would be taken for interrogation."
ICRC officials did not dispute the authenticity of the excerpts, but a spokesman expressed dismay over the leak of the material. "We regret information attributed to the ICRC report was made public in this manner," spokesman Bernard Barrett said.
"The ICRC has been visiting the detainees formerly held by the CIA," he added, "at Guantanamo since 2006. Any concerns or observations the ICRC had when visiting the detainees are part of a confidential dialogue."
President George W. Bush acknowledged the use of coercive interrogation tactics on senior al-Qaeda captives detained by the CIA in the aftermath of the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, but he insisted that the measures complied with U.S. and international law. Former CIA director Michael V. Hayden confirmed last year that the measures included the use of waterboarding on three captives before 2003.
President Obama outlawed such practices within hours of his inauguration in January. But Obama has expressed reluctance to conduct a legal inquiry into the CIA's policies.
The report gives a graphic account of the treatment of Zayn al-Abidin Muhammed Hussein, better known as Abu Zubaida, a Saudi-born Palestinian who was the first alleged senior al-Qaeda operative seized after Sept. 11 -- a characterization of his role that is disputed by his attorneys, who describe him as having a different philosophy of jihad than bin Laden.
Abu Zubaida was severely wounded during a shootout in March 2002 at a safe house he ran in Faisalabad, Pakistan, and survived thanks to CIA-arranged medical care, including multiple surgeries. After he recovered, Abu Zubaida describes being shackled to a chair at the feet and hands for two to three weeks in a cold room with "loud, shouting type music" blaring constantly, according to the ICRC report. He said that he was questioned two to three hours a day and that water was sprayed in his face if he fell asleep.
At some point -- the timing is unclear from the New York Review of Books report -- Abu Zubaida's treatment became harsher. In July 2002, administration lawyers approved more aggressive techniques.
Abu Zubaida said interrogators wrapped a towel around his neck and slammed him into a plywood wall mounted in his cell. He was also repeatedly slapped in the face, he said. After the beatings, he was placed in coffinlike wooden boxes in which he was forced to crouch, with no light and a restricted air supply, he said.
"The stress on my legs held in this position meant my wounds both in my leg and stomach became very painful," he told the ICRC.
After he was removed from a small box, he said, he was strapped to what looked like a hospital bed and waterboarded. "A black cloth was then placed over my face and the interrogators used a mineral bottle to pour water on the cloth so that I could not breathe," Abu Zubaida said.
After breaks to allow him to recover, the waterboarding continued.
"I struggled against the straps, trying to breathe, but it was hopeless," he said. "I though I was going to die."
I sent a rather generous check to the Red Cross.
How much did you contribute?
Don't cross a bridge that isn't built yet, if ever
I didn't vote for Obama, but I'm not upset that he won.
That's the average salary, not the Red Cross
That's kind of misleading, since it's the average salary for a non-profit CEO and whereas there are many little ones, the CEOs of the big ones (Red Cross and United Way) do make huge amounts. Takes a lot of nerve for them to ask me for my pittance of a donation!
Mine goes to Salvation Army.
Silver Linings and a Cross of Gold
Why some people love Bush and Israel so much.
http://harpers.org/rapture-ready-20060718001.html
I've been lurking on the other board (after learning quickly not to post there any more), and they also confirm the end is near. I can almost understand why some would be so excited about the end of the world after 6 years of Bush. It almost even looks good to me. 
That teacher also burned a cross into a student's arm.
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,369549,00.html
"...go to court AGAINST a Christian who wants to wear a cross"
nm
to see McCain's pictures click on the red cross marks, disregard the 1st...nm
nm
I agree, that goes for both sides. I don't agree with those starting trouble over...sm
on your board either, but then some of you come and take it out on the people who only post here and we have nothing to do with the fights over there.
I enjoy communicating with liberals and occasionally do learn something from conservative posters, so I refuse to let the driveby, no moniker, one-sided finger pointers, self-indulging posters drive me off.
Rush is right. I agree. Somebody's gotta agree.
....in many of his policies in his attempt to completely socialize America.
I hope he fails.
I hope he succeeds, however, in the office of president, and doing the right thing, and moves to the center.
However, it's not looking good. He's left of left so far, isn't he. Showing who he truly is, in his first acts as president.
I sure don't agree with
the Supreme Court's decision on eminent domain, either, and I also hope that guy buys Souter's property and turns it into a hotel. I love the name of the restaurant he wants to build in the hotel: Just Desserts. (I can't remember which TV show I saw that on because, contrary to those on these boards who already have me figured out, I DON'T only watch MSNBC. I actually flip back and forth between MSNBC and Fox. I'm sure it was one one of those stations, though.)
And I totally agree with a woman's right to choose.
I do have a problem with partial birth abortions, based on my limited understanding of it, which is what I've heard the conservatives say about a full or nearly full-term baby being basically born and then "beaten to death" by the doctor. (From what I've discovered from some conservatives on these boards in the past few days, I take everything they say with a grain of salt and accept the possibility up front that it's an exaggerated statement devoid of critical facts.)
But if this is indeed true, then I don't know how it could be considered anything BUT murder. And I don't understand the issue regarding the health of the mother because if the mother can survive the delivery of a baby that can survive outside the womb, then the issue would seem nonexistent. (Again, I don't know that much about it.)
I also have mixed feelings about children and abortion. One the one hand, it is a surgical procedure, and if my child can't even have her ears pierced without my consent, then certainly she shouldn't be allowed to have a surgical procedure without my consent.
But what about if she's been impregnated as the result of a rape by her father or other family member? That sick stuff DOES happen in this country. What if she knows she wants an abortion? Should she be forced to have the baby? I can think of situations where she might be safer if the parents didn't know, but yet I still feel the parents have a right to know. I'm very conflicted about this particular issue and can't say I have a definite opinion. That's why I'd like to hear more on the subject from some intelligent, thoughtful, nonjudgmental people.
As far as gay marriages, I admit I get a little "twinge" at the use of the word "marriage." It might be that something deep in my gut is telling me that marriage SHOULD be between a man and a woman. After all, WE invented it and WE wrecked it. I think they should invent a new name for their unions because from what I've personally seen, gay couples seem to last for a very long time, much longer than some marriages I know. As far as whether or not they should have rights, why SHOULDN'T they? I don't recall a day during puberty when I woke up and made the decision that I was going to be straight. Likewise, I'm willing to bet that no gay person woke up and decided to be gay. I just don't understand why people are so threatened by the thought that a group might actually have RIGHTS in this country. As with abortion or stem cell research, etc., if they don't believe in it, they shouldn't PARTICIPATE IN IT. I'm neither pro-gay or anti-gay. (A quick look in the mirror, though, reminds me that I'm definitely pro-gray. )
With all of these social issues, as you said, we will "stand in judgment with our maker." That's between us and our own personal God, and those with different religious/spiritual beliefs have no right to shove their beliefs down our throat.
I saw a post on the other board referring to when the U.S. was founded, saying that the vast majority was Christian but that others were given "the freedom to others not to believe..."
NOBODY can "give" anyone "freedom" to either believe or not to believe, and the fact that this poster thinks they can is either very stupid or very scary, and I'm not exactly sure which it is. I think this is relevant because I believe there are some conservatives out there who don't only want the law to reflect their specific narrow brand of religion, but they would LOVE to be able to control what people think and believe.
Knowing that Bush is going to appoint one (maybe two before the end of the year) new Supreme Court Justice(s) scares me because, as you said, our rights are being slowly taken away, and this man has proven by his own actions that the personal freedoms of others aren't things that he cares for much, especially freedom of speech and ideas. That's why he banned anyone who didn't agree 100% with his views from all of his "open town hall" meetings.
We also have an evangelical Senator who holds a public meeting in a search and says that liberals aren't people of faith.
First, it's freedom of speech. Next, it will be freedom of religion. What about freedom of "thought."
I wonder what their views on stem cell research would be if it was discovered that stem cell research held the key to developing a new technique to control thought processes of those who disagree with them. 
I AGREE
I agree with a few of your points..maybe this govt will push us liberals and conservatives together..how great that would be. I agree with eminent domain, I dont know about the abortion issue for a young person, however, I feel empathy for them. Regarding gay marriage. I feel there is not enough love in this word and if two people find love and want to be married, let them. I personally do not believe in marriage..dont want the govt or anyone else keeping tabs on my personal life. I have lived with my male friend for 11 years and dont want anyone telling me what choices to make in my adult life.
agree
I agree with you..why, a lot of my friends are conservative (smile), they really are. We agree on a lot and disagree on a bit but do it in a friendly manner. My dream..that both ideologies can live together peacefully..
I agree!!!
These people on here are pretty nasty to conservatives. They are definitely not living up to their standards of tolerance and peace. They seem very angry even enraged. I don't think we should rip each other apart. It serves not useful purpose whatsoever.
I agree with most of what you said.
However, I don't think it's because of President Bush AND his DADDY. I think George W. came into office hell bent on finishing what his daddy DIDN'T finish and only needed a reason, real or invented, to "finish" it. And I totally agree with you when you say that this was his personal agenda. I think the disconnect is that many people want him to focus on terror, but his personal agenda has always caused his focus instead to be on Iraq, and I personally am very fearful for the future of this country as a result of that.
Agree with everything you said
I believe they will definitely find a way to twist it if some are found guilty. Under no circumstances will they admit that this administration could possibly do anything wrong.
I so agree with you. Even one is way too
many.
I agree. I think they're ill.
It should be criminal to expose children to such hostility and insanity. It sounds like real violence could have ensued if these whackos would have been crossed in any way.
I almost feel for some of these people. A brief visit to the Conservative board left me thinking I should have worn a helmet and worn body armor. Although it's a scary place over there, it must be terrible to exist inside a body that harbors such rage and hatred every day, 24/7. I don't understand what has happened to their religion, but my Christian religion still promotes love, tolerance, respect and the principles of the Golden Rule, all attributes that seem completely foreign to them. All they do is trash others and haven't contributed one positive thing to that board.
Sometimes I think there isn't much difference between these people and the terrorists who attacked us and other countries. They both exhibit signs of mental illness, a maniacal obsession with controlling what everyone believes, and they both promote hatred, violence and intolerance in the name of their respective gods. About the only main difference I can see is that the terrorists, unfortunately, seem to be much more intelligent in their pursuit of their goals.
I agree.
The only way to do it is to DO IT, increase our troops, speed up training their troops, and GET OUT. We've created such an unnecessary mess over there, I think it would be very immoral to just invade, turn their country upside and leave without fixing what we broke.
I agree with you
I had the same feeling about Roberts and I was glad to hear he had done this pro bono work.
Let's hope he really is a "good guy" with a heart and a brain.
I agree.
With every day that passes, I feel less and less hope. I've never been this frightened of a politician in my entire life.
I agree with you.
And I wonder if we had stepped it up a while back, how much of this would be going on today. The more we delay, the better they get at their "craft."
I wish we had never gone in there to begin with and think it's one of the biggest mistakes a president could have ever made. But we're there, and we can't just go in there, turn their country upside down and leave without leaving them with some semblance of normalcy. Those who said this is a quagmire were right on the money.
I agree
Anyone who has anything less than a hate Bush agenda should burn in hell as far as GT is concerned. I too don't agree with Bush 100% on everything, but that does not matter to GT. If you agree with Bush on anything you should not pass GO and go straight to hell along with Bush's Stepford wife and alcoholic daughters. Am I painting that picture correctly GT?
I agree with you.
What you said is so profoundly true and so profoundly sad. I think over time Bush will be viewed as a pawn or a stooge. Who or what do you think may be the controlling force behind Bush? I have read articles on the "Vulcans" but have read little about this recently.
I agree.
It keeps promising to leave (yet another lie). Maybe if we ignore it, it will go away.
I agree.....
I am a moderate conservative, and a Republican, although I'd consider a moderate Democrat like Joe Lieberman or somebody reasonable, however, the Democrats won't nomiate anybody like that, so my vote stays Republican.
As for hand outs and hand ups... There's a big difference between somebody who is unable to work and somebody who is unwilling to work. The individual who is physically or mentally unable to work, or the hard working family who falls on hard times for whatever reason that is out of their control, those people deserve some help. Hands outs/hands up, whatever you want to call it should be viewed as a stepping stone to self sufficiency.
I feel for the innocent victims (children) of those who embrace a lifestyle of just taking free money from those of us in society who work hard, but I havn't much compassion for able bodied young people who refuse to work. If an uneducated person is working hard but not making enough to sustain themselves they can avail themselves of food stamps, WIC, free school lunches, and I don't a problem with that. But, drive through a poor neighborhood and watch the young healthy people sitting on stoops and standing on corners doing nothing all day instead of working. Whether it be pursuing their GED, or taking vocational classes, they should be at least thinking of bettering themselves instead of just resigning to a life of free hand outs.
agree!
I hear ya and yes I agree we should stay away..There are a lof of other political boards through the net, where we can discourse/debate with conservatives over ideas and America without being attacked like mad dogs (I hate to use the analogy as mad dogs as my dogs are much kinder than the conservatives who post here..smile)..
I agree with you.
I think O'Reilly got a taste of his own medicine and was about to lose it. I roared when Phil called him Billy, and Phil in no way denigrated Bill's nephew, but Phil had asked if any of O'Reilly's kids are serving in Iraq. O'Reilly tried to use his nephew's service to detract from the fact that NONE of his own children are there. I think that's what made O'Reilly the angriest: The fact that Phil zapped him on that point.
I agree with you both.
And now that Libby (yuck! I should change my moniker) and Rove are both implicated in the Plame scandal, it will be interesting to see what Fitzgerald's findings are, and they should be coming soon.
I also agree about Cheney. He's very scary. There is definitely a very shrewd, conniving network at work in this administration, and Bush simply isn't bright enough to do this on his own. And there are no standards of decency left on any level in this administration, which is incredible for the CONs, considering all they ever babble about is their superior *decency*. For example, they blatantly lie without blinking an eye, as do some of their more dedicated followers. If anyone dares to disagree with this president, the response it to DESTROY the opponent (not unlike what happens on these boards, only to a more dangerous degree, such as exposing Valerie Plame, for example). Nothing is out of bounds any more.
I'm eagerly awaiting the results of Fitzgerald's investigation. 
I agree with you as far as
the definition. But to read some posts on these boards, you'd think it WAS communism. It's a part of their mantra that you're worse than a traitor if you have anything GOOD to say about it, so it looks like McCarthyism is still alive in well in today's CONservative party!
I agree
I agree with you..I have always believed there was a **supreme being** who was creating evolution.
Agree 100%
with your post Freethinker..its a scary world out there, like the Twilight Zone or something.
I agree with that, too.
Schools are for teaching science, and churches are for teaching religion, except in the cases where there are private religious schools, which are certainly there for the purpose to teach both, which is great!
I have to agree. nm
x
Actually I agree with you.
I agree!
Bush and his military brass treated this family horribly. They did nothing but lie about everything. (Big surprise, huh?)
They tried to use Pat Tillman as their poster child for recruiting purposes, but Tillman wouldn't agree to be used that way.
When I think if the incredible courage and integrity Pat Tillman had and I look at what a coward Bush was when it came to fighting in a war and what a lying sack of crap he is today, it's easy to see who the REAL man is, and it just makes me want to spit on Bush.
I agree mostly
I think both the Schiavo case and the Lunsford case are equal cases, although what happened to Jessica is one the most heinous crimes imaginable. She used to live in a community only ten minutes from mine, and I can tell you if the guy who did this goes free on a technicality he will not be long for this Earth. He will be hunted down. Also, men who commit heinous crimes on children usually suffer in prison also...crimes against children are usually not tolerated even among the most hardened criminals. So, the death penality would actually be the lesser of the sentences if you know what I mean.
I agree he needs some
medication. Maybe his pal Rush will slide him some.
I agree. nm
I agree that this was not necessary. nm
.
Agree with you 100%, PK
I can't agree.
And I don't think expecting someone to control their animal is extreme by any means, which seems to be most of the consensus here. Control the animal. How hard is that to comprehend? Again, a total lack of responsibility by a pet owner who now throws the issue out for public sympathy, when all it would take is a little effort on her part. I think there is more to this story than we are hearing.
I agree.
And I certainly won't be sitting here in judgment of men and women whose circumstances I cannot even begin to imagine. I also will not be taking the media's word as gospel.
I agree.
Murtha's words always seem to get twisted.
He never advocated an immediate withdrawal from Iraq. He suggested we redeploy to the periphery in an attempt to let the Iraqis stand on their own feet, with us still being there if they needed us.
Regarding the deaths of the civilians, he said that continued stress and repeated tours of duty can can take a toll on soldiers.
As you said, I couldn't imagine what it must be like to live every single second of every single day, not knowing if the next step you take will be your last. Regardless of whether or not these soldiers had excellent training, in the end, they are human beings and can only take so much before they crack. Although I don't condone the killing of innocent civilians, I also can't crucify American soldiers, either. I've never walked in their boots, and it must be terribly difficult to survive physically, mentally and emotionally under such extreme conditions.
Even if an investigation proves the facts to be as reported, rather than condemn them to harsh punishment, I think instead they need intense mental health treatment, probably for the rest of their lives. I don't think a prison exists that could be more painful for them than the prison that exists within their hearts and minds.
This was a very poorly planned war, and our soldiers are suffering because of it in the form of repeated tours of duty. I think they deserve our compassion, not our condemnation.
I agree on that one
Darfur, Rwanda, Sudan. All examples of genocide, but it was happening in Iraq too by Saddam.
However, if/when Bush had invaded those countries they would be dubbed Vietnams by the left too.
Agree with you, PK, especially
collective coma...LOL...they really need to grow a backbone. Other than Murtha, Feingold, and Republican Specter, as you mentioned, no one else seems to have the guts (although a different word comes to mind here) necessary to do what needs to be done. Hillary is like McCain to me in that they are both all over the place and seem to just be twisting in the wind; I don't trust EITHER of them. Isn't that what happens when you serve too many masters?
I agree. (sm)
I even admired Giuliani at one time and thought I could maybe vote for him, but he's in the same category with Hillary and McCain now.
I think it's time to clean out the Senate and the House, get rid of mostly everyone (from both parties) and start again from scratch. They're all ineffective, Republicans and Democrats alike (with the exception of very, very few), and they're completely out of touch with what Americans really want.
I agree with everything you said.
They don't like to be treated the way they treat others, and it showed.
|
