Smith

Ah, here you go.

I'm scared to ask what a "raspberry" smilie is.

Jaime, I'd more thank welcome having a debate with you. Problem is forums don't tend to lend themselves well to that kinda discussion. As evidenced in several threads and why TGO David is usually wise to terminate them fairly quickly. On the other hand, sooner or later it comes done to the balance of evidence. There will be no conclusion since the final verdict can ultimately only come after the fact. So, essentially it comes down to faith in the evidence for both sides. I just wished both sides would admit that what they believe, they ultimately accept by faith. The divide is not as large as some think. PS when I use faith i mean in the Biblical sense "evidence of things hoped for, the substance of things not seen."

Just take it on faith that it was done for you benefit.

Start Monday on a new job that promises to be one of the most enjoyable I've ever had! My not make any money, but I'll enjoy every minute of it! I'm sure an official announcement will be forth coming about where it is, so I'll not spill the beans on that. Can't wait! I'm also looking forward to meeting some of you guys ...especially Jaime! Maybe I can sell him some stuff and we can talk Jesus!

No. It was started before.

Yeah those horrible people staying true to their convictions and trying to bring what they believe is a tremendous gift to those who may not have it. How dare they care about others. Just saying, there might be a perspective you don't see in all this.

I'd say ya'll were being pretty dogmatic in your efforts to refute him. So who is the fanatic? The one who passionately post his thoughts or the ones who post four or five to ridicule and attempt to refute him? Just saying. I see very little difference is the dogmatic beliefs of either side. I should add, if he does believe what he says he believes should he not try to give hope to those who have none?

Just what is it you guys so detest about trigem?

you already gummed it up.

Clear some of your PM's!

setsdw, seriously... I said it tongue-in-cheek in what was a good discussion. That is why we use smilies to help differentiate "tone". So yes, it does make a difference. I guess I thought our discussion was a little more light hearted than that. (that means give me a brreak) ....... couldn't resist. j/k

Maybe I misread your intent. It's been a long day, but your insinuation that my self or my "church" would kill someone is a little much. If I took it wrong my apology.

I said it in humor, thus the smilie, and it wasn't a personal attack. Maybe you need to read it again.

Your ignorance shines. This thread has run it's course IMO. I don't mind discussions, but you're crossing the line. Moderators making personal attacks ...nice.

is that a known truth?

.270!

BTW - my source is my friend Ahmed from Egypt. How's that for citing a source. Eh, I'll leave it alone. I said more than I wanted or needed to.

This isn't a research paper and I have yet to see anyone use the Chicago Manual of Style in a post. Again, I wasn't assigning a right or wrong in the Mexican-American war simply that Mexico tried it once in the disputed territories of NM, NV, CO, and CA (BTW - they were not Mexican. They were held in Spain and Mexico was levering them against the debt they owed us) the same as they are trying it now and that the parallels are no different than with European Muslims and the current situation on the border today in that regard. The fact that the US used a similar tactic in the 1840's is irrelevant and doesn't change my point or historical reference. I originally assigned no blame only the conditions and parallels. Your assumption that I was is why we are completely off topic. No they are not exactly the same, but have similar traits that illustrate my earlier on topic point.

Must be why he asked the question, eh?

You're right. Your friends qualify as expert witness to the state of those countries. You need to read my post in which you reference the Mexican American war. Mexico was attempting to control those disputed territories through population settlements. It was a well know plan of Mexico to gain power over those territories through shear population numbers. They thought they could avoid having to buy or fight over land this way and simply declare it was Mexican since it was inhabited by Mexicans. Islamic leaders have made it very clear they are following the same game plan. "None so blind as he who refuses to see.";)

in the words of Inigo Montoya,

Spain, England, France, Turkey, Bosnia, Darfour .... are on the same path Iraq, Afghanistan, Saudi Arabia, and Egypt already took. These weren't Muslim countries prior. They were actually very friendly to the west. This is very basic world history. Heck, Mexico has the same strategy, power through population. It is a known and tried tactic. We fought the Mexican-American war because of it the first time they tried it.

Problem Scottie, is people are trying to fight our enemy the same way they are trying to fight the war in Afghanistan and Iraq. You can't create multifaceted fronts with varying degress of response depending on arbitrary factors or the word of the opposition. You draw a line in the sand and say right is right, wrong is wrong ....pick a side. Be Muslim all you won't but understand that is secondary and sub servant to what is right. BTW - I have talked and dealt with Muslims around the world. UAE, England, Brazil, and here in the US and my personal experiences have no bearing on the whole of the issue. Again forest because of the trees. It's like someone saying I'm a Nazi, but I'm not one of the bad ones. You tie yourself to an ideology, you tie yourself to all of it.