Skip to comments.
U.N. Security Council votes 15-0 to demand Israel's withdrawal "without delay."
CNN
Posted on 04/04/2002 3:49:02 PM PST by newsperson999
Well it looks like we voted against Israel once again..I don't care what you say..Bush and the US are hypocrites when it comes to the war on Terrorism,you Bush lovers crack me up...I have lost major respect for the man today...You people are in denial
TOPICS: Breaking News; Israel; Your Opinion/Questions
KEYWORDS:
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 81-100, 101-120, 121-140, 141-156 next last
To: Howlin
Do you get paid to come on here and post that crap? Who do you work for? What is the crap? Other than his snide comments to Bush supporters, the fact of the US provoked UN resolution is a fact, not crap.
To: AppyPappy
no joke man... :-(
To: willide
Mister.. you can disagree with me all you want. And I respect that.But dont you go callin me simple minded... you wouldn't do it in my hearing so you neednt do it here.
LOL. You're a funny guy.
But if you go back and read my post again you will see that I didn't say any person was "simple minded", but was refering to a argument that was posted...
(..and I don't even think it was yours.)
Next off.. the one time Paul let loose on the High Priest (called him a whited wall).. when he found out he was the High Priest he apologized. And them was Jews agin Jews.. not me you or Bush.
Actually that was not Paul...
it was Jesus....
....and He didn't call anyone a "whited wall",
He called them ( the Pharasees) "whited sepulchres"...
....and there was no apology either.
God has done said anybody that goes agin His folks is gone git got by Him... thats plain what the Book says.
Are you trying to make me laugh on purpose or what dude?
123
posted on
04/04/2002 5:58:09 PM PST
by
Jorge
To: Jorge
Hold on.. let me git my Bible out.
124
posted on
04/04/2002 6:00:54 PM PST
by
willide
To: Jorge
Actually that was not Paul... it was Jesus.... ....and He didn't call anyone a "whited wall", He called them ( the Pharasees) "whited sepulchres"... ....and there was no apology either. Read again. It was also Paul, in the book of Acts.
Acts 23:2-5 And the high priest Ananias commanded them that stood by him to smite him on the mouth. 3 Then said Paul unto him, God shall smite thee, thou whited wall: for sittest thou to judge me after the law, and commandest me to be smitten contrary to the law? 4 And they that stood by said, Revilest thou God's high priest? 5 Then said Paul, I wist not, brethren, that he was the high priest: for it is written, Thou shalt not speak evil of the ruler of thy people.
To: cmsgop
All Hail the One World Government
To: CaptBlack
Well.. I reckon you done beat me to it. I'd a hated to type all that out anyhow. Thankee there bub!
127
posted on
04/04/2002 6:04:41 PM PST
by
willide
To: willide
No prob. Can't abide the blatant errors like that.
To: Lent
It has the force of warm flatulence directed in Israel's direction.
ROFLMAOPIMP!
To: tomahawk
The lion's share of Israel's fighting, by contrast, has been done on the ground, with greater care to prevent civilian casualties than any other army facing a similar threat would employ. While it is possible to argue that Israel could do a better job of implementing its own ideal, the contrast between the Israeli and Palestinian ideals could not be more stark: Israel tries to minimize civilian casualties, while the Palestinians try to maximize them. This is something the press, and even our President, seem to be ignoring right now. It drives me nuts. The Israeli's are very careful about harming palestinian civilians. Last month, they lost, proportionally, more civilians than we did 9/11. But you wouldn't know that. It's all about the poor palestinians.
130
posted on
04/04/2002 6:14:29 PM PST
by
texlok
To: CaptBlack
Read again. It was also Paul, in the book of Acts. Ok...so Jesus called the Pharisees "whited sepulchres" and Paul later called one of the chief priests a "whited wall"...but it is debatable whether Paul's response was actually an "apology"
And even if it was, the idea that this isolated incident should make us believe we can never criticize or disagree with a Jew, or the Gov't of Israel without being "cursed" by God is just silly.
There are numerous occasions of the Israelites being justly criticized throughout the Bible.
131
posted on
04/04/2002 6:17:03 PM PST
by
Jorge
To: Jorge
Well then fella.. I owe you a bow and a scrape about the first part. I thought you was givin me a clop on the jowls for no good reason. Sorry.
132
posted on
04/04/2002 6:17:28 PM PST
by
willide
To: willide
If I was that Sharon fella.. Id a bombed them stinkin arabs slam back into the genie bottle they come out of and then corked it with a Jimmy-Dean sausage. I wanna lern me talk like that, mister!
To: Satadru
Your offense is that you dared to criticize Bush. Bushibans cannot stand any dissent. You have committed a sin against their idol, and that is why you are being flamed. Please, refrain from criticizing the President, because the Bush martyrs might blow you up.heh. I think more and more people here are starting to criticize him. There's a lot of frustration with his going more and more left.
The way I see it, we definitely have the right to criticize him, seeing as how most of us voted for him. I'm seeing less and less people bashing others for criticizing Bush. Now if it had been a few months ago, and you bashed Bush, all hell would break out.
134
posted on
04/04/2002 6:18:06 PM PST
by
texlok
To: texlok
I, for one, has been withstanding flame since the stem cell decision came out.
135
posted on
04/04/2002 6:22:06 PM PST
by
Satadru
To: Jorge
Well now hold on... I aint never said nothin about disagreein with no Jew. A mans a man. He walks on two feet with his hind end pointin the same ways mine does. But when you go to talkin about the whole bunch thats whole nother row a corn.
136
posted on
04/04/2002 6:23:57 PM PST
by
willide
To: Jorge
I don't know about all that. That's a matter of theology for most people. I DO know that you were mistaken in your reference to Paul, hence my post. When Paul said,
Acts 23:5 Then said Paul, I wist not, brethren, that he was the high priest: for it is written, Thou shalt not speak evil of the ruler of thy people.
it seems clear that it is intended as an explanation for his misstatement because he is clearly saying, "Hey! I didn't know that he was the High Priest because I wouldn't do that knowing what the Scripture says about speaking evil of one's ruler". Sounds like a, "Sorry!" to me.
How to apply the "lesson" from this exchange wasn't my concern, just accuracy of the comment that this episode never happened.
To: Revolting cat!
Well I think your bein friendly.. I cant never tell anymore these days.
138
posted on
04/04/2002 6:33:04 PM PST
by
willide
To: willide
Well then fella.. I owe you a bow and a scrape about the first part. I thought you was givin me a clop on the jowls for no good reason. Sorry. Dats ok. :) Don take me too seriously amigo.
139
posted on
04/04/2002 6:33:21 PM PST
by
Jorge
To: Jorge
Alright then buddy. Well.. I got to hit the hay. Im done a whole hour past bedtime. Yall take care.
140
posted on
04/04/2002 6:37:08 PM PST
by
willide
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 81-100, 101-120, 121-140, 141-156 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson